New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-03-13
The Alleged Canal Frauds.


The Alleged Canal Frauds.
The Legislative Committee appointed to
inquire into the alleged frauds in the recent Ca
nal lettings have reported the testimony taken
before them, without however showing that such
frauds were practiced. GEORGE LAW swears
that there was not the slightest collusion be-
tween him and Mr. SEYMOUR, the late State En-
gineer that no conversation nor negotiations of
any kind took place between them on the matter;
that Mr. SEYMOUR has no interest of any sort in
his contract, nor he any in the Railroad enter
prises, or in any other business in which Mr..
SEYMOUR Is engaged; and that no public officer
or member of the Legislature is, to his knowl-
edge, in any way interested in the lettings, or
has been so interested. Ex-Secretary MORGAN
testifes to the same points. A. B. DICKINSON,
bidder and contractor, testifes that he knows of
nothing on which the suspicion of personal
interest or of fraud on the part of any member
of the late Canal or letting Boards could be
grounded. FRANCIS H. RUeGLEs, late Auditor of
the Canal Department, gives the same testimony,
and so do all the witnesses examined as to that
question. Attorney General CHATFIELD is the
chief party who testifes to any offer refusal of
bribe, and he,-doomed as he is to have his yir-
tue assailed by such temptations,-swears that
one CALVIN T. CHAMBERLAIN offered him thou
sand dollar bill to get for him reasonable amount
of work. This proposal CHATFIELD rejected, and
opposed Mr. CHAMBERLAIN's bid when before the
Board. They were, however, supported by Mr.
FoLLETT and finally CHAMBERLAIN got about
$50, 900 worth of work, Mr.. CHATFIELD not see
ing fit to expose his rascaity before the Board, and
in fact, is rather sorry to tell of it now. Mr..
FoLLETT also swears that Mr.. STILLsoN offered
him two thousand dollars in behalf of J. w.
Goodrich, as a bribe for section No. 2O6, but
STILLsoN was sent off with a flea in his ear,
and GOODRICH got no contract at all. The
same STILLsoN, who has for some time been,
and still is, Engineer of the Western Division
and who was present with the Board when it was
decidedto whom the contracts should be awarded,
states that they began with the lowest bidder in
each case and went through the whole list of
proposers, discussing their offers and competen-
cy to execute them. More attention was paid
to the personal qualifications and ability of the
bidder than to the security offered. The job
given to GEORGE LAW is the most difficult ever
let in the State, requiring heavy outlay in tools
and machinery before commencing it. Mr.. LAWS
offer was $4,000 below the Engineers esti-
mate, and lower, Mr.. STILLsoN thinks, than the
work can be done. As far then, as the evidence
goes, there is a complete failure to establish any
fraud or corruption on the part Of the officers
engaged.
1t is, however, abundantly proved that con
tracts were awarded on political grounds Mr.
CHARLES Cook testiies that the Attorney Gene
raj proposed in writing to a meeting of his
Cooks friends in the Board, where Lieut.. Gov.
CHURCH was present, that if they would agree
to allot to GEORGE Law contracts for work to the
amount of 81 800, 900, and allow It. Gov. CHURCH
to take care of his friends in the West, and vote
those two through the Board first, and divide
the balance of the work between the two politi-
cal parties equally, that then he would Join in
making the allotment and stated that this pro-
position a sine qua non. This proposal the
members present declined, and so returned an
answer to Chatfeld." GA second note was
received from the Attorney. General by the
Lieut.. Governor which he read to the members
present In this note Mr.. CHArFIELD proposed
that contracts for work to the amount of
$l,OOO,OOO be awarded to GEORGE LAW, and that
CHURCH be allowed to take care of his friends
in the West, the balance of the work to be di-
vided equally between the two political parties ;
this being done he would Join in making the al
lOtment and help carry 10 through the Board,
and said this was his ultimatun." These pro-
posals were declined and another allotment
made, whereat CHATFIELD, in his indignant
virtue, announced that he should apply for relief
on the ground of the unconsttutionality of the
law This identical CHATFIELD, according to
the testimony of N. E. PAYN, a Wing who
obtained section 255 at Is cents per cubic yard
for embankment, proposed to alot that section
to E. PEsHINE SMITH, another bidder, and also
Whig, at 20 cents. This shows that he took
reasonable view of things, and was disposed
to give all parties fair grab at the spos, if his
friends could bat have good chance with the
rest.
There is, then, no more doubt that political
considerations were powerful in determining
the awards than there is that they were not
in all cases made to the lowest bidders. Bat,
before complaining Of these facts, we must
inquire whether, as they stand, the contracts
are, on the whole, favorable to the interests OF
the State. We are persuaded that they are.
They are so made that they will be executed
without the probability of any application to
the Legislature for additional allowances, and
at an aggregate cost considerably inferior to the
estimates on which the law for the more speedy
enlargement was based
One witness who went to Albany to obtain a