Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-05-27

grave illusions and the frequent inter-
changes Of remarks OF a personal nature.
the inquiry wound up as a sort OF love
feast.
Every one seemed in a happy vein. The
lawyers INDUCED in good-natured and
even humorous remarks. and the Com
nissioners, who were unusually dignified
throughout the inquiry. joined in. So
pleased were all with every one that they
chatted for nearly half an hour In the
boardroom after the session was ad-
joprned.
| The Commissioners announced that the
only additional evidence to be taken will
be an affidavit from Charles E. Stewart,
a contractor who worked jointly with the
Brennan Construction Company in ex-
cavatinE at the House Office building site
| and in dumping earth in the plaza The
Commissioners also hope that Charles =.
McDermott Of the mullen
Hoffman Construction Company, who Is
alleged to have given Charles Fernald.
former engineer OF highways: $500. Will
return to this city and testify.
| Commissioner Mcfarland announced
| that II Mr.. McDermott does not appear
the Commissioners will take note Of that
| fact In reaching conclusion. He also
explained that the records Of the inquiry
have been sent from day to day to United
States Attorney Baker.
| Counsel for the Brennan Construction
Company last evening said they desired
to begin the arguments today, and that
they did not think 1t necessary to await
tho possible appearance Of Mr. McDer-
mott. Counsel for the Crawford Company
ana counsel for Mr. Fernald said they
were ready to proceed with the argu-
ments. The Commissioners stated that
they would hear the arguments today OF
wal. until June 5. when the time expires
for McDermott's appearance. But al
counsel desired to proceed the Commits
sioners agreed to hear them this after
noon at o'clock
Beginning the Arguments.
Attorney Gibbs L. Baker of counse
for the Brennan Construction Company
opened this afternoon at Q o'clock. ]. S
Flannery. attorney for the Crawford Com
pany and ]. E. Laskey. representing
Fernald. will follow. and Charles "A. Doug.
las OF counsel for Brennan will make the
closing address for his side. E. H
| Thomas corporation counsel. who has
been in daily attendance at the inquiry
will not speak.
Attorney Baker Opens.
| Attorney Baker, in beginning his argu.
ment. expressed the hope that Charles
which rests upon him as the result Of the
| inquiry. Mr.. Baker directed his remarks
to criticism Of the methods of the en-.
gineer department. alleging unfair con-
duct and favoritism on the part OF the
officials Of that department and laying
| especial stress upon the attitude Of the
| Engineer Commissioner.
| The Crawford Paving Company. which
| is alleged to have been favored by the en-
gineer department officials. came in fol-
its share Of Mr.. Bakers arraignment. the
| attorney declaring that in face OF a sworn
statement the proof is conclusive that
Fernald gave the Crawford company in
formation which made possible the low
bid on the LIST street paving contract.
The division of this contract" Attorney
/ Baker declared. was a violation Of the
organic law. which declares in imam,
| biguous language that public work shall
be left to the lowest responsible bidder.
and where the bids have been asked for
| upon the whole work the Commissioners
have no discretion to do otherwise. except
| on account Of something which affects the
responsibility or ability Of the bidders.
Language of the Statute.
There is no power lodged in the Com
missioners to reject part OF bid and
accept part where the bids have been
invited for an entire contract. This is
the plain language of the statute. and in
connecting this ingenious scheme to give
rankest favoritism displayed. but In
| order to do SO the fundamental law was
utterly ignored
1T was at first said that the division
Of this contract was JUSTIFIED because
| the work could not have been done by
two contractors but the engineer depart
| ment has been driven from that position
as 1t has from every other one which II
| attempted TO occupy, by the fact that all
Of its objection could have been met
| by awarding the whole work to the Bren-
| nan Construction Company. which was
the lowest bidder. and should have re-
| ceived it upon every consideration of law
| and fair dealing.
Alleged Rank Favoritism.
THE only excuse that Is now offered for
the violation Of the organic act and the
unfair discrimination against Brennan is
| that it was for the best interest OF the
| District to keep the Crawford Paving
Company engaged in asphalt work. The
mere statement OF the proposition shows
| the thin veneer which clothed the rank
favoritism complained of.
There has been competition in the as
phalt business continuously. and In view
| OF that fact Congress refused to establish
! q municipal asphalt plant. and further
! secured the District against unfair prac-
tices by fixing maximum price for as
phalt work
! And yet. in the teeth of these facts and
| Of the acknowledged character of the
| work and cheapness of cost which has
been obtained for public work in the Dis
| trict on account of active competition, the
engineer department seeks to hide itself
| behind this transparent excuse for its
partisan favoritisn toward the Cranfords.
The evidence shows conclusively that the
Crawford Paving Company has been for
years. and Is now. amply able to take
care of itself"