The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1858-05-07


The ovsrpay meDss amount to NJ Gum Of 81 AIS 81
The overpay meps awards Nos. IS, 70 and SO
by No 2OC4 "a per receipt dated Sept q 1866
piened by N. ThursoD, executor, amount $780, An
but having sbie 70 elicit any information in re.
gsrd to IL, your committee offer opinion 10 the
purpose for -bich, or by whom, this was done The
warrant regularly entered Issued for pay
these awres, and no entry can be found TO indi.
cate that it was ever cancelled. The warrant has
Of warrants drawn" and the want Of proper
method in the arrangement Of the returned by
The Chamberlain very long examination may be neces
ssiy before the fact can be determined whether not
this warrant is among the papers OF the department
PROBABLY FORGERY.
In regard to payment by warrant No. 040, purporng
to be pay meni for an award on this Involvement, with
interest, drawn 70 the order Of E Cxmbreng astor-
Dey, and recepted for In that name, amounting to
1926 81, your committee are Of the opinion that
gross fradd has been perpersted whereby the treasury
tae suffered Ices 70 that amount The receipt flied
up in the opinion OF those familiar With his writing by
james Smith, late clerk In the Comptroller oace, and
writing in the body OF the receipt the susp
cions Of the examiners that the receipt and signature
we're made by one and the same person This
was confirmed by the similar opinions OF the Comp
,rolers employees. as well by the appearance Of
the endorsement on the wsrrsnt which written df-
ieTept sly from the signature in the receipt appa
rently IN a disguised hand. Az there was no award to
justify the Lay meDts the Transaction Indicates rraudu
lent purpose the part OF the person craving and ssu
ing the warrant and in the opinion Of your committee
csse requires that prompt steps be taken 70 bring the Of
| fender before a legal tribunal
CEysuRKp.
The want OF all proper method in recording the 1nan-
cial transactions Of the city, and the absence
bave been so apparent TO committee at almost every
step OF the various Investigations they prosecuting
head OF the Finance department is highly censuraole for
having omitted TO institute Ineligible and correct mode
OF keeping the books and Of causing all the counts
be opened which are necessary to show conveniently
and accurately the actual fpan of the city
| had proper account been kept Of the Improvement
forming the subject OF this report the overpayments
D.
pear, without beng discoyerabe Immediately upon the
posr OF the ledger In the Absence of any such sys-
tenn, matter for surprise that errors ana frauds
are committed, and that the head of the department
should be imposed upon by those disposed 70 avail OF tho
opportunities afforded 70 procure payment of
| character
investigation Of the payments made awards for dam
ages, in the matter Of widening Beekmsn street, reveals
an apparent overpayment OF 600 on award No. a..
Owing TO the disorder among the papers in the County
Clerks Office, the report nj the Commissioners this
copy report signed by Commissoners on ale in tho
street department., has been necessarily used ir the
award was made 70 WsbeS Ma5pey cor aamsse IN ,s s
| suru OF TOUR thousand and three dollars.
| Tho payment Of this award wa by warrant No si2,
dated september l. 1883, 10 order OF H. Msloney, en-.
doTsed by Elizabeth Maoney, sd oipstrstrix Of NJ Mao
ney, oecsased, and deposited by James Kelly. Il was
yeceiped for in the Street Cornissoners Office ;tober
., 1883 ne written amount Of the award in the copy
report h for 4oo3, but the figures in the margin
81 oo3, and whether the Street Commissioner fms taken
the marginal reference for his guidance paying the
award or whether tn. discrepancy Is clerical error IN
making h, copy, can only be sscerained By inspection
I'm snKnr ooxmssIoSKR's orr1cx
In ths connection yorr committee have 10 state thai
great negligence aud careessness characterize the most
Of the Commits opers openings so far
/ as they have been examined
the street department erasures and rterneatons Of
very frequent occurrence The Of a portion OF
the awards are written out different from the figures
dow in the gins. and differences between xna
and copy, the Csusl and Walker streets case in f.
cate u at no comparison was made 10 ascertain the
0~ing to the difficulties the Street department rem.
dcrpg access to he books and papers FOR time imprno
ucabc, and IN the expectation that the very extended
investigations into the affairs OF that department. which
| seem TO be lmperatvely called for by the dis.
| ordered condition OF the books and papers could
no more satisfactorily conducted when the department
should be again In working order, have only caused
such examinations TO be made ~ should satisfy your hon
orable body s 10 the 10 which the ssrs that
department have been conducted esvIg mos. OF the
numerous cases where critical examinations Of contracts,
mtefsmenfs, &c, &C., seem ncedfu for favora
bic time.
The results Of the inquiries Instituted in regard 10 The
manner Of performing the work in several Of the burca
for years past such 10 Justify the call
Immediate change. 70 little attention has been paid by
the heacs clerks Of the department and bureaus
ordinances prescribing their duties and wanting have
they been Efforts 10 secure accuracy the accounts
negligent in keeping the books and preserving the
cords Of the department. that valuable papers, forming
the key 10 the proper understanding Of contract
longer be found and books have 10 be posted by the
amnsr for several years preparatory 10 an understand
Il has been a master Of common occurrence for the
street Commissioners 70 into contracts without the
previous formsty Of notices and estimates make such
allowances for work not embraced IN contracts they
ohose 70 permit surveyors 20 make returns Of work with
cut reference 70 the conditions Of the contracts under
which the work done, and 10 avoid such necessary
examinations Of the surveys and clerical computations
would he apt 10 prove corrective of well
wholesome check upon designed msngurng and fraud.
SURVIVORS DUTIES
Of work no, embraced IN contracts a well as o.
work not properly chsrreable 10 the improvements,
eometimes IN violation Of the express terms Of the
a. TO render doubtful whether the contract has
been complied with or not The nsccuracy Of the
based In well understood that contractors have
been accusomed many 70 take this into
in framing their bids comparison OF estimated
surenens with the measurements Of work performed,
made IN connection with The bids based such estimated
1si sbe specnaions were simple errors 81 judgment
that the contractors we're ignorant Of the true state Of
the case There seems 70 be no other rational way Of
counting for the peculiarly az the bids the prices being
onentines merely nominal on items Of expensive work
and at very exuavssant rates for work, the estimated
bidders although the lowest the basis Of the speciaca
ton were really highest on true returns Of the work the
Rave been greatly over esmsted and tbse bid for A. seb
prices greatly under estimated
The specifications on which bids based
previous TO 1854. though frequently called for, have
not been produced-the clerks In attendance aver.
ring that they could not be found. so important
these aordng clue 70 the bids and for comparison
with the surveyors OF the work performed that
complete examinations cannot be made without them.
The surveyors should be required TO make their
turns under cath that the work q properly done IN
cordance with tho terms Of the contract and specifying in
all Of extra work that there may be liability TO
over allowances In payne nt
now THE ASSESSORS no rrFuR WORK
The sssee,ors though most literally paid for the service
required them 70 have been governed entirely by
the returns OF the surveyor and the prices and allow
reported by the Street Commissioner, without any
exsmir alton Of contracts comparisons OF the
statements furnished herewith, ~ the
clerical computations by their own employees. The as
sefsment lss many OF them enormously footed In
clude allowances 70 large amounts and 80 den
cicnt In the usual ailments OF correct business
that they dscredable 10 the parties concern
ed The fact that assessments have epured TO the
bcnef OF the themselves and collectors ss Wen
A. 10 the contractors has far towards justyng the
opinion nat they have not given such attention 70 tne
performance Of their duties the property owners and
public had right 20 eyyect
They have included their fees IN the assess men
s IN such manner n make themselves the recipients
n nIiac 10