The San Francisco call., 1905-02-16
MIST TAKES MADE
BY SECRETARY.
Hermann Schussler Explains
Errors in Estimates of
Value of the WaterwOrks
ACCOUNTS ARE MIXED
Pipe in the Right Place
Entered in Wrong Column
for Engineer to Straighten

Yesterday was a season of explana-
tions by Hermann Schussler of the
Spring Valley Water Works in re-
sponse to cross-examination probings
by Assistant City and County Attor-
ney John S. Partridge. The whole Of
the days session in United States Com
missioner Heacock's court was taken
UP in that way.
Mr.. Schussler said that on February
"a. 1904, he made valuation of the
water company's property, including
reservoirs, reservoir sites, water sheds,
water rights. rights of way, artesian
lands, filter beds, ETC., inclusive OF its
value as going concern having an
established business, coupled with the
value of its franchises at $29, ,919,4OO
He estimated the construction work,
coupled with the properties in and
near San Francisco, inclusive of Lake
Merced, at $23, ,045,300; making total
valuation of S52,964,7O0. Mr.. Schus-
sler continued:
In 1901 estimated the total value Of the
property at SAC. 231. $50. and thereafter I said
that this total does not include the assessed
value of the franchise, which is nearly $5, 4Oo.-
coo ON which the company paid ,oo taxes ooa Inis
would bring up the total to $4o, iOOUoO
The examination then ran thus:
In your statement, made in 1901 to the Su-
pervisors, you estimated the cost of the upper
Crystal Springs dam at $265. 600; now, you
say, it cost S365.o0o. How do you account for
that?
/ estimate it inclusive of ten per cent for
incidentals.
that in 1901 you stated the cost OF the Crystai
Springs lower dam as $2.242, 900 and tnat you
now state its cost was 81 1921 OOo Please eA-
plain the discrepancy.
Mr.. Schussler replied that he called
on Secretary Ames year ago and told
the secretary that he thought that the
charge for the lower dam was exces-
sive. On making an investigation into
the matter that some of the land pur-
chased had been included in estimate
of $2,242,000, the witness continued:
Subsequently when 1 went to make up the
total estimate for 10000 think 1 discovered
certain things that should have been charged
to the upper dam, and consequently the back
account of the upper Crystal springs Dam sp
weir of the upper dam was probably charged
to the construction Of the lower dam In my
weir has been charged to the upper dam.
There is difference of $50. 600 between the
secretary's reoort and my estimate
Mr.. Schussler was asked as to the
discrepancy between his estimate of
Springs pipe line and his estimate of
$1,095,6 500 in the present case for the
same property. He replied:
That was the figure furnished to me at the
time. Later 1 investigated 1t, and I believe
In that estimate is contained large portion
OF the A. Al 33 and 80 inch pipe. Then 1
asked Mr.. sAmes to give me the cost of the
pipe line from Crystal Springs to the city res
ervoir and he gave me this item of 81, Ooo
"Then," asked Mr.. Partridge, "there
must have been double charge given
to the Board of Supervisors %
In reply, the engineer said:
That is not my fault Those were the fig-
ures given me by Mr.. Ames-that there was
included in the Crystal Springs pipe line
large amount of pipe that laid in this
city. When this came up 1
made up my mind that would go to the bot
tom of every of these items OF charges.
Anybody Is liable to make a mistake. If I
CO. as engineer to the secretary who has
charge of the financial accounts and ask him
for list of figures can't very well see, un-
less 1 positively know then and there that
there is oyercharge or a misstatement.
have always corrected such in my estimate
made later to the Supervisors. Over my own
signature before the Supervisors 1 corrected
mistake that made by the secretary in
1901 thereby amending 1t in my estimate.