New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-01-11
HOW THEY GOT THE GRANT OF THE
EIGHTH AVENUE RAILROAD.

suit has been dragging its slow length through
The Superior Court of this city for about a year,
which has merted degree of public attention
that some of the parties have succeeded in pre-
venting il from receiving. So it seems from the evil
denee recently elected before Judge Hoffman, of the
Superior Court, in suit brought by Peter b. Sweeny
md A. j. Willard against Messrs. Petugrew and
sherman, of the Eighth Avenue Railroad TO recover
The one undivided fourth Of the interest of the latter
PARTIES in the above Company.
The grounds of the prosecution appear to be as fol
0ws: In the year 1851 Messrs. Pettiqew and Sher-
nan being about to form company for the construc-
Ion of railroad through Hudson street and Eighth
avenue cast about for persons Of influence
the vicinity Of the City Hail. who might back their
own efforts to procure a charter from the Common
Council. Mr. A. j. Willard, then in the Office of
Henry Z. Davies, Counsel of the Corporation, was
selected as fit person, and rendered the gratuitous
right to one undivided fourth of whatever the interest
Of those two gentlemen might be in the projected
Company.
Mr.. Willard doubtless forming very moderate
estimate of his own lobbying abilities, or with view
place the result beyond peradventure, subsequently
associated with him Mr.. Peter b. Sweeny, nephew
q the then Alderman Barr, of the Sixth Ward. The
Eighth Avenue Road was duly obtained from the Com
mon Council, probably through the cooperation OF
Messrs. Willard and Sweeny; but those gentlemen, 1t
SEEMS never received their compensation, and accord
ngly this suit is brought to enforce payment.
From the evidence given into Court few weeks
nee it appears that after the track had been laid a.
Jar as Canal street certain parties, whose interests
we're likely to be conravened by this route came
down to the City Hall with pockets full of rocks, and
distributed a fabulous amount among the city fathers,
6r the purpose of getting the Eighth avenue grant
evoked. Messrs. Pettigrew, Sherman q Co were
also on hand and il is said, expended some ten thou
sand dollars to defeat the efforts of the opposite party
II was stated by witness that, of the Aldermen ana
Assistant Aldermen, one received $4,000 another
s. 900, another $500, another 500, one 500, ana
$1,000 was divided between three Others Another
s,l was presented with *, 900 worth OF stock on
twenty years credit a certain individual was PAID
600 10 get dissenting Alderman drunk, and keep
him away from his seat on the evening when the SUBJ
iect came up before the Board The former aferward
stated that he cOuld not get liquor enough down the
refractory member TO the first part Of the agree
ment but his absence was secured nevertheless. 1t
was alleged also that another prominent politician
connected with Tammany Hall, and recently with the
Custom House was about $500 richer for hs services
The Pettigrew interest prevailed, and the grant was
b0 revoked
Thee is still on and it remains TO be seen whether
Nesr Willard & Sweeny will find any satisfaction IN
av for the injustice which they allege has been done
hem