Five Mile Beach weekly journal., 1921-09-23

all of Sea Isle City, all gave similar
testimony as Mr.. Fitch. Two engl-
neers by the name of Sherrerd, Oh
Newark, testified that the work was
faulty and did not comply with the
sp~ecications. at was not a satlsfac-
tory Job" Morris Sherrerd testified
land payment might have justitiably
been withheld on it,"
Contract in Evidence
The contract which Sutton & Cor
son accepted was very specific. 1t was
brought into court at several points
during the trial and figured constantly
as part of the testimony on both sides.
1t stipulated that Lands avenue u
be swept clean before the new sur
face was applied; that a half gallon
of bitumen a square yard be applied,
and that a definite amount OF stone
and pit-run gravel be applied on top
of the bitumen. 1t further demanded
that the bitumen be applied at tenn
peratures between $50 and $50 de-
grees and that the spreading of it be
done during clear, dry weather.
Later testimony disclosed the fact
that Mr.. Sutton, of the firm of Sutton
& Corson, had rendered a bill for $16,-
$50 after all the terms of the contract
had been executed as he understood
them. The Board of Freeholders for
warded one check in December, 1920,
for $9,720.8O, after which Sutton de-
manded full payment. Then the free
holders forwarded a second check for
Sc, 1S3. 20, which, according to the state,
they had no right to do until the
county engineer had approved the job,
which at that time he had not done.
Defense Calls Contractor
Sutton was a witness for the de-
tense. He testified that the work on
Lands avenue had been done accord
ing to specifications. He said that
near the end of the job when it was
being rushed before fall weather
would stop it altogether, one block
had been laid soon enough after a rain
to have the surface damp. 1t was
that block which the county engineer
would not approve. At that time it be-
came known that the Freeholders had
withheld 1880 until the work had
been approved in every detail. That
was in addition to a bond which the
Sutton & Corson Company was under
during the operation.
In describing the work done by his
company, MI. Sutton said: 81 needed
the money being withheld by the Free
holders and demanded payment in full,
guaranteeing at the time that should
any part of Lands avenue peel, l
would resurface that portion without
cost to the county. AS a matter of
fact, we found that the gravel stipu-
lated in the contract was not suited
to the purpose and l sent for a Stag
that would do a better job. That cost
me more money and 1 had to have it
shipped here by railroad. 1 stood that
expense myself. I was perfectly will
ing to make good any part Of the job
that did not stand up if the Freehold
ers would pay me after my part of the
contract had been completed"
John E. Kale, road foreman, cor
roborated the testimony of Mr.. Sutton.
Otto Schweigart, a former employee
of the Atlantic Refining Company,
from whom the bitumen had been
bought, testified that he had been in
personal supervision of the work of
applying the bitumen. He said it had
been applied at the temperatures stipu-
lated in the contract and that and
otherwise according to specification.
Gus Hilton, of Wildwood, who was a
member of the board in 1920, testified
he thought the payment was proper,
although the county engineer had not
approved the work, because Sutton &
Corson we're under bond, and had
guaranteed to make good their work.
William Shaw, of Cape May, was not
a member of the board when the work
was done, but voted to pay the last
bill. Freebooter John R. Groves, of
Ocean City, was called to the stand
when the court reconvened Wednesday
morning and was questioned by Attor-
ney Leap. Judge Eldredge was on the
bench at the opening of court Wednes-
day morning, and in about an hour was
Joined by Judge Black, who came
down on a morning train and remained
all day. Judge Eldredge, however,
presided all day. Attorney Newcorn,
in questioning Mr.. Groves, attempted
to show that Groves voted to make the
payments on the Lands avenue con-
tract because of his friendship for
Mr.. Sutton. A number of character
witnesses were then called for Messrs.
Groves and Fox, two of the defendants,
all testifying to the good reputation
of the two Freeholders. They in
cluded James M. Chester, real estate;
Albert Fogg, garage keeper; Super
intendent of Schools James M. Stew
ems; Clinton Breckley, a painter;
Clayton Haines Brick, a real estate
agent; Russell Nulty, treasurer of the
k-.-k - r.