Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1853-03-02
Corruption ia the New York CITY Cow
eminent.

We rtjoce TO that the Grand jury, in the
Court Of General sessions, N. Y, has al lenel
taken IN hand the cOrruptiOns OF the N. CITY yov.
eminent. On Saturday, the Jury went Into Court
and presented through their foreman a paper setting
forth the result of their investigations into the al.
legged couuplons of the CITY Common Council
From this paper it appears, that the Jury had at
tempted to make thorough investigation Of the fol-
lowing explicit charges against the City Govern.
meat.
First-That public property, real and personal,
had been granted 10 different parties, for inadequate
and improper considerations. Second-Charges of
direct bribery and corruption on the part of public
officers. Thrd-Aleged violations Of the 18th and
70 sections of the City Charter. Fourth-Improper
and corrupt legislation in regard 10 certain railroad
grants Lasty--Generai and improvident waste and
expenditure Of public money.
y In pursuing their investigation the Jury met with
serious obstacles in the neglect and refusal OF impor.
tant witnesses TO appear before them, or TO testify to
facts involved in the examination They had, how
ever, been able 10 arrive at the most important con-
illusions touching The general trulhluIness of the
charges OF corruption made against the Civ Govern.
ment.
For example: they find that the GanEevoort street
property, so called, was sold at private sale with
out advertising il, TO Reuben Loveioy backed nv
Simeon Draper, for 10000, forty thousand down,
and twenty on mortgage; when 1925, 900 would have
been given by one party, and $500 900 by another
party Tor the same property, aud the Mayor and
Comptroller were notified previous to The sale!
IL further appeared, that when the same deed of said
property Was made out according to agreement, TO
Simeon Draper, another deed was made TO- and ex-
eculed by, Joseph b. Varnum, for the same proner.
Is, and is now ON record in the Comptroer's office.
while against Mr. Diapers decd is written "cancel.
led, Dec, 1852" made by direction Of the former
Corporation Counsel, Henry f. Davies. Mr. Dra-
per had mortgaged the property TO the city for $780,.
OOO; but Mr. Narnum has given such mortgage;
and The only apparent security to the city is mort
gage from Mr. Draper, while the conveyance TO him.
sell is cancelled, and he has executed quitclam
deed to Mr. Varnum, who thus enjoys a complete ii.
tie Tree from membranes. Thus much for the
charge Of wasting public property.
~ regard TO private property, il was in evidence
before The jury, that Arthur Quinn was compelled to
sell certain upland property Of his adjacent 10 Ger.
tain city water rights, thus entitled TO The presunn
tive right to them because he could moi or would
not pay Alder man Slurtevant S2 600 to procure him
me grant OF SAID water rights. Quinn offered the
Alderman VI ,OOO Tor his services; but he declined
accepting that, saying he should have to divide and
there would be nothing left 10 himl In another case
VIM Cockcrofi, and applicant for the Catherine 81.
Ferry, paid Assistant Alderman w. Smith $500 (pr
his services, and was subsequently called ON for 40
300 more for the same. The same Alderman recaiy.
ed $zOO from another party for suppressing rrsolu
ton 10 reduce coroner's fees. Mr. John p snn,n,,
testified that he paid $500 to Alderman James M.
Boyd or the suppression Of the report Of the leasing
OF the pier south side OF Wall street
Mr. George G. Byrne testified that he leased from
the Corporation the south half of the pier foot of
Jay street; and to procure that ea.e, had promised
TO pay member Of the Board Of Assistants money
to procure such grant. He refused 10 answ.r ~
whom. II was also in evidence before the t;tand
Inquest, that IN the lease Of part Of pier foot Of
Jay street, 81 200 was agreed 10 I've paid member
Of the Common Council. The individual, however
could moi be reached by the refusal Of witnesses 10
answer the questions propounded
The Jury further say, that was clearly shown
TO them that enormous SUM Of money had been ex.
penled ior and towards the procurement Of Railroad
grants sums that would slarile the most credulous.
Du, inconsequence of the voluntary absence Of i'm.
porlant Witnesses, the Grand Jury was left without
direct testimony Of the particular recipients of the
different sums.
In conclusion, the Grand Jury rendered true billa
oil Indictment for msdemeanor against Aldermen