Daily press. [volume] (Newport News, Va.) 1896-current, 1909-12-23
City Engineers Case Taken Up
by Judge Barham.
ATT0RNEYSARGUE ALL DAY
ciya Attorney MassIe Proseeutes Case
While o. o. Bachelor Appears for
MIR. Fearse-Typewritten Evidence
Submitted to Court.

The appeal of City Engineer
Pearse from the decision of Mayor
Marquis Jones removing him from Of
tice, was taken up by Judge Barham
in the Corporation Court yesterday
morning and the entire day was spent
in hearing the arguments of the at
tcrneys on the evidence as given at
the hearing of the case before Mayor
Jones. Typewriter copies OF the
evidence were furnished Judge Bar
ham yesterday and he will review 1t
before rendering his decision.
Judge Barham's decision in the
case will be final as the Corporation
Court is the court OF last resort for
appeals by city officers from a de-
cision of the mayor in ordering their
renewal from Office.
when court convened yesterday
morning, City Attorney j. A. Massie
opened the argument on behalf OF
the city and Attorney o. d. Bachelor,
counsel for Mr.. Pearse, followed him.
Both attorneys spoke at great length,
each going over the testimony very
carefully.
Acted Without Authority.
Mr.. Massie contended that in or
dering the amount of sand base under
the vitrified brick paving laid by j.
w. Davis reduced from four inches to
two inches, the city engineer acted
without authority as the contract
specifically states that if any change
of the specifications were necessary
the engineer should report to the
council committee on highways and
sewers and the committee and the
contractor SHOULD settle the matter
OF the amount CT the reduction or ad-
dition to be made to the contract
price for the paving. Mr.. Pearse, the
city attorney said, bad ordered 2 re-
duction of the amount of sand base
and had made Nc report CT it TO either
the committee CT the contractor.
The city attorney contended furth-
er that had Mr.. Pearse inserted q
clause into the contract saying that
the amount of the sand base might
ne reduced there might have been a
difference in the bids on the paving.
Citys Loss Small.
In his arguments Mr.. Bachelor
dwelt upon the fact that the city had
not suffered enc penny's loss, either
in the quality Of the paving or the
price paid for it, but freely admitted
that the city had lost about $500 by
the failure Of the engineer to report
the change to the committee SO that
the committee could deduct the diff
ference between the cost CT the origi
nal amount of sand base and tue
amount put down.
Mr.. Bachelor declared that so far
as the evidence given before Mayor
Jones is concerned no improper mo-
tive is even limited at in the action
of the city engineer. The evidence, he
said, shows conclusively that the
change was, from an engineering
standpoint, a necessity. Then
the worst view of the case for Mr.
Pearse, he said, is that he failed 10
report the change to the committee.
Found Guilty of Misconducts.
In a decision handed down On Oc
tober rs, Mayor Jones found the city
engineer guilty o. misconduct in Of
flee in that he ordered the reduction
,cf the sand base without asking the
permission OF the committee and Or
dered his removal from Office. The
mayors investigation was made at the
request of the city council, to which
f5cdy the reduction OF the sand base
was first reported by Councilman T.
.E. Christie. of the Second ward. Mr..
,Pesrse appealed from the mayors de-
cision and was granted stay of NJ
teen days TO note the appeal. Judge
Barhsm then granted further stay
until the trial could be had and de-
-cision rendered.