The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-08-21

L
aeet ana extending from the manhole
! % iest west At the bottom of this
! trehcn which was two feet lower than
| the bottom of the manhoIe and 6 feet
| lower than the sewer running from
! the manhole west. after the 4 foot
rise, we found the top of a ledge of
| rock lying horizontal.
| In this trench there could he nIain1,,
| seen on the sides the marks left Nv
! the excavating machine in cutting the
| trench west from the manhoIe about
| 20 rect before 1t was raised 4 feet and
| the trench back to the manhole filled
up by order of the engineer a :
charged by Gilmore and admitted bv
| McCabe- The bottom of our trench
was ? feet lower than the one made
by the machine and extended 3 or 10
| feet further west.
This showed beyond question that
| no Iedge or rock was or could have
been encountered at the place where
| the machine was ordered raisad A
feet. However, in this trench we did
| find a single stone, in size about 18
inches long. II inches wide and 6
! inches thick, lying embedded in the
earth about 25 feet west of the man
| hole and feet below the bottom of
| the sewer as constructed. This proved
| to be the only stone in the trench and
| the one found by ]. F. Ellis, the KAN
sas CITY expert sewer engineer. in his
investigation, and pronounced by him
in his report to the special committee.
ledge of rock. Having settled be-
yond question that no stone could
have been encountered at this point
before the machine was ordered
raised four feet, we next had a boring
made Is feet further west, and again
no rock was struck until a depth of
feet below the sewer as constructed
was reached The other borings at
intervals were made west to the alley
between Polk street and Western ave-
nue. and north on that alley to the
north line of the Douthitt tract. At
vz1- 4 i
though the holes were bored in every
instance to a depth below the orig
inal profile.
Hence, as to this question we must
conclude that there was no excuse
whatever for any radical deviation
from the original plan and profile in
the construction of this portion of the
sewer, not even the poor and, hereto
fore, unheard of excuse that rock was
encountered. Had rock been en-
countered there still would have been
no satisfactory excuse for the wide
deviations. since everybody knows
that stone is expected to be encount- |
cred and passed through in construct !
ing sewers. ,
3. We find that the lateral con-
structed in the alley between Kansas |
avenue and Jackson street from
Douthitt avenue to Thirteenth street is !
all the way above the original eleva-
ton. Many other lateraIs deviate s
more or less from the original pro- 4,
file, running above in all cases, and }
never below. All changes seem to
have been made for the purpose of
giving the contractors less work than
they contracted to do.
Rebuild Part of 1t.
Your committee recommends that |
in order to afford relief to the prop
erty owners in this district whose cell
lars cannot be drained that the main |
on Huntington avenue from the man
hole where the foot rise was made
to Western avenue, and the lateral in
the alley between Polk street and
Western avenue from Huntington
avenue to the north side of Douthitt |
tract be reconstructed, and that by
legal process the cost of same be re- |
covered from former city engineer,
James f. McCabe. and contractors.
Gilmore & Brooks, and that our city
attorney be instructed to institute i'm
mediate suit In the district court
against these parties on a charge of
collision to defraud the city.
The Ellis Report.
On account of the wide difference of
opinions and conclusions concerning this
whole question as expressed by your
present engineer, John P. Rodgers, in
his report to the committee, which is
filed herewith. and the opinions and con-
cIuSions expressed by J. F. Ellis, the
sewer engineer from Kansas City, i'll
his report to the special committee ap-
pointed to investigate this matter, your |
Qee1n 1t Well TO point out ana |
criticise some of the glazing misstate-
ments of facts and illogical conclusions
contained in the Ellis report. A large |
part of the Ellis report is so Irrelevant
to questions submitted to him for in
vestigation and so clearly labored in an
effort to lead to conclusions not war
ranted by the facts, as to render his
whole report utterly unworthy of any
creoence. When he finally reached the
points at issue, he evaded answering or
making any comment upon the main
question at issue, the one that first
aroused interest and led to an inquiry
IN regard to the construction of this
sewer; namely, whether or not the sewer
as constructed would drain all the
cellars in the district, more especially
those on Polk street north of Douthitt
avenue fronting east. His attention was
first directed to this in a way that he
could not have failed to comprehend the
value of Its answer the street numbers
of the houses whose cellars could not
be drained being given to him by the
city attorney. He went to those houses |
and took the elevations, or pretended tC
do so, but made no mention of his find
ings in his report, thus leaving unan-
swered the most vital question as re-
lates to the efficiency Of the sewer.
In the second place Mr.. Ellis labored
long and learnedly to disprove by math-
demonstration the charge of
main where it joins onto sewer No. IA !
was constructed IS inches above the {
original profile, Notwithstanding the
tact that field notes in the office of the
city engineer show that the bottom of
the main as constructed is higher than |
the original profile indicates. Now since
the engineers estimate of the cost of
and the contractors bids .
were made on the depth to be cut as :
shown by the original profile, it follows :
hat whatever less cut was made for :
any cause in the construction of this ;
main than indicated by the original :
profile resulted in a corresponding less
amount of excavation at the bottom of
he sewer, and hence less work for the
- l. l. 4