The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1910-03-03
Lack Memory
Chief Feature ofProbe-
Report Now Goes to
Columbus and Will Be
Back Sometime.

Back Sometime.
The inquiry into the matter of
painting and repairing bridges in Can
ton, which has been conducted by
State Examiners MCGUIRE and Jack
son, came to an end wednesday, and
the examiners will now formulate and
send their report to the department at
Columbus.
Contractor Charles G. Groner was
subjected to a searching examination,
and what he did not remember forms
large part of the stenographic re-
port of the testimony
The report of the examiners will in
due course be sent back to Canton.
but none of the testimony will be used
to take the case before the grand jury,
should such action be contemplated.
The expense of the inquiry will be
borne by the city.
During the early hours of the day
about a dozen men who had been
employed by Groner to do the paint
ing and repairing of brides were ex-
amined to find how much each one
was allowed for his services by the
contractor and to ascertain where the
work was done. Most of the wit
nesses testified that they had been
paid So per day for their work, while
others drew as high as $225 per day.
One or two had been paid only S1.50
per day. One of these men said that
he was a structural iron worker and
that he received 25 cents per hour.
He said that most of his work was
done on the guard rails and declared
that he was never on top of any OF
the bridges. No inspection had been
made and he said that the bridges had
not been thoroughly repaired
These men said that two or three
gangs were engaged in the work and
that sometimes these gangs would
consist of from three to six men. the
size of the bridges depending upon the
number of workmen on the Job. Only
one coat of paint was given on most
OF the bridges and one of the bridges
was completed in one days time.
Groner's payrolls sent TO the BOARD
of public service contained the names
Of lot of people that could not be
located by the examiners, and when
the men who were there as witnesses
were asked if they knew any of the
men whose names appeared on the
payroll they said they did not know
them, that they only knew the men
that worked with them regularly.
Then those three barrels of paint,
referred to in yesterdays account
brought out some interesting things.
Examiner Jackson went to Groners
place some weeks ago and asked him
about the materials that Groner claim
ed had been left over from the job,
and he was told that the paint was
in the cellar. He investigated and
could not find the paint. 1t developed
at the hearing that the 156 gallons of
paint sent back to the director of SER
vice had been purchased at the plant
of the Canton Paint & Varnish COM
pany on February II of this year. the
time that it was turned over to the
city
ss 1t was. also charged by thee exam
iners that Groner sent man{to the
home of Joseph Munter to clean out
cistern and that the work was done
at the time that this man was paid
for painting the bridges. Later in
the day'I rector Munter testified that
he had man sent him by Groner. but
that the work was paid for by himself
to Groner.
Groner was placed on the stand Just
before noon. In answer to questions
put to him by Examiner MCGUIRE he
stated that he had been given a ver-
bal contract to paint the bridges in
the city; that he was to receive SO
per day for his services and 81 for the
use Of his horse and wagon; that he
was TO hire his help and buy the ma
terials and present his bills to the
board. He said that he did not re-
member soliciting the work and that
he had no understanding with the
board as to the price of labor or ma
terials.
Groner was asked if he charged the
city the same prices for material that
he had paid to the manufacturers and
dealers. He answered no. He did not
remember as to any fixed percentage
He did not remember how much mixed
paint was used. He had bought some
of it in Canton and some of il out
side the city, but he could not remem-
ber where he purchased it or how
much he had bought. He said that
he had no records, and presumed that
they had been destroyed with the first
of the year.
He said that he did not know what
had become of the time books. He ad
mltted that the city had paid for all
materials. He did not remember
whether he paid his hands or whether
they were paid by a girl in his office.
Gr9ner's memory seemed to be very
defective and at one time during the
examination Examiner Mcguire broke
in with: "Mr. Groner, be careful, or
you might remember something"
At the reconvening of the inquiry
after dinner Groner was handed a lit
tie book which had the appearance of
a time book. in which was jotted
down the names of several people sup
posed to be in his employ. He said
this book was kept by the girl in the
shop. He could not tell whether his
son, r. Groner, was working in the
shop or on the bridge job, in fact he
could not tell by this where the men
were at work.
He kept the time of the bridge gang
on slips of paper and paid his men
every Saturday night. He kept part
of the time himself, but he didn't re-
member who made up the payroll
sometimes himself and sometimes the
girl.
Groner was asked whether a man
named Brown had not put up some
spouting while he was on the PAYROLL
as doing bridge work, but he could
not remember. When asked if man