Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-05-20

q clerk in the engineer department get
ting a salary of $500 a year. paving
$40 a month house rent, and it turned
out when Mr.. yelling was put upon the
stand yesterday that being within q
never been sent for by the Engineer
Commissioner. or Capt. Markham OF
anybody else that we know of. ana II
this matter had been investigated We
have not been able to learn about IL.
You will remember there were no con
ferences after this talk with Mr. bIao
ley in the latter part of April. II tneas
has been any investigation since IL nos
not been disclosed. II 1t has been IN
vestigated and results obtained we arr
entitled, and everybody is entitled: ~
have the results Of that investigation
at this hearing.
Not Public Prosecutor.
You will remember 1t has been referred
to more than once that had mace inc
charge here on behalf OF the brennan
Construction Company and stated that We
would furnish list of witnesses LOT uie
purpose of enabling you to psooe THESE
charges to the bottom. I do not knoG
why it has been so many times quoteo.
unless the suggestion was intended to be
made that the burden Of public prosecu-
tor was upon the shoulders of the attor-
neys for the Brennan CONSTRUCTION eoiii-
pany.
''It was not our purpose when we Iur
nfShed the list of those witnesses 10 ds-
sumo the role of an examiner ana cross,
examiner as to charges that Brennan nau
not preferred. I would have you pear 40
mind that in our charges OF favori'lsni'
especially favoritism in the award OF TINS
contract of May 16. 1907. and charge OF
favoritism as to the awarding OF the ISL
street paving contract. We mace no
charges as to Fernald. We had our be-
liefS and our opinions about that ana mao
some evidence to support IT.. and Wnen
this matter came up and developed In the
way in which it did. we then 'ronereo
list of witnesses. But since that time.
s one of the counsel for Mr.. Brennan. !
have been compelled to assume the role
of public prosecutor here, and If l had
not done so 1t might have been said that
we made the charges and had failed to
sustain them, and having made them and
having had the burden cast upon us to
examine these witnesses. we have so
far done so. without assuming any sort
Of responsibility for that task. and we
feel-we may feel unjustly so-but l do
fee! most earnestly that we have not
had the cooperation of the Engineer
department in performing that public
duty which we are not called upon to
perform and discharge.
Mistaken Line of Duty.
I say again it resulted from. think.
tie mistaken line of duty of the Engineer
Commissioner; and with all Difference to
the Engineer Commissioner, l submit it
would be better for his department and
better for all the departments of the Dis
trict government to put in the probe and
to send 1t in deep and find out the facts.
And this matter of false pride, as to
whether or not the engineer department is
right or wrong. | cannot see that 1t would
in any way reflect upon the Engineer
Commissioner in the slightest possible de-
gree. So far as the evidence has gone no.
body has produced any evidence here as to
the engineer department, as to favorit-
ism or as to corruption. except the Bren-
Construction Company, and so far we
have got no assistance in the cross-exam-
ination Of these witnesses-not single.
solitary question can 1 recall has been
asked by the engineer department of this
government that was calculated to bring
out things against the engineer depart
ment. The very structure of their ques-
tions leans toward the defense and the
vindication of the engineer department.
Bias and Partisanship.
But the very fact that he is in the
attitude mentioned; the very fact that he
is in that position, and his natural bias
and natural partisanship would be upon
that side. and the very fact that he has
confirmed it by the very questions he has
asked from day to daylthe very fact of
the intense feeling of dislike and hostility
that he must feel toward Mr. Brennan
or he would not have done the remarkable
thing yesterday of denouncing the princi-
pal prosecutor of these charges here as
being liar. right out in the open pro-
ceedings and asking that 1t be recorded
in the minutnS-n
Commissioner Morrow interrupted at
this point. saying:
IF he had made such a statement, it
was not unqualified"
Suppose that is true" Attorney Doug
las continued, lit seems to us. If the
Commissioners please that it would be
wise in the end for everybody; it would
be best In serving and subscribing the
public interests to have this investigation
go forward, so that nobody, not even
Commissioner Morrow himself, would be
put in the position where any one can
say that he is sitting in Judgment upon
his own department and his own case
l do not mean his own personal case or
his own official case. but the case Of his
own department of the government Then
l think If the investigation goes forward
with the president of the board and Com
missioner West. that will satisfy every
body that this hearing will go forward as
it should do with impartial judges, and
conducted by judges who are not in the
attitude or position to be partial and
whatever may be their finding it ought
to receive the confidence and trust and
CONNIE ndation of the whole community"
Mr.. Mcfarland Explains.
When Mr.. Douglas concluded Commits
sioner Mcfarland said: THE Commits
sioners will. of course. have to con-
fe: upon this matter. and let me
say before we do so that the Com
missioners have desired and do desire
to get at the utmost truth of this mat
ter, and that everything that has been
done up to this point has been with that
object In view. and that everything that
shall be done will be done with that OBJ
ject in view: and when all possible on
portunities OF inquiry are exhausted and
the Commissioners take their action they
will be ready to submit it to the candid
judgment Of all concerned and of the
community at large.
Aside from the statements by Commits
sioner Morrow and Attorney DOUGLAS
there was little of significance at the
session today. It adjourned at 40
o'clock this afternoon until tomorrow
morning at 10 o'clock.
Explains a Conversation.
The first witness. Warren F. Brenizer,
a local contractor. was called by the Com
missioners to explain a conversation be-
tween Brennan and himself concerning
reports of Fernald's irregular transac-
tons Mr. Brenizer told the Commission
ers that he had said to Mr.. Brennan that
he heard Fernald had accepted money
from contractors, but 1t was all based on
hearsay evidence. He further stated that
he had told Brennan that he would not
E,,1-