Imatges de pÓgina
PDF
EPUB

Question. Where do they reside?
Answer. Dixon, in New York; Beals, in Maine.
Question. What is the business of the men who are doing the work.

Answer. Beals is a practical quarrier and stonecutter and contractor for granite ; Dixon was formally merchant, now contractor for stone.

Question. What was the cost of the fence, also of the flagging ? Answer. Granite gate-posts ..

$14,807 83 Curbing

521 74 Iron-work.

3,049 69 Flagging foundations and setting by day's work ...

7,066 19 Question. Do you remember from what appropriation they were paid for?

Answer. From the Treasury appropriation and appropriation of $15,000 made for removing a wall from the President's grounds, and which was afterwards transferred to Treasury appropriation.

Question. By whose authority was it transferred ?
Answer. By act of Congress.
Question. Who disbursed the money for Treasury extension ?
Answer. Mr. Clark.
Question. Do you know if they gave any security ?

Answer. They did not, as no payments were to be made until the work was completed.

Question. Are you or have you been acting as disbursing agent for any contractor for the government?

Answer. I have received and paid out money for Beals & Dixon.

Question. Have you received a compensation from them for so doing?

Answer. I have in no shape received remuneration, except by the use of their horse.

Question. Did you go to the wharf and superintend the reloading of the stone ?

Answer. I did occasionally.

Question. Did or did you not have a general care and superintend. ence of their business ?

Answer. I did not.

Question. What amount of money passed through your hands and was disbursed by you for Beals & Dixon ?

Answer. Over $100,000.
Question. Did you disburse this money to his superintendent alone ?

Answer. I disbursed to their superintendent and such other of their employés as he directed me to.

Question. Who accepted the buttress caps ?

Answer. Their acceptance was consummated, when the settlement for them was made, by the acting engineer in charge.

Question. Had they not been previously rejected ?
Answer. Not to my knowledge.
Question. Do you know if they were ever countermanded ?

Answer. I have no personal knowledge of it, and there appears none on the record of the office.

Question. Do you remember what they were to cost in the rough? Answer. About $34,000 each.

Question. Do you know what was paid for the buttress caps in the rough?

Answer. $5,500 each.

Question. Did you advertise for proposals for the marble floor of the south portico?

Answer. The competent manufacturers of such work being few in number, it was advertised by circular letter, addressed to different manufacturers. A synopsis was made of their offers, and the lowest one accepted.

Question. Do you remember how many marble mantels there were that have been bought without advertising?

Answer. I think all were bought without.

Question. Have any been made out of materials belonging to the government.

Answer. Most of them.
Question. Who has done that work?

Answer. The first two by Mr. Parry, then two or three by Mr. Rutherford, and the last ones by Mr. Bradley.

Question. Do you remember that you paid for any of the work?
Answer. I think from $50 to $100.
Question. Were they put up by contract ?
Answer. Yes, private contract; so much apiece.

Question. Has or has there not been complaint in the department at the work not having been done by contract ?

Answer. Yes, sir; in the case of Parry.

Question. Do you remember how many cubic feet of old sandstone columns, cornice, &c., were sold ?

Answer. I never sold, but in one instance, a single block, and the money was paid to Mr. Clark.

Question. Have you ever had any interest in the Treasury extension ?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. Have you ever received any money for any of the contracts for building the Mobile custom-house ?

Answer. No, sir.
Question. Is Mr. Clark a practical engineer?
Answer. I should not think Mr. Clark was a practical engineer.

Question. Has the Treasury building been materially changed from the original plans?

Answer. They were changed by Mr. Guthrie. The rooms were made larger, and the general design of the exterior was adhered to, but the windows were altered.

Question. Were the caps and cornices over the doors more elaborately worked than was originally intended ?

Answer. Yes, sir.

FEBRUARY 25, 1862. Committee met. Present: Lazear, Kelley, Wall, and Chamberlain. BARTHOLOMEW OERTLEY sworn and examined. Question. What is your business? Answer. Civil engineer and architect. Question. Where are you employed ? Answer. In the Bureau of Construction, Treasury Department. Question. How long have you been employed ? Answer. Since June. 1855. Question. What is your especial duty in that department? Answer. Preparing estimates. Question. What date were you made sworn measurer or computer ? Answer. In December, 1855. Question. Have you discharged that duty from that time to this ? Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. In payment of accounts, has it been your duty to certify to the correctness of the measurement ? Answer. It has. Question. Has the department been guided by your estimates ? Answer. Always as to quantities.

Question. Is there any other person who certifies to the correctness of quantities but yourself?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. Who makes the measurement of the material bought in open market?

Answer. The inspector of materials.

Question. Do you know in any case of a dispute between the contractor and measurer ?

Answer. I recollect of but one or two cases in which the contractors complained, but they finally yielded.

Question. You have never signed a certificate for a greater amount of stone or material than you found ?

Answer. No, sir.

Question. Do you know whether the granite work of the southern enclosure of the treasury was advertised for ?

Answer. No, sir.
Question. Were bids invited for the stone and flagging ?
Answer. They were.

Question. Were bids invited for the marble floor of the south portico?

Answer. I think they were.

Question. And for the marble mantels not made by the superintendent?

Answer. I think not.

Question. Can you say what was the cost of fence and flagging for south wing enclosure and of the gate-posts ?

Answer. Gate-posts, $14,807 83; flagging, $7,066 19; iron-work, 3,049 69; curbing, $521 74.

Question. What amount was paid for the buttress caps of south wing?

Answer. Stock, fine cutting, and moulding, $7,467 70.
Question. You say there was a dispute with Mr. Bowman?
Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. What did Major Bowman say was the contract with himself and Mr. Dixon ?

Answer. Mr. Bowman told me he had a statement from C. P. Dixon that the stone in the rough would not cost more than $2,800 each.

Question. When the claims came in for the stone what was their amount?

Answer. About $35,000 each.
Question. What was it finally settled and paid for?
Answer. The rough stock $5,500 each, and $1,650 for cutting each.
Question. What was the estimated cost of the south wing?
Answer. I do not know that an estimate was ever made.
Question. Can you say what has been the actual cost of the south
wing ?

Answer. Eleven or twelve hundred thousand dollars.
Question. What are the dimensions of the south wing?

Answer. Its length from east to west, 276 feet; its extremities in width 65 feet, and centre 95 feet; height, 75 feet.

Question. Do you know if there has been more than one roof

put on?

Answer. There has been but one roof, but two slatings.
Question. How does it happen that two slatings were put on?

Answer. By mistake of Major Bowman, by bathing the slate in asphaltum. The loss was about $2,000.

Question. Was that an experiment of Major Bowman's?
Answer. It was entirely an experiment.

Question. Is Mr. Clark, the present engineer in charge, a practical engineer?

Answer. I believe he is not a practical engineer?
Question. Has Mr. Clark made any drawing for the extension?
Answer. No, sir.

Question. Does it require a practical engineer to go into the streets or quarries to make actual measurement of the stone ?

Answer. It does not, but it does to estimate the reasonable market value.

Question. Is Mr. Young an engineer and architect?
Answer. He is an architect.
Question. What is his duty now?

Answer. His business now is superintendent architect of the bureau and superintendent of Treasury extension.

Question. Has he not been the agent for Beals & Dixon ?
Answer. Not that I am aware of.

FEBRUARY 28, 1862. Committee met. Present: Messrs. Lazear, Wall, Chamberlain, and Perry

B. OERTLEY recalled :
Question. Were the antæ and buttress caps advertised for?
Answer. They were not advertised for the size they are now.
Question. How is the work now being done on Treasury extension ?
Answer. The granite work is furnished by contract.

Question. Was the contract they are now performing advertised for; and who were the contractors ?

Answer. Beals & Dixon.
Question. Were they the original contractors ?
Answer. They were.
Question. At what price are they furnishing the granite ?

Answer. The rough stock, under thirty cubic feet, at forty-four cents per foot; above that, three-quarters of a cent a foot for each additional foot.

Question. About what proportion of the stone that they furnished will be found above the thirty cubic feet.

Answer. About one-half.

Question. At what rate, per foot, has the larger price been they have received, except for the caps ?

Answer. About four dollars.
Question. For what purpose were these used?
Answer. For antæ.
Question. How is the iron-work contracted for?
Answer. By purchase in open market.
Question. Who is doing that work.
Answer. Ellis & Bro., Washington; W. Duvall

, Georgetown; McClelland, Washington ; Hibbard & Bartlett, Baltimore; Candel, Philadelphia ; Trenton Machine Manufacturing Company ; Cooper & Huet, Trenton.

Question. Was this not originally advertised for?
Answer. No, sir ; none of the iron work.
Question. How is the iron-work being performed.
Answer. The balance is being done by day's work.
Question. How is the iron-work now being done ; is it satisfactory?

Answer. In the case of Candel it was very badly done, and some by Cooper & Huet was nct satisfactory.

Question. What was the amount of Candel's bill?
Answer. About $6,000.
Question. Was he paid the full price?
Answer. I cannot tell.
Question. What is the amount of Cooper & Huet?
Answer. About $60,000.
Question. Was there any deduction made for bad work?
Answer. No, sir.
Question. Should there have been, do you think?

« AnteriorContinua »