The Washington herald., 1908-05-27
SAMUEL BIEBER
SPEAKS FOR SON
CONTINUED from rage Ono.

while the Brennan Company was doing
paving work"
Before leaving the stand the witness
was asked by Commissioner Morrow II
at any time. in his presence. his son had
mentioned the name Of the Crawford Paw
ing Company in connection with the pro-
posed deal. Bieber answered in the mega
tive.
4, Conway b. Hunt was called and cross
examined by Commissioners Morrow and
West from 500 until li;l5 o'clock.
Most of the questions directed at the
engineer OF highways were OF a technical
character. and dealt with the considera-
tion given 10 orders for paving work In
the District.
Testimony of Hunt.
Hunts testimony was uninteresting. but
tended TO show he was In no way con-
nected with the charges OF favoritism
brought against the engineer department
by Brennan.
In answer to a question by Maj. Nor
row, he said: Il have never received
money from any contractor or other per
son relating to my official duties"
The hearing adjourned at u:l5 o'clock
to convene to-day az 2 o'clock. when the
arguments VIII be presented by the attor-
neys.
1t is expected Mr. G. Il. Baker. attor-
ney for the h. ]. Beall Construction Com
pany, will speak FIRST, and viii be fol-
lowed by J. S. Flannery. counsel for the
Crawford company. Charles A. Douglas,
| representing p. ]. Brennan. will speak in
rebuttal ]. T. Iasiey viii defend any
attacks made upon his client by the other
lawyers,
The Afternoon Session.
Clarence Corson, of the Columbia Ma
tional Bank. was called to the stand at
the opening Of the afternoon session and
questioned by Maj. Morrow regarding
deposits made by A. L. Thomas. an en-
ploye Of the engineers Office Little evil
dence could be adduced to connect Thom-
as with charges Of graft.
David Warner. Of the tax collectors s
office. was called. He told OF technical
matters relating to deposits by con-
tractors
p. J. Brennan was called and subjected
to rigid cross-examination by J. S. Elan
do you charge or contend that the
Commissioners Disseminated against your
company on this contract OF March 30.
1907 asked Mr. Flannery
LAS Commissioners - queried Brennan
"As Commissioners or individuals"
No" replied Brennan
Now. Mr. Brennan, this idea Of divid-
ing the contract in question was sane
toned by the Commissioners, was II
nOt?"
Yes"
you received a copy OF the instruc-
tions 70 bidders, In which the Commis-
sioners reserve the right to withdraw any
contract or award any contract as they
see ft?"
Claim of FavorItism.
well, when you claim favoritism was
shown the Cranfords by the division Of
the contract on which you were the low
est bidder. you are making charges
against persons who awarded that con-
tract?"
7 made that charge, and I mean it."
replied Brennan.
Then you openly charge the Commits
sioners with favoritism in awarding the
contract"
You may construe my answer TO mean
that"
Mr.. Flannery tried 70 show that Bren-
nan had sought the aid OF legal proceed
ings 10 have the Commissioners give him
the entire contract OF March 80, 1907
Brennan said he had sought legal advice
and was told he would be foolish 10 an
tagonize the engineer department. In view
of the fact that be had a large amount
of work with that branch of the District
government.
At this point Commissioner Morrow
Joined in the examination, and consumed
much time in going over the figures in
volved In the contract under considora-
ton.
1t was shown by Commissioner West
that Brennan's work for the District had
been satisfactory. One point dwelt upon by
Attorney Flannery was that Brennan had
done q great amount Of District work
during the years Of 19O3-'O7 without fur
Dishing the Commissioners an additional
bond.
Brennan contended that he gave a bond
on the estimates Of his original contract.
and had never been asked by the Com
missioners 20 give additional bond.
In examining Brennan in regard 10 his
statement that no work was given him
out Of the yellow dog fund. Maj. Nor
row said:
Mr. Brennan. showed more favorit-
Ism 10 you on that occasion than was
ever accorded TO the Crawford Com
pany."
Charles A. Douglas. counsel for Bren-
nan. Jumped to his feet, and said: MAI
Morrow, do you wish that statement TO
go In the record Of this hearing?"
Il Il. -. IA 4. a.
shown favoritism to anybody I merely
intimated that Brennan had no cause TO
allege favoritism on the part OF the en-
gineer department to the Crawford Com
pany. ] do not wish the statement put in
the record said the engineer Commits
sioner.
Mr.. FernaId's Honesty.
Attorney Flannery again asked the wit
ness II he was willing to trust Charles
Fernald with his money Brennan re-
piled he would not trust Fernald with
every cent OF II, but that he considered
him an honest man.
Mr.. Flannery then asked Brennan II he
considered Fernald dishonest. after Fer
maid had told him of the large sums Of
money received from other contractors.
NO, did not" said the witness. But
considered 1t case of flexible con-
science"
Didn't you consider II your duty to
notify the superior officers of Fernald
when you heard OF this action?" asked
the attorney.
Il did not. l am not running this Of
fec; II Is up 10 the officials 20 find these
things out" replied Brennan.
Why didn't you go TO the immediate
superiors Of Fernald when you did make
up your mind to tell, instead Of going
TO Commissioner West?"
Because 1 had gotten a raw deal on
the original contract and I Thought Mr.