The following amounts show the value of the four caps under their several heads, and the fourth of each amount would be the cost of one, as follows:

O. T. Rogers's bid being the lowest in Mr. Clark's list, it is placed in the foregoing, with Beals & Dixon's and E. Hawkes's, to illustrate both rules of computation, and from which it will be seen that the rule which made one cap worth, when the contract was awarded and entered into, $3,007 75, the rule applied when the caps were about to be paid for, increases that amount to $34, 104 57, and for a stone of over fifty cubic feet less than was estimated for by the first rule, so that if the last rule had been applied in the computation of the caps when the sum total of the several bids made under the department's invitation was being determined, Beals & Dixon's aggregate would have been $59,557 higher than E. Hawkes's, and $91,316 higher than O. T Rogers's; so that they would not have got the contract, as the following table shows:

Edward Hawkes's aggregate bid

308,385

Cost of caps not increased by new rule of computation.

Question. What has been the effect of the changes in the increased dimensions of the stock and style of the work on the whole cost of the building, and is it more permanent, and its architecture improved by the changes?

Answer. The reported amount paid for the granite used in the south wing alone is all of two hundred and fifty thousand dollars above what it should have cost, and the work less permanent, and the architecture impaired rather than improved by the changes; and the expenditure on the whole work of the south wing, and on the west. front, up to the first of September last, amounting, in the aggregate,

to $2,000,933 59, as shown in the last finance report, so far exceeds the real value as to render the report one of very doubtful accuracy. Question. Have you noticed the manner in which the flagging has been laid on 15th street, and to the south of the south wing of the extension? If so, state the manner, and how its cost comports with its value.

Answer. I have, and noticed that there has been an extravagant and useless expenditure of concrete and dwarf-walls placed under the flagging to support it, when the strata formation of the ground was of a character sufficient of itself to make a permanent work.

I have no doubt it has cost double what it might have been done for, and in a more workmanlike manner.

Question. What is your opinion, as an architect, of the style and adaptation of the approaches and enclosure to the south wing, on 15th street, and south front of the Treasury extension?

Answer. As a whole there is an unfitness, for they present a sort of incongruous mass of piers, pipe-stem railing, and gates, without reference to the architecture of the building or their proximity to it. The four piers comprising the main and two side entrances opposite the centre of Pennsylvania avenue are passable for the present; but the remainder, north to the building and in front, on the south, (all of which should be of iron, harmonizing in strength and design, but subordinate in composition,) not only materially impairs the effect of the whole, but obstructs the view of the building from a point of sight where it should be seen from base to summit.

EVENING SESSION, June 23, 1862.

Present: Messrs. Sargent, Wall, and Chamberlain.

BARTHOLOMEW OERTLEY recalled:

Question. What is the mode of computation of the antæ of the Treasury extension?

Answer. First, the rough stock is computed; next, number one hammering; then the moulding; then the rough work; then the rebates. Question. How do you measure the mouldings?

Answer. We girt it first; then, if there are arrises, they are counted; then the channels, if any.

Question. Do you carry the price of the moulding to the whole stone?

Answer. There is a deviation from the contract in computing for the antæ; it was in computing the cutting. The original advertisement did not call for an anta in one piece. When the government decided to have them in one piece the contractors refused to do them at the rate of number one hammering. It was decided by the Secretary to allow for the plain face at the rate of double number one hammering.

Question. What rate per superficial foot does that make one of those antæ ?

Answer. $12 40.

Question. What would be the difference if the shaft of the anta was in three pieces?

Answer. I think it would be two-thirds less.

Question. What is the cost of one of these antæ, in one piece, delivered on the ground?

Answer. $2,300.

Question. Who pays for the setting?

Answer. It is done by day's work by the government.

Question. In measuring the moulding around the window, do you carry the girt- of the moulding to the plain surface?

Answer. We do not.

Question. What is the cost of one of those window jams per superficial foot?

Answer. About $6.

Question. Describe how you get at that cost.

Answer. To make up the window moulding there is one portion of two curves which is two hundred per cent. additional to plain work; a portion of the moulding of one curve which is one hundred per cent. additional to plain work; two channels, at sixty cents per lineal foot, and four arrises, at twenty cents per lineal foot, to which is added the cost of the rough stock and the fine and coarse cutting.

Question. Then the great cost per superficial foot is covered by the excess of moulded work?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. By whom was the moulding ordered to be put in?

Answer. The plan was prepared by Mr. Young, the architect, and approved by Guthrie.

Question. Are there other portions of the building ornamented in a manner which the plans did not authorize? State what ornamental work there is on the extension which is not on the original building. Answer. The basement, belt course, the window dressings of all the stories above the basement, and the various courses (other than window dressings) between the antæ.

Question. Do these ornamental appendages much increase the cost. of the building?

Answer. I think about $60,000.

Question. Were you one of the computers who determined the quantities and values of the several bids in 1855?

Answer. I prepared estimates, which, I think, were used in making out the award.

Question. Did you pass upon and find Beals & Dixon the lowest ? Answer. Yes.

Question. By your interpretation of the proposals and bids, did you find Beals & Dixon's the lowest ?

Answer. The superintendent decided the meaning of the proposals and bids, and I had to follow his interpretation.

Question. Was there a schedule of quantities given to accompany the proposals?

Answer. There was not.

Question. Was it not necessary that there should be a schedule of quantities, in order that bidders might bid understandingly?

Answer. In my opinion, it was.

Question. Did not the publication of the proposals without a schedule of quantities give an opportunity to those who interpreted the proposals and bids to vary the quantities so as to give the contract to any bidder they saw fit, by requiring larger or smaller stock? Answer. Undoubtedly it did.

Question. Was it not the duty of the architect to publish such a schedule in order to prevent such favoritism?

Answer. I think it was.

Question. Who was the architect?

Answer. Mr. Young.

Question. Did you compute the buttress caps on south wing of extension?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. How many were there, and how much did you make them amount to under the contract?

Answer. There were two of them. I made them about $35,000 apiece. Question. Explain how you made them reach that amount.

Answer. The width of the stone over three times its thickness is 12 feet 3 inches, adding thereby, under the wording of the contract, $1,225 to the price of the stone computed at ordinary width.

Question. Does not the rule become a monstrosity when thus applied?

Answer. I think so.

Question. Was not there a bid for all four of the buttress caps, but two being used, for $1,800, or $900 for the two?

Answer. The schedule shows that Hawkes's bid was for that sum. Question. Did you recommend a man to Mr. Dixon to cut the caps now at Hastings, on the Hudson, embraced in the schedule now exhibited to you, who offered to cut them for $1,000 each?

Answer. A man who cut the caps for the Capitol extension came to me to inquire if he could get the job, offering to cut them for $1,000 each. I think I sent him to Mr. Dixon.

Question. Is Mr. Dixon one of the firm of Larned & Co.?

Answer. Yes, sir.

Question. Is he also one of the firm of Beals & Dixon?
Answer. Yes, sir.

JULY 2, 1862.

Committee met. Present: A. A. Sargent, William Wall, and J. P. Chamberlain.

PETER HAMILTON, being duly sworn and examined, testified: Question. Where do you reside and what is your business? Answer. I reside in Baltimore, and my business is stone-cutter. Question. Have you had much experience in practical stone cutting? Answer. I have worked at it for twenty-two years.

Question. Have you ever taken and executed contracts for stone cutting; and if so, what?

Answer. I have been a contractor for six years. contracts at Syracuse, New York, in Baltimore, &c.

Have executed

Question. Have you ever executed Corinthian caps, and do you know the value and cost of such work?

Answer. I have had the supervision of such work, and know the value.

Question. Have you, at the request of this committee, measured and computed the marble named in the invoice here exhibited to you, at Hastings, New York?

Answer. I have.

Question. Have you examined the floor plans of the Charleston custom-house here exhibited to you?

Auswer. I have.

Question. How many columns will be required for the Charleston custom-house?

Answer. Fifty-two, as shown by the plan.

Question. Who accompanied you at the quarry and exhibited and pointed out to you the marble for the Charleston custom-house?

They

Answer. Mr. C. P. Dixon, of the firms of Larned & Co. and Beals & Dixon; also, the foreman of Larned & Co., Mr. Webber. opened the sheds in which the marble was stored for its inspection. Question. How many blocks are named in the invoice, and in what state did you find them?

Answer. Thirty-one; of which fourteen are in a state of preparation and unfinished. They are all parts of the capitals of the columns of the exterior of the building, varying from an eighth part to the half part of a capital, and when put together and clamped, in not less than three nor more than five pieces, will form a cap; the whole thirty-one pieces being equal to eight caps and a fourth of a cap. Question. What will those caps cost by the invoice in their present condition?

Answer. Five thousand two hundred and nineteen dollars fiftynine cents each, on the average, by the footing of the invoice.

Question. How much of that is for stock, and how much for labor and profit?

Answer. The stock in each cap is 113, cubic feet, averaging $9 82 per cubic foot, amounting to $1,112 87, and the labor, profit, &c., to $4,096 72, making the cost of each cap, in their present condition, as per the invoice, as before stated, $5,219 59.

Question. What is a fair market price for the stock in each of those caps, delivered in Charleston?

Answer. Two dollars per foot.

Question. Do you know what is paid per foot for such stock, taken from that neighborhood, and delivered in New York?

Answer. About $1 25 per foot.

Question. What would the stock in one of the caps be worth at $2 per foot? Answer. $226 66.