The Washington herald., 1908-05-28
DOUGLAS SCORES
ENGINEER OFFICE
Continued from Pngc One.

big corporation. doing work In various
cities OF the country. There was no talk
about insolvency in connection with IL.
There was no talk OF a $4,000 mortgage
on their plant. like there has been about
the Brennan plant
Mr. Crawford testified here that those
portable plants can do work cheaper than
the other plants. Yet il was necessary TO
maintain that sort OF competition under
those peculiar circumstances when the
proper people were here. and the Gran
ford people were here and the Brennan
people were here and the act of Congress
fixing the maximum amount that could
be paved. I'm addition thereto.
No Force I'm Argument.
Il submit there is no force or effect in
that argument.
I'VE claim that even assuming that
you have to stand by the contract as 1t
originally was, that there were orders
given and work assigned to the Crawford
Paving Company that was contrary TO
the law and absolutely null and void.
We claim. further, that even II you had
the power TO do it, il was done in an
unprecedented way as to time and un-
precedcnted way as to amount and was
done without commensurate necessity as
10 the time or the occasion or of the
circumstances.
I'VE claim. Furthermore. that that work
was assigned to the Crawford Paving
Company months and months ahead OF
the time when IL could be done. or should
be done. or was expected TO be done; and
that 1t was done for the express purpose
upon the part OF some subordinate in
the engineers Office OF crowding that
work TO the Crawford Paving Company
- TNeN
day of June or whenever the contract
expires 1t was done for that purpose
for the purpose Of conferring benefits or
partial benefits to the Crawford Paving
Company.
Against Public Interest.
I'VE claim furthermore thatit was done
against the manifest interest of the Dis
trict Of Columbia and in violation OF the
rights OF its citizens and taxpayers.
"Our last charge is as to the Beall Con-
struction Company-whether through cor
ruption. or partisan friendship or not. we
do not know-that the bids for the First
street paving contract were improperly.
/ Illegally. and dshOnoTably dealt with. to
the detriment of the Beall Construction
Company. with the result tlat the con-
/ tract was awarded to the Crawford Paw
/ ing Company.
/ "Our position is this. that II was with
out the power of this board 10 have
divided this contract. in the first in
stance, at all They have absolutely no
power than II private individuals had un-
/ dertakeu 10 award the contracts under
! those circumstances. and II is not worth
/ the paper on which it is written when
/ the test comes"
] Tynr,nIfafa1,F hafora adfOurnu1put Com
missioner Macfarland announced that
/ Charles McDermott. the subpoenaed wit
ness. would be given until June 10 ap-
pear before the Commissioners. IF he
does not appear by that time. the Com
missioners will notify the United States
district attorney that he evaded the Ferv-
] ice Of their subpoena and attendance at
the hearing"
! Commissioner Macfarland then declared
the hearing adjourned.
Defends the Cranfords.
/ j. S. Flannery, in his argument in de-
fense of the charges against his clients
the Crawford brothers, severely criticised
Brennan's actions. and denounced him as
seeking TO hide Fernald from suspicion.
1 He made il understood he was not an
tagonizing Fernald. hut was trying 10
show wherein Brennan erred in not fling
his charges against the engineer depart
ment when he first learned Of the former
assistant engineers alleged improper ac-
tons
Brennan locked this secret in mis-
breast for nearly two years until he
feared the Crawford Company was 70 be
awarded a contract-of sc5. 0Co" said Mr..
Flanuery Then he whispered II in the
ear Of one Of the Commissioners"
After telling Of Brennan's position in
the proceedings Mr.. Flannery continued:
He is charging the Commissioners with
favoritism and yet he asks them 10 show
equity toward him. Has Brennan come
into this hearing with clean hands? He
testified Fernald received money from
him. but he waited until he was pinched
to peach
when he was on the witness stand ]
tried to draw from him what his charges
were He alleges favoritism was shown
\ the Cranfords on two occasions. I claim
his charges are unfounded since the tes-
timony on ali sides shows that my clients
are innocent Of any effort to get the con-
tracts.
Evidence Against FernnId.
He has said Fernald used his influence
I
Cranfords This has not been proved In
fact, the only himsy evidence against Fer
J nald is that he ha, deposited $4,000 within
/, four years. Brennan claims Fernald told
him he received $500 from McDermott
and $1,000 from Wainwright. Have these
b statements been proved? So far as Fer
nald is concerned. you have only suspi
cion against him This suspicion Is likely
! to do him a gross injustice. I feel the
time will come when he will he able tC
T establish his innocence Of any wrOngdOnl
with the District government
: Mr.. Flannery then accused Brennan ot
using r. j. Beall and Fred Smith L
! shield his actions. He also told of Bren
2 mans past dealings in an endeavor tC
show his record to be corrupt
/ He said he thought any court Of justice
would exclude the evidence given by
p Brennan's secretary, O. II. Perry John
} son. against the Cranfords
Looking at the Commissioners, he SAID
in deliberate manner:
You are the defendants. and at youl
own motion. II is regrettable that in the
{ District Of Columbia. over which the Com
T. missioners preside. that a contractoi
' should file charges against those execu
e tives charging them with favoritsm, at
tacklng their conduct. and impugninl
I their integrity. The engineer department
has been compelled 10 sit here quietly anC
r not reply 10 the derogatory charges mad'
E against them. In the whole record Of thi
hearing there is not fifty pages that woul,
be considered as evidence I'm a court o
Justice The major part of the testimon,
has been rambling talks widely separate,
from the main issue.