New-York daily tribune., 1858-03-02
RnARn OF ALDERMEN.

IRON the mayor, TRANSMITTING '"0 " - =. =.
Sailors Snug Harbor Also another l" ,o'' ~,
~ ~sy-.S-, ,,,;s.a, No 3lo Pearl street was totter-
"a, "a ,.hl. a, any moment to fall. The MAYOR
raSonn.adsd that an ordinance be passed 10 met
srcb csses nronrtly The papers were oruereu u NC
pripted. Ala TroNry oNered
oIfI: o I'd resolution in relstion to the CITY Hah
Crr;.i,, nnpointed by the Legislature, ana direct
-; 49, ~ urs.i 10 the Corporation to memorlal2e tne
Legislature for the passsgf c an ScI [el""nns the
"O pPf, of he Com n,'ftcc Fr1HdS-The Commit
Co., ~ Frr1ds reported 10 relation to the contract to
rsoulate &c. Fifty y-secOnd street. from FIth I" SHtn
aTenus Terence Farley was the lowest bidder, Dut
tbe contract was never confirmed by the Common
f,ounci and no formal agreement was signed by if'
lev in the Street Department. The work was en-
cuted by him till June 1857, at 80 cents per square
vsrd for excavation, &C., wnen he then declneu Ine
contract aud the job although nearly finished was
given to John McGrane, who was the next lowest
bidder but at very high prize. McGtane InTn, az
the high rate, assigned the contract 70 ratrch
NJ Farley's fatber.in law BY these ingenious opera
fiops sanctioned by the Street Department the prop
erty-ovners were liable TO unjust and heavy assess
Inepts and a complaint was made. Inc committee
hold that the whole proceeding was hiegai ana out
r,geous. that the contract, when the lowest bidder
failed 10 come up, should not have been given
70 TO- the next, but readvertised; that Farley
and McCirane have no legal claim against the
city, and that both are guilty OF fraud;
The Committee think that John /. Dodge (surveyor)
is chsrgeabe with neglect of his duty in not keeping
accurate copies Of his returns. On the on
of November 1857 the assessment was confirmed, and
on the 9TH OF November, 81, Mr. Terence Farley
drew 50 $50 7S and received assessment bond for
~ 600 and a check for sS9 78. No voucher appears
on file by which he drew the amount, whether Dy
power Of attorney from =. Tracy, or by assignment
Of the contract to him. At the prices in Farley po
be weud have been entitled to 81 5il 81 and ne mas
received So $50 78. The Committee are OF OPINION
that the contract with McC;rane fraudulent that
a aytv IN "a
Tracy are also liable to the city for assisting the saa
Farley in cOnsummsting the fraud, and that the Cor
porstion Counsel should take proceedings gns agsns'
al these parties to recover the whole anoupt,
60 ESQ IS paid Farley under fraudulent contract ana
Assessment; that Charles Turner, the late Deputy
Street Commissioner, has been guilty OF colludlng
duty in suffering the contract with Mr.. Me,
Crane 10 be made in signing q faise anu
fraudulent certificate Of prices, and in allowing tne
asseasment roll to be made up under such nahduienI
TayIor. for the loss Of the assessment roll.
After Recommendation the Committee offer reso-
luons directing the Counsel TO proceed against Ter
epoe Farley the - 689 78 under the fraud
uleut coatract with McGrane. That the transaction
be sso referred to the DstnctAOrDey for his action,
with request investigate into the abstraction OF the
assessment roll from the office of Joseph X. Taylor
On motion OF Aid. CLANCY, the paper was ordered
printed and made a special order for Thursday.
More Frouds-Aaother Report from Mr.. C0noDer-
A communication was received from ID. ID. Conovcr,
Street Commissioner, showing nlOle ~ "oS
ordered printed
STREET DEPARTMENT, STREET CoMNIssIoSER's
OFFICE, NEw-YORK, March, 1855.
To IL. Honorable the Cosmon Council Of the CITY Of Ne'0- York
Such of the assessment lists were made up by the
Assessors and confirmed by the Common Council and
Eavo, in the wear 1856 and now on file in the Street
Department, have been examined and compared IN
detail with the contract or record by order OF inc u
dersigned and the following ofoverpayment 10
contractors. and consequent over assessn1eets oo W
lvgha he
are submitted, with such explanations OF the cause OF
the excess as the undersigned s enabled to give, for
che information of your Honorable body.
Satin, cub and sutter and tagging Foryninth street.
Third 10 sixth avenue John w Cukns contractor aud
Robert Dods1 surveyor ane s snonn ns @ to tbe eon
sss st'S The .Rount rsSy and legally due him. as per
contrset $50
a,so,.,, p,.ins u,ov.ry owner. ss q
which made up from by the Street Comms
Sns for roes s0y Snas ia anf the srS &
prices respectively Of S7 30 cents and 36 cents pc cubic
by the prices paid for curb gutter and ss ing as
Incident and sppertsnins thereto
CASE SECOND.
Ferug sidewalks in Third averue from FOurtyiourth street
Sixty FIRST street G. Foster was contractor ana EDWARD
Boyle surveyor The assessment list was confirmed on Sep l.
made the amount due to the contractor
g., Se .mcant 9btiai; and legally due as per said
list wss... %'f'' ~
H.rrnce AGAINST property.owners oi........ S479 90
Which TO the extent Of $69 a. ia made from extra allow
saS wSb items be wronsfly certified were included in the
prices respectiyey Of cents square foot and o.
IN and covered By the price paid for sqsns fo
stands entirely unscsO.pted for on
apparent the made 10 the tsossor
and the explanation of which rests entirely upon he. to give
this property assessed also 80 for IN
spon s when the appointment OF al inspector was nt al
lowed b5 the ordinance.
Paving Forty sixth street from Ninth to Eleventh avenue
Terrence Farley Contractor aud John l. Dodge Surveyor
The assessment list confirmed in September 1886 The
Assessors made the amount due to the CONTRACTOR per
But the .n.ouui rightly and legally due him per
Efo
difference ,,sin,t popcrty owner. .of.....sI42l Of l8
Which The rxeut Of OO7 Oiis up allow
snces BY Street Commissioner rnhing grare repairing re-
work be wonay certified included in the cor;ract
yard cents per nea foot and 10 each but ali of which
the contrary included in and covered By the price paid for
1p ndes and returned by the Surveyor not provided io ia
the contact nor even allowed by he hIs' certificate Of the
TO by the CopIacor just aud reasonable aud the
were 4s9 inspection fees notwithstanding the
appointment Of an Inspector was d'Aowcd by the ordnance
CASE FOURTH.
Sitting curb aud gutter and tagging Feh street from Ninth
surveyor The s.sament m was confirmed in September 1876.
The made the amount due to the contractor a. per sad
BIT the .noant rshtly and legally due hiul per
t'sa hOO' -
diseceoee a,ain., property owner. Of $500 90
winch made by allowance. BY the Stree Commits
sonei of $50 eet Of retaining wall which work he wronsuy
cehed Was provided for in the price OF 81
unnns o An assessment of s96 for inspection fees also
made ,6 e.e though the ordinance allow the appou,
neni Of an inspector
CASE FIFTH.
Paving f1ty hr street from Broadway Eifhh
John fzPelick was contractor aud T. Do1se
The assessment iss confirmed september 1873 To-
made The amount due 70 the contractor per said
But the amount rightly due hii eouct
Adisetence ssinst property ......S 607 90
Which made ND allowance by the Sr.et Con,
hvoDd Of