The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1909-11-30
SEWER CASE IS UP
Echo of Fifth Ward Scandal in
District Court.
Contractor Gilmore Suing for
Money Claimed to Be Due.
A JURY is SECURED.
No Resident of Topeka Per-
mitted to Sit.
Case Promises to Be Long Drawn
Out.
| JURY is SECURED.

AO ll1uCu CO1llIluoQ CdoO VI AVA. W.
Gilmore against the city of Topeka in
volving the explanation Of the graft in
the construction of the Fifth ward sew
er and the dismissal of City Engineer
James f. McCabe. was begun in the
district court this morning. Ninety
nine witnesses have been subpoenaed
by both sides from among the residents
of the sewer district and those ac-
quainted with the history of the sewer.
No resident of the city was allowed
to sit on the jury by Judge A. w.
Dana and a special venire was made
county. The jury as empanelled con-
sists of, F. P. Mccullough, ]. w. Reed,
T. J. Meyers, NJ. Holt, E. Watson. J.
A. Price, s. L. Nelson. Isaac Mitchell
F. B. Fritz, William Turner, j. II.
Phillips. William Quail.
Former City Attorney F. P. Dren-
ming is assisting City Attorney
RaIston and his assistant. James Clark
for the city. Ed McKeever and ). ).
Schenck are conducting the case for
the plaintiff.
The case now on for hearing is a
tangled affair and the city might well
be the plaintiff. The sewer constructed
by Gilmore was paid for by the CITY
before the discovery OF the graft ana
the amount was about s66,000. Then 1t
was found that they had paid some
500 too much for the actual work
Later Gilmore got the contract lot
building the city's sidewalks and made
a claim for S3,2O4.37. The city withheld
payment and Gilmore brought suit
Meanwhile the city had begun action
to recover on the sewer and when the
suit of GilmOresWaS brought the CITY
dropped their case setting up the coun-
ter-claim of $4,000 to offset the claim
of Gilmore which leaves Gilmore the
,,Joip+iff in the Dresent case In which
the city hopes to recover
REEVES Old Sewer Scandal.
Mr.. Dreaming in making the opening
speech for the city recited much OF the
history of the sewer which he INTEND.
ed to lay before the jury. The CONTRACT
for the sewer was let in the spring OF
1904 and the work was completed In
September, 1905 The district in gen
eral is bounded on the east by the
Santa Fe tracks, on the north by Tn1r-
teenth street, on the west by western
avenue and on the south by the Snun-
ganunga creek, into which it empt1es,
along Twentieth street. 1t is known as
sewer No. "a and it's total length is
seven miles.
The allegations of the city are that
the contractors, then Brooks ana Gill
more, by arrangement with the city
engineer, James McCabe shortened
the distance by 1854 feet, for when
collection was made; that in CONN.,
vance with the engineer the grade or
the sewer was raised in the main line
IS inches and in other parts from
several inches to- several feet thus
saving the excavation of some 7,OO0
cubic yards of earth; that Gilmore
claimed and got $4,000 for excaVating
rock, with the estimate of the engln-
eer. when no rock had been excavated
at ALI that when the digging machine
struck rock near the alley west of
Tyler street on Huntington street, the
engineer and Gilmore put their heads
together for a minute and resolved,
without further Formally to raise the
grade 5 II feet. and that when the
laterals were built at that level up
the east side of Polk, the water flow
ed into the cellars of residents IN
stead of out; that Gilmore supported
Mayor Bergundthal for reelection
with the understanding that he would
re-appoint McCabe engineer and that
McCabe extorted from Gilmore 5000
at one time and $500 at another time
for his friendship; and that to save
expensive construction they diverted
a. section of the sewer from its IN
tended course, to the Shunganunga
creek, emptying it into sewer No. Ia
to the north.
Claim Gilmore Is Blameless.
Investigations disclosing these
things were ordered at the time and
Gilmore went before the council and
made a clean breast of the whole at
fair That fact will be used by the
attorneys to exonerate him from any
fault Mr. McKeever in presenting
his side of the affair to the jury stated
that the contractors had lost $4,000
on the work beside what McCabe got
| from them. He stated also that what
| ever deviation there was from the
| original contract was at the consent
| of the city themselves and that aside
from McCabe the city had inspectors
| on the ground making examinations
at every twenty-five feet and that any
deviation not ordered would have
| been a violation of the contract right
there, that inspectors each morning
| outlined the work to be done by the
| contractors that day binding them,
and that any faulty work was impos-
sible He also commended that the
raising of the grades to avoid rock
IL IL