The news-democrat. (Providence, R.I.) 1906-1909, 1906-08-28
(Continued DOM Page oneO

CONTINUED from Page One.)
Was certain sewer work I'm con-
nection with two OF the city schools taken
from Contractor n. V. Famiglietti who
had started IL, and given TO Alderman
John c. Dunn?
This is the direct allegation that is made
by those who claim 10 be In position 10
know.
The question is up 10 the city council
committee on city property 20 answer;
and upon the answer may depend consid-
rable more than appears on the surface.
II II now a marer of history how the
plumbing work OF which Alderman Dunn
has long done much for the city, was di-
verted from him this year TO Thomas T..
Manney, one OF the Providence representa-
atives in the general assembly. and how
Alderman Dunn once said the work could
be done for $500 and later for $1,000; but
the committee on city property agreed to
let Mr. Manney do II for mot exceeding
$4,000"
1t is known that the alderman did not
get any of this plumbing work. and that
he was wroth over II.
Did the committee on city property fear
his hostility and seek 20 placate him by
giving him a sewer work sop?
The sewer work on the two schools was
not entirely I'm Alderman Dunn's line OF
business.
Mr.. Famiglietti. who has a high repu-
tation for doing just that kind OF work,
is said TO have taken one OF the Jobs, and
TO have worked from the street 10 the
Veazie street school, when Alderman
Dunn came into the game with the an
nouncement that both jobs were his
This was subsequent TO the awarding or
the contract for plumbing 10 Mr. Manney.
and the committee on city property
agreed to pay Alderman Dunn not 10 ex-
ceed $1,000 for the jobs az the two Schools
According 10 reliable information. Alder
man Dunn went TO Contractor Fami-
glietti. who had helped elect Dunn last
year by influencing some 81 Italian prop
erty voters In the Third ward. and said;
.This is my Job. II you want TO do the
work. you must figure on IL for me.
Famigliettl knowing that $500 was
available for the work. is said TO have fig
ured that he could do II for 500, and the
other job for the same sum, making Ssop
for the two Jobs for which the city was
liable 20 give up 5000. 1T is too much,
Dunn Is quoted as saying. II can do IL
myself and for much less money
FamIglietti. who purposed 20 do a good
lob. furnishing all the labor and materi-
ais and turning the completed Job over 10
the city for the $500. refused TO take any
less.
He expected 20 make not exceeding zoo
for himself. which means that he figured
that the lob for which the city property
committee undertook 10 pay 1900 70 AL
derman John c. Dunn could be done very
satisfactorily for 500
Now the question Is asked: How much |
does Alderman Dunn expect 20 make out
OF Il. and why did the committee on city
property set aside 5000 for job which
could be done for t6oo7
IL Il was desired 20 save money for the
city. why could not the committee on
citv property have made the same kind or /
contract with Alderman Dunn that u
made with Representative Manney-Dunn
70 furnish the labor and materials. and
So the work and receive y per cent OF
"a cost for his own compensation.
II the cost was 500 for work done as
reu as Contractor FamigliettL an expe-
,enced man. Intended 90 do II. then the
.Itv nropertv committee would have saved
% bv holding Dunn down 90 the agree
nent II made with Manney; and $50 com
,ensation for a 500 JOB Is not 50 bad, u
would seem.
put Dunn was not satisfied with clear
,roat OF $40. apparently, when Fami-
,iiefii would have done all the work. tur-
,ished All the labor and Materials ana
he cltv property committee seems not 10
ave been satisned 20 let Famlgletti do
he work for $500 as he is said 10 have
omitted he told Alderman Dunn IL could
. done for WHIT
Contractor JSsssnstti was seen con-