Evening Republican, Volume 14, Number 48, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 25 February 1910 — BADER FOUND GUILTY IN BRIDGE GRAFT CASE [ARTICLE]

BADER FOUND GUILTY IN BRIDGE GRAFT CASE

Head of Winamac Company Convicted of Presenting False Bill to the County Commissioners.

FACED WITH PEH. SEHTENCE Evidence Showed Bridge to be Almost 7 Tons of Metal Short and Otherwise Cheapened In Construction. Clinton L. Bader, head of the Winamac bridge company, was adjudged guilty by the Jury which had heard the evidence and argument in the case charging him with presenting a false claim' tp the county in the matter of the construction of the bridge over the Ho'we ditch in- Milroy township. The jury returned a sealed verdict which was opened this Friday morning at 9 o’clock after the Jury had been out all night. - The verdict carries with' it a penitentiary sentence of from 2 to 14 years and the possibility of a fine amount-. ing to SI,OOO.

formed to the specified plans. The evidence of shortage was' not denied by the defense, but it was Admitted that the shortage existed, although Mr. Bader said in his testimony that he did not know the extent of the shortage. The defense introduced character Witnesses to prove the standing of the defendant in Winamac and these showed him to be of the highest standing in his home town. Mr. Bader testified that he was unable to get the kind of material called for in the specifications in time to complete the bridge by June Ist, when the contract called for its completion and that he thought the completion at that time urgent and informed the commissioners in April that he could not procure, the required material and that he was informed that he must erect a “good bridge.” He said it was with this understanding that he used a lighter material that was procurable. The bridge was completed on or about June Bth. At the May term of the commissioners $l,lOO had been allowed the contractor and at the July term he presented a claim fors3oo, the balance of the contract price. Mr. Bader was not present at that meeting of the commissioners and it was at that time that Wallace Marshall of the Lafayette Bridge Co., told the commissioners that he knew the bridge was Ar short of requirements and would be willing to testify before the grand Jury for the purpose of, having Bader indicted. Bader’s claim was not allowed in July, but in September it was allowed after a cut of SIOO had been made and he was- allowed $25 extra for an alleged change in the specifications thdt required a different backing or web support. Thus, he was allowed $225 instead of S3OO. * Charles Kelly, engineer for the Winamac Bridge Co., who had drawn up the specifications and . made the blue prints for this bridge, testified that in April Bader had told him that he could not get the required material and asked him if he had material of a lighter mold that would answer. Kelley did not deny the correctness of the state’s witness about the amoiyit of shortage. The county commissioners, John F. Pettit, Fred Waymire and Chas. T. Denham, all testified. Pettit and Waymire did not remember that Baker had told them in April that the bridge would be short of the specifications, but thought it was in June that he had told them. Mr. Denham thought it might have been as early as April when this statement was made by Bader. They were all of the impression, however, that the cheapening was of much less Importance and that it was not enough to amount to much. The cut in the allowance in September was made to cover the shortage. Bader professed Ignorance of the weight and measurements of steel, and his strongest defense was that he did not know the extent that the bridge failed to conform to the specifications. In summing up the trial it is evident from the testimony that the bridge was cheapened in the sum of almost $450, that Bader presented a bill for the full amount and that the shortage was at the expense of the tax payer? of Jasper county. Mr. Bader is a one armed man. He is a democrat in politics and prior to the election of Curtis D. Meeker, a few years ago, represented the WhltePulaski district In the state legislature. He is superintendent of the Presbyterian Sunday school at Winamac, and has been identified with the anti-saioon movement In his home county. He is a man of pleasing address .and those who know, him best will be much surprised to find that the

The defendant was represented by Attorney George A. Williams, while the state was represented by Prosecuting Attorney, Fred Longwell, of Brook. After the verdict had been read, Attorney Williams verified it by asking each of the jurymen if it was his verdict and after each had answered in the affirmative, he consulted momentarily with his client, and then made a motidn for a new trial. The argument for the new trial will be made within a day or two and in the meantime the defendant has been placed in the custody of the sheriff. The verdict was not much of a surprise. The uncontroverted evidence which showed the bridge to be cheapened in construction and to be short in weight of steel almost seven tons, proved conclusively that the county was being defrauded and while the •knowledge and intention of the defendant to engage in fraud, was not clearly shown, the fact that the bridge had been’cheapened to the amount of $438 could scarcely escape the knowledge of the contractor. Mr. Longwell presented the States case very ably. After verifying the contract and the specificat ens, he inti oducted expert tesLuony. to show that the bridge did pot come up to the requirements. The bridge is what is called a hign truss steel bridge, w'th a 70-foot span and a 16-foot roadway. The specifications required that riveis be used in the construction. The testimony showed that in respect *tc If gth and width only did the bridge conform to requirements, that it was short in weight *of steel used in its construction to the weight of 13,885 pounds or almost seven tons, that bolts had been used instead of rivets, that there was a cheapening in the wopd used for the driveway and that almost every part of the bridge frame was less than called for by the specifications. It was shown that the raw metal used in bridge construction is worth about $1.30 per hundred pounds, that the freight per hundred pounds would be 20 cents and that the cost of having the raw material made into bridge parts would be 75 cents per hundred pounds, thus making the material laid down worth $2.25 per hundred. As 13,885 pounds had been saved it represented a saving' to the contractor of $312.41. It was also shoWn that to have erected the bridge as called soy would have required labor amountint to SIOO more than was used in the bridge that was constructed. It was then shown that there was a curtailing of wood parts amounting to $26. Thus a total of $438.41 had been saved in the construction and consequently the bridge was far inferior to the specifications and a? a whole 40 per cent weaker than it would have been had it con-

evidence was so strong against him. Mr. Bader took the verdict feelingly. He was plainly moved by the adverse finding of the jury. If the case is appealed and the finding of this court sustained Bader will be compelled to serve a term of from 2 to 14 years in the penitentiary.