Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-05-16
STREET PAVING WORK
Commissioners Proceed With
Investigation.
CHARGES OF FAvORITISM
Capt. Edwin Markham Continues His
Testimony.
EXPLAINS CONTRACT AWARD
Attorney Douglas Quotes From Rec
ords as to Lowest Bidder and
Expresses Views.
CHARGES OF FAVORITISM
EXPLAINS CONTRACT AWARD

Capt Edwin Markham, assistant engt.
neer commissioner of the District, wit
ness during the entire session yesterday
of the investigation being conducted by
the Commissioners based on charges OF
favoritism shown by the engineer depart
ment in the awarding OF certain con.
tracts. resumed his testimony this mora.
Ing.
Attorney Douglas. for the Brennan Con.
struction Company. drew from the wit
ness statements bearing on the conduct
and management of the engineer depart
ment. especially In connection with the
awarding of the contract for street paving
work divided between the Brennan COM
pany and the Crawford Paving Company.
which division caused the protest from
the former. He also answered questions
in relation to the contract for street work
in connection with the elimination OF
grade crossings which was first award
ed to the Crawford company and
called forth protest from the R. ]. Beall
Construction Company.
Regarding the awarding Of the contract
which was divided. Attorney Douglas
asked Capt Markham If 1t was not the
fact that the main reason for the Com
mssioners dividing the contract was to
encourage competition in this city and to
give helping hand to the Crawford Com
pany as the means of assuring the future
maintenance of competing asphalt plant.
Requests Direct Answer.
To this Capt Markham replied that 1t
was not the reason for the Commission
ers' act in awarding the contract as they
did. but that 1t was given some consid-
Grafton.
When requested to give direct answer
he said that If he had been recommending
the award of the contract In question. he
would have given considerable considera-
ton to the maintenance Of competing
asphalt plant.
Competition in this line OF work. the
witness declared, sis vitality important to
the District. It will mean a great saving
of money to the District In future work =
ords showing that the Brennan company
was the lowest bidder on the entirety Of
the work under contract. but that for the
individual item Of vitrified block cutters
the Crawford Paving Company was the
lowest bidder by about forty dollars He
asked Capt. Markham: Isn't it really
true that despite the fact that the Gran
ford company was the lowest on the Wit
rified block work. according to the speci-
fications. the vitrified block work could
nan company because of the cost OF
inspection necessary In connection with
the Crawford plant?
Cost Of inspection.
1T strikes me- he continued
that the cost of inspection
should be taken into consideration by
the Commissioners in the awarding Of
contracts. II 1t had been taken into con-
sideration in this case the Brennan COM
pany would have been not only the low
est bidder for the work in It's entirety. but
In its divided form. AS representatives
of the District the Commissioners should
consider what is right and just. and at
the same time consider what will prove
to be the greatest saving for the city.
You have the legal right and power. and
you should have the intention"
Commissioner Morrow remarked that
he could not agree with counsel as to the
suggestion that the Commissioners could
have awarded the entire contract to the
Brennan company. and that the cost Of
inspection should figure In the total
amount Of the respective bids.
AS long as l am Engineer Commits
sioner 1 will not agree to that way Of
considering contracts he added.