The Washington herald., 1908-04-24


The statements which Mr.. Brennan
has made about Mr.. Fernald may be true.
1 do not believe they are; nor do I believe
that Mr.. Brennan believes that they are"
This is the way Commissioner Morrow
regards the situation in the engineer de-
partment Of the District bearing on the
charges brought by 2. J. Brennan, Of the
Brennan Construction Company, against
Charles Fernald. former assistant engi-
neer IN the surface division Of the high
way division Of the District
MIR. Brennan's statements" lLr Nor
row continued, were, however, OF such A
character that the Office could not over
look them, and Mr.. Fernald's resignation
was requested and accepted"
Open Hearing To De Held.
The Commissioners will. however. give
Mr. Brennan a chance TO be completely
heard anew in the matter at a public
hearing fixed for next Thursday.
Il know that Mr. Brennan has for this
year been harboring this resentment
against the office, and has been talking
with a great many people Of decision OF
the Commissioners as raw deal. I re-
gret that he has seen TT 20 consider Il IN
this light
His attitude and statements are di-
rectly responsible for the charges made
IN Connection with the recently opened bids
for the paving Of First street In the dis
~usrfnr7 in ronra1tSor NTH sf4Fe v,,o4fnr- k..
invited our attention to some grave irreg-
ularities charged against Mr.. Ferna.d.
and which have resulted in Mr.. Fernaid's
separation from the Office"
COm1issioner M0rrOvy's StafemenI.
The Engineer Commissioner yesterday
made the following statement:
I note certain statements in the press
this morning, which, believe. should be
replied 10 in detail II is stated that the
Commissioners revoked an award 80 the
Crawford Paving Company. recently pro-
tested against by the Beau Construction
Company, and suggests that the reason
Of this revocation was on account Of an
.irreguiarity in opening the bids. rather
than upon the probable adverse ruling OF
the Comptroller that might Be expected
in the matter, the District auditor hay-
ing. subsequent 10 the Commissioners
decision to award this contract to the
Crawford Paving Company, stated 10 the
Engineer Commissioner his doubt that
the Comptroller would pass payments
under this contract. where the formali-
ties OF public advertisement had not been
followed.
IN regard 10 this particular case I
wish 10 state that when the charges Of
the Beall Construction Company OF IA
voritism were received by the Commits
sioners, an investigation by the Board Of
Commissioners was at once made. at
which Mr.. Beail and Mr.. Smith, Of the
Beali Construction Company. were both
present, as We're Capt. Markham. Mr..
Hunt, and Mr.. Fernald. Of the engineer
department. and also Messrs. Joseph and
Percy Crawford, Of the Crawford Paving
Company. As a result Of tHis investiga-
ton, the Commissioners issued an order
awarding the contract to TIE Crawford
Paving Company. the lowest bidder BY
reason OF the probable adverse action OF
the Comptroller, as outlined above, and
at the suggestion Of the District auditor,
and for no other reason. the Commits
sioners countermanded the order award
ing the contract TO the Crawford Paving
Company, ard the work IS row being for
mally advertised for new proposals.
Alleged FavOEitism Old story,
The matter of alleged favoritism IN
the award Of contracts IN the engineer de-
partment is an old matter. and was en-
tirely thrashed out in the Office Of the
Commissioners and in the public press
about a year ago. In April 1907, pro-
posals were taken for paving certain
streets and avenues for the fiscal years
1907 and sos. and when the bids were
opened and canyasSed. while afr Bren-
mans total bid was lower than the Gran
ford Paving Company's total bid, the
bid OF the Brennan Construction Com
pany on all streets paved without cutters
was lower than the bid q the Crawford
Paving Company, but the Crawford Paw
ing Company's bid on streets with vitri-
fed-block cutters was lower than the
Brennan Construction Company's bid on
that class of pavement These awards
were based upon Specifications from
which the following are quotations:
The estimated amcun. is $500 square yards Of as
phslt surface 2S0 yards Of vtrihed block gutter.
These amounts are approximations only and mEy be
considerably varied from; but they viii be used in
canvsssiBg the bid and the award viii be based
thereon.
The Commissioners reserve the right to waive any
infornality in the proposals received to disregard
the proposals Of any falling bidder contractor and 70
reject any and all proposals parts Of proposal,
and 70 make the award in such manner as they con-
slider best fer the interests Of the District Of Co
lumbls
What Contractor sshscribes To,
IN the proposal for the work in Ques-
ton the contractor agrees TO execute
such work of paving as may be awarded
to us by the Commissioners under
the appropriations for the fiscal years
ending June 30, 1907. and June 50, 1908.
"A year previous to advertising for
this work instructions had been given TO
the engineer OF highways as to the poli-
cy to be followed out in paving streets.
This order, which was dated April 8. 1896.
was Issued for the purpose OF securing
symmetry of appearance in the street
pavement and specifically directed the
conditions under which vitrifed-block
cutters should or should not be used.
"A recommendation TO divide the work
I'm question was made by me TO Col
Biddle, then Engineer Commissioner. as
being for the best interests of the Dis
tTict of Columbia, and that the Com
missioners should take advantage OF the
right reserved in the specifications TO
reject any and all proposals, or parts OF
a proposal. if TO the interests Of the Dis