Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1915-04-22
CLAY WITNESS ASKED
DIFFICULT QUESTIONS
BY JUDGE FERGUSON
Former City Architect, De-
Tending Alleged Conspir-
ators to Cheat City, Con-
fesses Amazing Igno-
rance.

Although he did not know that there
was any difference between costs OF metal
Z and wood lath and between costs Of quar-
tered white oak and quartered rcd oak,
and that there was any material saving
! IN expense in the substitution Of wood
wainscoting in walls for marble tiles, ac-
cording to his testimony, Carl r. zilen-
, ziger. former city architect, was non
plused for moment at the conspiracy
trial OF Clay, Virgins and Walls this
morning, when Judge Ferguson took
hand In his cross-examination.
mir. zilenziger." questioned the Judge,
'when you prepared the bulletin TO reduce
the cost of the bathhouse at Montrose
and Darien streets to meet the limit cost
hxed by Mr.. Clay, did you not have rea-
son to believe that the changes YOU men,
toned in this paper would accomplish the
end sought?"
The witness was clearly staggered by
the query, and rather lamely explained
that he had received exact information
from the builder In preparing the puI-
letin.
ReopeninE the cross-examination Of the
former city architect Attorney Taulane
began:
mir Zilenziger. when you modified the
plans and specifications TO substitute
uuartered red oak for QuarteTed white
oak in the interior finish of the truck
house at Sd and Race streets, did you
not know that this would effect con-
siderable saving?"
II did not know"
Just why did you make the changer
"1t was solely for the sake of the ap-
pearance The irregular grain of the
white oak was much less pleasing than
the straight grain of the red oak"
Ibid you not substitute wooden studs
and lath on the second specifications for
metal lath and studs called for In the
< first specifications"
Yes sir
j.. s'Did you not know the wooden material
was less costly than the metal?'
No sir, did not. made this change
only because difficulty had been expert
enced in running the electric wires
through the metal lath."
Dropping this line of inquiry, Attorney
Tauline attempted to show that Mr.. Zilen-
:. ziger had certified on the first contract
that work had been done by Virgins &
: Co. to the amount of about Sl7s,00O with
out deducting anything for work not done
under the second contract. The witness
would not admit. however. that he certi-
fed separately to the work done under
three contracts.
Mr.. Zilenziger. when you received no
ttce that the contract under the nrSt
specifications had been awarded to John
r. Virgins G. Co. you had already COM
pleted the specifications OF the second
contract embodyng the changes you
have mentioned, had you not?'
II had"
Ibid you not know that these changes
reduced the cost of the work in every
instance?"
NO, / did not know 1t. The only way
could learn If there was any difference
/. in the cost of the work under the two
! contracts was by the bids on the work
by the contractors"
Nov, Mr.. Zienzger," Judge Ferguson
,hyoAsS IN when you prepared the bull
letn 4 NJ Ing the cost of the bathhouse
at MonNAse and Darien streets, to meet
the limit cost fixed by Mr. Gay, did you
not have reason to believe that these
items in your bulletin would accomplish
this chespening?"
Yes. but l had information from the
builder upon all these items"
But as an architect, Mr. Zilenziger,"
persisted the Judge. are YOU not able
to tell the difference in the cost of two
buildings where such exists from their
plans and specifications"
mot unless there is very wide diff
ference" replied the witness.
Now. Mr.. Zilenziger." the Assistant
District Attorney continued, can you
name one single item in the second speci-
hcation which increased the cost of the
buildings at Sd and Race streets to the
contractors?"
The witness was unable to do so.