The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-03-22
Stone SUPPLIED
BY CONTRACTOR
Witnesses Say They Were Not
Informed City Was to
Furnish 1t.

II was shown last night III tie FUR
thcr Investigation OF the charges
brought by Clarence g. Burton against
the City Engineers Office that out OF
total expenditure OF something like
s2i3.odp for city sever work III 1910
the purchase OF stone for sever con.
strucl.un totaled sG5s.2a Also that
OF this latter amour, only s70.25 wen,
on sewers where specifications wcre
iiteriined SO that the contractor was
10 furnish stone.
II was also shown that in a co!npari-
son OF bids among contractors. Mr..
burton was nearly always awarded
the contract. although never the low
est bidder, ana that frequently after
deducting the cost OF what was spok en-
Of IS inlet OF basin" stones from
Mr. Burton's bldg. he was still not. the
lowest bidder. although the contract
was awarded TO him. THIS made II
appear 70 the committee that ne had
not he Disseminated against, by the
Engineers Department.
Many Witnesses.
The Committee me, last night at the
City Hall a. 5 o'clock and sat until
midnight when the hearing was adj
tourned until next Thursday after.
noon at +:ao o'clock. Many witnesses
were introduced some testifyinS at
great length. Little additional lighi
was thrown on the situation, however
and neither Contractor Burton no,
CITY Engineer Boiling took the chair.
Furnished stone.
Hunter Burton. Of the nrnl OF Burton
& Driscoll was first called The Wit
ness, replying 10 questions from At
torneys O'Flaherty and Fulton, said he
had been awarded several contracts
by the city for sewer work That In
all work done by him his firm supplied
me stone That al no time was nc
ever informed by any person connected
with the City Engineers once that the
city did not require him TO furnish
stone. 1e bid on the contracts, which
We're four in number. making an allow.
nnce for furnishing stone
Mr. Burton was examined as ia ~.
cost of stone used by him, after which
he was excused.
understood bid
Contractor ]. j. Smith was next call
cd. and said that on the Cary street
sewer lie bid with expectation OF sun
plying stone.
IN the next contract awarded by the
city to Air. Smith he had bid with the
understanding that he was not TO
supply stone. did not include II IN his
bid and did not supply It, This stone
was supplied by the city
colonel George Wayne Anderson
counsel for the city, asked the Wit
ness II he had not on one occasion
been ovcrpaid for his work He re-
Piled that he had once been over
PAID, that he had called the attention
OF the City Engineers department TO
THIS and had refunded the amount over
paid to the city
Fl contractor W. f.. Fletcher was call
Ell. Witness introduced letter writ
ten by him to City Engineer Boiling.
sayinS that lie was not required IN
Ger his contract TO furnish stone. bit
pii'E 10 hau stone supplied by she
ctiE TO tie work on tile sewers.
Dictated Letter
Mi. Fletcher was asked where n.
had written he letter introduced Ho
Icp!lel that nc had not written hnt
had dictated it in the Offices OF Tic
CITY Engineer 10 =. p. Talaferro First
Assistant City Engineer. ana at the
request and suggestion OF persons in
that department.
+ r. p, Taliaferro was called. Mr..
Taiiafcrro exhibited a tabulatcd state
ment compiled by him. setting forth
all morey paid out for stone given out
~ the city to contractors by the late
Ar. Bolton between March % and De-
cember 30. 1910 The table contained
various subdivisions Of the total