The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1914-07-23
STREET OIL TESTS
REVEAL STANDARD
GRADES EMPLOYED
Rival Contractor Erroneous
ly Charges Curry With vi
olating Two Specifications
in Contract With City.
Earlham Professors Analysis
Shows Curry Oil Good and
One Rivals Test With Low
Grade.

R. G. Alexander. representing a.
agent c. E. Davis, street oiler. today
issued q statement charging H. w.
Curry, who has the city contract for
oiling streets. with violating in two
instances the specifications under
which he is working. and also linked
Alfred Bavis. president of the board
of works. with the accusation.
Investigation Of the charges at the
city hall prove both of them false.
Alexander charged that Curry be-
gan oiling streets before the oil in
the tanks in the railroad yards was
tested to see If 1t measured up to
specifications, and that tests Of oil
made by Professor Holmes Of Earl.
ham college, for the city showed the
material below standard.
Reports Oil Good.
Professor Holmes said he made four
tests for the city and reported the find
ings to the city engineer. The latter
showed that the analysis, as reported
by Professor Holmes. proved the oil
OF standard grade and that 1t could
be applied to Richmond streets with
success.
Analysis of the four tests, accord.
ing to records in the office of the city
engineer show:
Test No. 1-Oil used by Curry good.
Test No. 2-Oil used by Davis. low.
Test No. 3-Oil by Davis, good
Test No. 4EOil by Curry good
Professor Holmes said he did not
know whose oil he was testing.
City Engineer Charles and Presi.
dent Bavis said that the oil Davis
used at first was not tested, and
that after the analysis it was seen
| that the product used by Davis was
below standard. In the meantime, 80
! these officials declare, Davis had used
| quarter of car on the Richmond
streets. They say that oil used by
Curry, however, was tested.
City Engineer Charles expressed
satisfaction at the method of forcing
oil through the tank wagon by means
of pressure. as used by Curry. and said
1t assured a better distribution than
the gravity system employed by Davis.
Denies Accusation.
/! Alexander, acting, as he told Pal
ladium representatives, for Mr.. Davis
i! charged that the work of Mr. Curry
did not assure consistent oiling and
that the surface would easily wear Off
The city engineer took exception to
this charge, denying it in emphatic
| terms.
| Pressed by The Palladium to specify
exactly wherein the Curry oil was be-
low specifications, Alexander said
that generally speaking the oil was un-
! satisfactory. Asked his motive for
making the charge, Mr.. Alexander
gave an evasive answer.
| Asked directly if he accused Mr..
Bavis with connivance in covering up
the alleged deviation from the speci-
fications in the contract let by the
city, Alexander also sidestepped the
issue. The only direct, open charge
he would make was to assert that
Bavis seemed to want Curry to have
the contract and would not let Davis
have a chance.
| Evades Answer.
To the query whether it was not
true that Davis had the same privilege
as Curry had in presenting bids, Alex
ander said, HE guessed So"
Alexander specifically charged that
Curry was using oil from a car that
had not been tested. He claimed
that he, Davis and Robert Benton, city
inspector, took a sample from a car
and that its analysis was below stand
ard.
City Engineer Charles said that a
sample of the Curry oil was taken to
Professor Holmes by Inspector Benton
and that it showed standard consist
ent with the specifications.
Professor Holmes analysis at the
city building show all Curry oil Of
standard grade. and the Earlham
teacher also said that one test made
of sample left on his porch with the
note signed by Davis requesting
analysis also of standard grade.
Alexander said he did not have a
copy of the returns of the analysis Of
the oil which was below standard
with him.
AssaiIs Mr.. Benton.
f; Mr. Bavis today said records Of
street oiling in Richmond were open
to the public and any committee that
desired to inspect.
City Engineer Charles said the work
was going on according to specifics
tions.
Alexander alleged that Mr.. Benton.
the inspector, was "a mighty poor man
on the job which provoked sharp
denial from city hall officials.