The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-06-18
CITY N { W S.
THE TENTH AVENUE SEWER.
ravestigatSon Of Charges preferred by Mr..
Craven against the Common Councal-The
Testimony taken before the Committee.
From the Times, June 10. ]


Common Council, appointed to investigate certain
charges preferred by A. w. Craven, Esq, Chief
Engineer Of the Croton Aqueduct Department,
against the Committee on Sewers, in accepting n
work refused by his Department., met in the City
Hall at 3 oclock-Aderman Teman in the chair
Alderman Boyce said he had read Mr.. Craven's
letter carefully and before entering on business ne
would like to know whether they had met TO consider
the truth of these allegations allegations hey
might be called.
The Chairman conceived that was their object
Mr.. Boyce--And suppose these charges-ii charges |
they NAV be called--alI turn out TO be true
Charman--Then the committee have not done
their duty.
vens letter embraced several statenents-some
which il may have been necessary for the public to
know--some which il was not--and a large proper
tion mere matter Of record. The question they
should confne their attention TO was to what was
alleged to have occurred before the Committee on
Sewers. Mr.. Craven stated that evidence on one
side only was admitted The rule in all cases OF
inquiry was, that evidence on both sides should be
heard This committee was appointed to inquire
into the charges made by Mr.. Craven. Mr. Denman.
of the Committee on Sewers. desired to appear by
oounsel-Recorder Tilou, who was prescnt-and this
being granted, Mr.. Craven had right, also, TO APP
pear by counsel.
Mr.. Craven said that in coming before the COM
mitee the previous sitting he did not anticipate
anything beyond an investigation into the
charges preferred by him, in the simplest way.
But if the Committee on Sewers thought it
necessary 10 have counsel, he was advised
himself, to have counsel also not for the purpose OF
shielding himself or taking advantage Of legal
technicalities in this matter, but simply to protect
his witnesses from legal technicalites on the other
ride They all knew how easily the most straig ht-
forward Witnesses could be mystifcd in this way.
He would prefer, however. as far rs he was
ed, that counsel on both sides should be withdrawn,
and leave the case to stand simply on plain state
ment before the committee.
This proposition not being responded to. it was ar
ranged that Recorder Tillou should appear for the
m tee on nd Mr ara m haha 1f Of
Mr.. Craven.
Mr.. Tilou said he understood this proceeding to
amount to an investigation Of certain charges pre-
ferred by Mr.. Craven, and the defence and counter
charges set up by Mr.. Denman; and he would sup
pose Mr. Craven Treparedto prove the truth OF the
allegations set forth in his letter for instance
first" That large portion of the sewer was built
IN direct violation Of the spirit and letter Of the
contract; and asa consequence. = that the work
for which the assessed parties will now be called
upon to pay the full price stipulated in the contract,
IS not the work which, by the same contract. they
entitled to receive This was an allegation
which he supposed Mr.. Craven was ready to prove.
AS to those allegations relating to the resolution Of
the Common Council, he supposed the resolution
itself would test their accuracy. Then a seri
ous charge" That the investigation of the Com
mIttee Of the Common Council which the subjec;
was referred, was UNJUST partial, and utterly in
violation of the rights Of owners of the property
De assessed. That was grave and broad charge,
And one which, If proved true, would show want
OF proper condnct on the part of the committee.
Again the Committee on Sewers were charged
with confning themselves exclusively to the
statements introduced on behalf of the contractor
and that "while it found convenient by the
said committee to have witnesses in behalf Of the
contractor brought before them from any part Of
the city, those in behalf of the people, who in
the very building, $50 far as may judge from
asts,) were carefully kept ignorant of the whole
proceedings, from the beginning to the end
These were the allegations which Mr.. Craven had
declared himself ready to prove.
Aid Sturtevant would inquire il it was intended
70 conduct this with all the legal furm0iities Of
irregular trial between plaintiff and defendant lie
preferred seeing it placed on the footing OF a simple
investigation into facts.
Mr.. willard said he glad to hear the matter |
Tor investigation placed IN such excellent arrange
nent by his friend, the Recorder; but be perfectly
agreed with Alderman Sturtevant in regarding this
proceeding rs smT ly an Investigation into certain
charees-an examination Of acts for the purpose Of
fixing whom the i;iult--if fault lay anywhere
should he placed This would bring al parties on
equal footing. The simple ground which Mr. |
Craven rested his first charge was. that the Croton
Aqueduct Department had certain duties assigned
them; that they had n code Of rules ordinances,
Of which was, that hydraulic masonry should
be laid after the lst OF December. And then. to
the charge against the Committee Sewers. they
should examine into the allegation ofan exclusion Of
evidence. If that exclusion proved then they
should consider the decision uniust and If ii further
appeared that any member Of the committee was |
Of such evidence existing and did bring il
forward. then their decision = partial.
Mr. Tillou--Though an ordinance existed that no |
masonry should be proceeded with after the lst De-
gwen except for particular reasons. 1t would be
shown that permission was given TO another con- |
tractor, while this refused. Now il would be
Tor the committee 70 consider whc her the Guntrac
tor under such circumstances and knowing thar The
street would otherwise remain impossible during The
winter, had acted contrary to the spirit os the orj
in taking himself the responsibility Of pro-
ceeding with the works. whether the Engineer
had not acted contrary to the spirit OF the ordinance.
~ refusing to accept the work Of one, while sum-
lar indulgence had been granted 10 another
ruVG nat md. tuTF fha 4Y,rp nh
Recorder Tillcu was giving 10 the proceedings. If
any charges existed against his department, they
could be brought forward at the proper time. He
was not now here to charges against his de-
partment He was here substantiate charges |
made by him.
Mr. Tillou did not make these remarks with
view Of bringing forward charges, but for the pur-
pose Of taking into consideration how far such cir
cumstances might justify the contractor in departing
from the strict letter Of the ordinance
The Chairman considered the committee comre- |
tent TO inquire On al circumstances which might |
bear on the
4 Ar. Craven denied the right Of the committee to
inquire into any counter charges preferred against
his department. but in his desire 10 have this matter
fully cleared up, he waived his objection, and was
ready to answer all the Recorders questions in
der.
Mr. Willard then handed in copies Of the adyer-
tsement and specification for building a sewer in
Tenth avenue from Forty-second to Forty sixth
streets, with the contract made by Mr.. Pollock,
reading from the specification the following clauses:
. All work IN masonry 10 cease positively on the lst
December in each year, and not TO be resumed until
such time in the month Of March April following
AZ shall be designated by the Croton Aqueduct De-
partment" And in case Of this work not being
completed on the LIST day Of December ensuing the
date hereof the trenches shall be reflled and re-
paved and all materials surplus earth, sand. work
and rubbish. removed from the street within five |
days hereafter
Mr.. Craven was then sworn, and stated al be |
ihen personally rsconested IN subs'an,iatioD 81 the
charges preferred b. him as follows. " bout ten /
days previous TO the lst December, notice. nv my |
order, was sent TO all contractors work. calling
especial attention TO hat5cause in their contracts
requiring them 70 stop mason work On lst December l
~ that clause would be rigidly enforccd that notice
was sent 70 Mr. Pollock. contracting for sewer in |
question, and John Connor the Inspector in charge
q the works, told he also gave NJ. Pollock |
feros notice TO the same eficct shortly after per-
| 4.