The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1906-05-22
Lhl32a11gzAA
LIFTS 2 zQz{ 5 J ,2zzzzzzzzzsI,

| cording to tho contract price7 He re-
piled that he had no recollection Of the
matter. Witness was asked number OF
questions regarding q number Of like
| discrepancies, to which witness replied
that no could not recollect.
Chairman Sadler reverting to the bar
rel of whiskoy incident, asked II he
(Brooks) had not taken a legislative Conf
mfttee to his store-room and treated
them. Witness said that the committee
did talto drink.
"Tho SUPERINTENDENT has never called
my attention to tho improper use Of
whskey since l have been here said
Mr.. Brooks.
Witness said that DR.. Foster had never
objected to a member Of the committee
taking a drink or If he had &c never
spoke about it,
Witness said that the committee was
in the habit of coming down and taking
'toddy before dinner, and that he
thought his act met with the superin-
tendent's approval"
Colonel Lawess here cross-examined
Mr.. Brooks. Witness said when suppltks
were short, he purchased on the open
market. Witness said the shortness OF
supplies was not due to any act Of Or.
Foster; that when supplies were shor.
it was necessary to get them or tho
patients would Ego hungry" Dr. Foster
was simply notified that purchases had
to be made.
Water On Grounds.
Witness, in answer to q question, said
that water did not stand in the grounds
long enough to become stagnant; that
he had not meant to say so In his direct
examhation, He had meant TO say
| that water stood in the low places but
! not long enough to become stagnant.
Witness stated that he felt sure that
in time he could prove that the charges
made by Messrs. Boudar and Company
in their report were not true. Chairman
Sadler then asked If the report showed
that goods were purchased at one price
and paid for at an advanced price, that
10 discount was deducted. as though the
bills were paid within the time IN which
discounts were allowed: that improper
estimates were made; that retail prices
we're paid for contract goods would that
not prove that there was "laxity OF
duty?'
Witness said he did not know If the
; report showed this.
Chairman sadler then re-examined the
witness along the line of the purchase
Of -four Witness insisted that ii TOOK
| three barrels day 10 run the asylum
! and that he advertised for eight hundred
l barrels Il year, anu IIfAi 4'Nu. $3.50
The chairman insisted tina" 8 bbls.
| dav was .G5 bbls. wear, but witness
| was firm IN his statement. The chair.
| man then took up the question OF meal
| and showed that S3S bushels OF meal was
! used a quarter and that as the contract
| for meal was for only 90 bushels there
could not be LAP over al the end
! of the Quarter This was done TO show
that 70 cents should have been charged
| ,.Sg hNnPhtF
| captain Lane, OF williamsburg.
Witness said he had only very seldom
tn buy any article on the open market
| except flour Chairman Sadler then ask
| ed why he purchased tobacco from
| local firm at 80 per cent. advance when
/ he had contract with Christian and
Wlnfree for tho tobacco. Witness said
| he thought the tobacco was ordered from
the factory and was delayed.
! Witness said the firm was no, he'd
| ness II he asked tho Williamsburg mer-
chants to bid for the extra supplies
when the regular contract was out, Wit
ness replied that he notified oil that
he thought desired TO furnish supplies.
Meat Contract.
Witness said that the contract for
fresh meats was not awarded to the
lowest bidder, but TO a Williamsburg
butcher,
Witness said the Williamsburg butchers
purchased their meats from Minsan ana nc,
not think It expedl"nt to buy from Kin
gan and Armour direct
G. THE two Williamsburg butchers
then have = monopoly on beef?'
Q, now do the bids of outsiders