The Washington herald., 1908-07-10


peared. with a view to eliciting such in
formation, If there was any. There was
not the slightest intimation that there
was any system of grating such as
has been discovered in other municipali-
ties in similar Investigations. The allie
cations were confined 10 one man. anJ
indicated no collusiOn or cooperation with
him on the part OF any one else in consid-
Ieration of graft in any form. AT worst
1t was a sporadic case Of dishonesty such
as might occur In any private corpora
tion.
Officials Are EKOnernted.
"As TO the second class of charges; be-
yond what was involved in the allegations
against Fernald there was no warrant
in the testimony for the assertion that
any official or employe of the engineer
department had been guilty OF favorIng
one contractor over another; or OF giving
favor TO any one else In any sinister
sense
"The opinion Of the corporation eoun-
sci shows that the different acts OF the
engineer department with respect 10 the
proper. and II does not appear that the
discretion exercised by the Commissioners
or subordinates in the engineer depart
ment was influenced by favoritism toward
a particular contractor. The legal exer-
else OF discretion will benefit the per-
son in whose favor the decision Is made
and this Of course, happened in the case
under examination, but this does not
support the charge Of favoritism. since
the interests of the public were the prime
consideration according 10 the testimony.
AT the same time, the Commissioners
cannot approve as a matter OF admin
istration the issuance Of orders for street
paving in advance of the delivery OF the
grade sheets. which was the consumma-
tion OF the orders upon which work
actually began. or in advance OF the ap-
propriatiOns actually made and avail
able. The orders In controversy We're
issued honestly and with a view 10 the
interests of the District Of Columbia. and
not OF the contractors. and according 10
custom Of ordering work in advance.
but they should not have been issued
except when the time had come TO DO
the work and when there was money
available for that-purpOse. No work
was ordered except work that ought 10
be done, and the orders We're giver 20
the proper contractor. but II ought 10
have been ordered differently.
UneKecuted Orders Cancelled.
The Commissioners. in accordance
with the regular practice Of the engineer
department. and upon the advice Of
the corporation counsel. have directed
that unexecuted orders amounting 20
SIS. 600 In round numbers for work which
could not be done IN the fiscal year 1908
shall be cancelled ana that amount of
work taken up by the contractor or con-
tractors for the new fiscal year II AZ
pears that these orders were not re-
garded as binding contracts. and ac-
quiescence has been made by the con-
tractor In the cancellation OF this por-
ton Of them. In 50 far as they were
limited 10 the fiscal year 1905 they were
properly given 10 the contractors for
that year and the work required no re-
advertisement In the future advance
orders Will not be given contractors.
'As 10 the specific charges OF the
Beall Construction Company respecting
the opening Of bids for paving First
street, the Commissioners before the
formal hearing, at the instance OF the
auditor. had provided that hereafter no
contracts amounting to more than 81 600
should be awarded without formal ad-
vertisement and the opening Of bids in
public at an hour and a day certain
The Commissioners disapprove the method
which was observed IN the matter Of
the First street bids. although they
realize that the engineer department be
lieved that It was warranted by law and
custom, and was in the public interest.
''As TO the filing Of the public space
in the plaza before the Union Station. the
Commissioners believe that that portion
Of the work for which the District paid
ought TO have been advertised and the
contract given to the lowest responsible
bidder. even If the work had cost more.
In this case. as in other cases, he engi-
neer department took informal action.
such as private corporations take. and
with the same end I'm view, 20 make the
best bargain possible both in time and
money
In the judgment OF the Commissioners.
corporations cannot follow the
practices of private corporations in such
a way, but, even at the risk of greater
cost. must always act by means Of adver-
tised competitive bidding and public
awards, and so prevent such suspicious
as have arisen in the matters which have
been under inquiry. What is called red
tape is often inconvenient. and hamper
ing by delay. and sometimes more expen-
sive\ than the shorter informal methods
used by private corporations. but a mu-
nicipal corporation ought TO avoid the
very appearance of evil, and be above
susDfcior