The Duluth rip-saw. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1917-19??, 1919-03-29

about the same practical use as five
legs for a dog. .''.
If information is correct, the Far
rellian partner received three cents
a barrel for testing cement for the
kindly old city. There is no dispute
as to the ability and accuracy of
commissioner Farrell's partner but
there is dispute as to the necessity
of spending all that money, as we'll
as to the legality of the expenditure.
AS all real engineers know, ce-
ments now used are standard, with
characteristics well known, there
fore testing has been reduced to a
minimum, il not entirely abolished.
Former administrations for some
years did little or no testing, only
standard brands being specified in
contracts. .
If the charter means anything,
commissioner Farrell illegally en-
ployed a member of his own firm to
do such work for the city.
At this time, when stalking every
thing on another term of office, Mr..
Farrell may have some plausible or
specfous explanation OF his clever
stunt, but his art in camoufiage of
illegal acts should be remembered.
Here are some of the welcome
picknps handed to Mr.. Farrell's part
ner, from the city, through Mr.. Far
rell, viz:
On April 27, 1916, as shown by
voucher No. 1858, $50 was paid for
getting Is signatures to street paw
ing petition.
June 27, 1916, as shown by vouch-
er No. 1921, $3.50 was paid for
testing cement on several jobs of
work.
June %, 1916, although the long
est day in the year, brought very
short check, only $1.93 for cement
testing.
June %, 1916, brought $79.6S for
testing cement. -.. -.,
July II, 1916, cost the city $72.84
for testing cement and the Farrell
partner got the check, as shown by
voucher No. 1905.
There certainly was something do
ing on July 28, 1916, when cement
testing by the Farrellian partner set
the kindly old city back $163.6S.
Cement testing by commissioner
Farrell's capable partner cost only
$11.10 on August Is, 1916, and an
other job on the same day climbed
up to $S0.71, despite the hot mid
summer sun.
September IL, 1916, cost the city
$113.40 for cement tests. Sept. 26,
1915, the cost amounted to $52.29.
There were scientific doings on
Sept. 20, 1916, when commissioner
Farrell's partner made comparative
tests of the strength Of crushed stone,
screenings and sand. Seventy tests
at Is cents each, set the city back
$3.50, but the firm had beefsteak
for dinner that night. Z. 3.
October 9, 1916, saw cement test
ing done to the extent of $75.25. On
November 8, the bill was $51.71, as
shown by voucher No. 1927.
Now, dear old taxpayer, go back
to May 1S, 1916, when commissioner
Farrelrs partner surveyed Snively
boulevard with crew Of men. 1t
took 16 days and a charge Of $15 a
day, an aggregate o. $270.
That same month, during the first
half of May, 1915, eight engineers
worked regularly in the department
and the same number for the second
half of the month. Two instrument
men and three Ievelmen also were
| kept at work during the month.
During that merry month of May,
1916, the total number Of men who
were on the payroll Of the engineer
ing department was thirty-two.
That was some little engineering
army, dear old voter. - = ~.
But tfgetting back TO the Farrellian
partners work, the records show
that, during a little. Of 1915 and all
| of 1915, a total Of nearly $1,000 was
paid to him by the city. "'-
Yes, commissioners Farrell has
"done things" even the city. =
A KENTUCKY VIEWPOINT.
Il u