The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1907-06-20

-
tliscourtesy towards Colonel cut
shaw We. hoped that this would
be tie end of that phase of the
subject. but In tho published re-
pnrt OF the proceedings OF the
Street Committee on last Mon Jay
n1g The T {e ran ss' ,nsi pss ,hs
contract to survey the. onyexae
territory is given to the Rcdds the
city must spend $4,000 more for
CHECKING II up before The survey
Dan he safely adopted for future
use. 1T is true that upon u,tes:chs
admitted tint the snine condition
would have had to be imposed
case Colonel Burgwyn, tho 9TH
bidder, had gotten tho contract,
but tho chances arc .ninotN-nine to
one that Il II Ind beer given to
have been heard about Checking
up Was Mr.. Hankinss work
Checked up when he surveyed the
Lee District some years ago?
Alleged Errors.
Colonel Cutshaw has said a
great deal about checking up our
work, and in his communication to
tho Street Committee lie says 'hc
will not be responsible for work
done by men not under his con-
sumcd that lie Is responsible for
work done by the men lin his Of
flee who are under his control.
Did 1t ever occur to amy one
that the City Engineer might need
to be checked up? He has made
the most OF an error in our work
Cured in a country survey during
the big snow III 1899 or 1900, but
has any ono ever heard of any cr-
rors in the work OF the City En-
g!ncering Department.? DO tic
taxpayers know that the road to
the Pumphousc was, through an
error Of the City Engineer, built
Euker? We checked them up on
that, and It cost the city sS,1l1.66
besides the cost of condemnation
proceedings to rcctify It (sce D.
d. 1876 A, pnge us, hcnrico Cir
cult Court.)
do the taxpayers know that two
sewers. the first that we're laid IN
rors of the Engineers office, laid Oh
private lots instead of along the
alleys, as was intended, both of
which had to be taken up and re-
laid at cost of several hundred
dollars to tho city after tho errors
nad peen discovered uuu poiulee
out by r. Crawford Redd & Bro.
We mention these instances be-
cause they came directly under our
notice. When the city made q sur
vey of Shields's Grove wo checked
them up 1eforc they had fenced In
Major Dooley's road. and perhaps
saved them n lawsuit. When the
department proposed to cut into
the yard of Mr. Adams. at Broad
and Thirty sixth Streets we check
ed them up" and in this instance
also probably saved lawsuit
badly Disnrranscd. 49,
Take Lee District, which was
laid off some years ago by Mr.. M.
o. Hankins. When he turned that
survey over to the city It was as
How do we find 1t now, after the
City Engineering Department has
had charge of 1t for fifteen years?
1t has been SO badly disarranged
( that it is a difficult problem to
survey or Locate 19t N ,t that see,
to have two engineering depart
ments, and let one check up the
other.
1--WE have not the slightest OBJ
lection, Mr.. Editor, to our work be-
ing checked up. W ,1s. make a. 500
sulScyS Il Scdi, ptSIuCS AiciliS ~
large amount of engineering work,
such as street work. sewer work,
concrete work, earth work, tile
drainage, etc, and we do not claim
that our work Is free from errors.
The man who makes such a claim
is vain boaster. But we do seri-
ously object to having our errors
published In the newspapers UNI
necessarily, and being held up to
ridicule by the very man who Is
supposed to be fair and impartial
arbitcr Of the work we had pro-
posed to do for the city.
I'VE say again that no self-re-
specting man would want to do
this work after the attack which
4 was made on US. and which Is CAL
culated to ruin our reputation,
which Is dearer to us than few
dollars Most OF the business men
Of this city know our standing and
with this we leave the matter to
q fair-minded public, sincerely re-
GREETING that wo have been forced
into such disagreeable controvcr-
sy. as we find no pleasure or salts
faction in 1t.
yours very truly,
!, IT. CRAWFORD Redo & BRO.
"June 10. 1907"