New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1858-01-12

go and 20 m
tuu on. - md omissions will be liable To remain
rJs,s,ed and assessments wrougfu!ly made and col
lectsd, as IN this case. ...n,.., -.
NJ wopN therefore respectfully recommend that
an ordnhnce be passed 10 meet the case oS .9ur'ng
a. s,,-eyo,'s re.u-u and the Assessment LiS's 10 Al
go 40 he submitted to the Street DeT,rnen. 10Y ~
animation and comparison with contract bSio,o me
zane shall be presented 10 your honoraoe WY 'V'
confirmation
Regulating Fourth avenue, between SeV"n'y-nrss
and Seventy-niuh streets. For ms ~ork ipu,
estimates were received. hewOrk was awsu - .
cor6rrned December - 1856 to Michael Ireacy tno
Iowes, bidder and whose estimate amounted :" go
St0 Nevertheless the contract was made on 'ne IV.
- isnuary 1857 with John McGrene, whose est
,,,e pmouned 20 SO, 025. Work 10 be coinl',,"a
n ne months. Ierene haiiey ana S""'''' w.
became his sureties
Regulating grading and tagging euro s1I
SiIth Avrpu. between fifty-fourth and riity-nin'i
.,es,s For this work eleven estimates were lv.esu'
and The work awarded ard confirmed Dec; =, iNG'
% Michael Treacy the lowest bidder, ara WHOSE ~,
mate amounted TO sl3,V3'' but coh,ffe' eSh h;Jgsp
Anril & 1857, with Terence Farley, the hi'h oIu.I
,rrr the Lowest and whose estimate nhiouh'"" "a
SID 5t2. Tine allowed for doing the w%S, tour
moaihs. Sureties, Michael Treacy and Patrick ifeSy'
Work not yet completed
cAsE *. 1870 :.
Regulating, Tagging and setting curo sha guto,, -
Ffy-sxth street, between Broadway ana o nsn
nue.. For this work eleven estimates Were 'e.e ~
WORK Awarded ana COnHtUtu wv - '|'
euce Farley. the lowest bidder, whose estimate Nas
sl979S 20. Neverthele-s, contract was made ApIn
D. 1851 with Michael Treacy, VINO was the tenth, OF
next 10 the highest bidder, and whose estimate
amounted TO sic l26, Time allowed for completion .,
the work six months Surcties, Terence Farley ana
Patrick Ireacy. Work not yet completed
CASE
Elar.-ng and setting curb and gutter IN t1ghty-
fonrt6 street from First to Third avenue. For this
uo-t ff,een estimates were received, and the work
swar,ed and confirmed Dec. %, 1856, TO John hns-
lev lowest bidder, whose estimate Announces " g.
l5 Nevertheless contract was made, AprlI ~ 1917,
| ,,;,h q g. Harsep whose estimate wa, fourth rom
| tbs lowest and amounted 10 $3.50. Time allowed
for the work two months. and the work mas zee" Vo
| peted H. :. .l.;,. .,,n,,s.t
| with Marty 10 whom the work was neither awarded
nor confirmed, chsracerizes these four a't case,
resulting in o.s 70 the ~ o" 1 IN o e TSrss
nj the cases also. exhibit excess of some months
| time in executing the work.
| CASE xr.
| Iracgino sidewalks setting curb and gutter, and
LAYING bridge-stones in Fourth avenue Irom
| ninth to Ninety. second street For this WOrs wv
| estimates were received. viz: From T. G. Eis anu
Charles Devlin. The Ellis estimate being ihioruai'
the work was awarded to Charles Devli9 whose eS,l
| mate was az folows, viz: Curo ana gutter % w
per rum ing foot bridge stones, 10 cents per squsro
| soot tagging 10 cents per square foot; while TAR
rate for such work would be ~ cent? - GEMS anu
cents respectively. The award was sent to tne No
/
| Nevertheless n contract was made with Dsvhn ON
the 18th April 1857 at cost ~ per ms estniate N
| sl2Ss7. Work has been completed.
new feature appears in this ease, VIZ: Inc max
ing a contract with party after the Common Coun
| ci had refused to confirm the award.
CASE XII.
Setting curb and gutter in Eighty ninth street be-
| tween Fourth AMI Fifth avenues. Charle- Devhn
alone bid for this work, at 81 ~ per running loot
There il no evidence in the Street Department Vf any
| award or confirmation of the work 10 Devn' bu, ts
| known that a contract made with him aud duly
| recorded. But it appears further IN reference I'd
| This case. that during the period frum June IL TO
| July Is throughout which ID lvin IN possession
Of the Street Department by force, VIZ: On the otn
June the said contract torn out OF the contract
book by c. II. T.. Lynch the contract clerk appoint
| ed by Deyiin, and another contract for the san5
| work was made by Charles Turner (Devlins Deputy
Commissioner with John Fitzpatrick, party Who hsd
| never been a bidder Tor the work, and which con-
tract predaf,d June 10, apparently iJf the puf-
pore of taking the responsibility Of the transaction
| from Deylins administration of the affairs OF tee
| Street Department, which commenced on June l|' w
IL presurabe that the time inserted in said contract
with Devlin for the completion Of the work Wa jana
| ., 1857, nasmuch as through haste or overnight IN
copying the Particular Of that contract into the new
contract with Fitzpatrick that date Junc j still re-
mains "a the time for the completion Of the work
while the contract itself bears date june 10, being oD
day after the time set for ils termination by completion
| Ct the work
The whole train Of irregular. illegal and fraudulent
proceedings before exhibited, eliminate IN this in
the mutaton of public records during the temporary
superintendent of Charles Devhn ~ street Commits
sioner; but notwithstanding even these grand develop
| ments the main consideration which seems to have
been paramount throughout all the cases presented,
viz: a margin for profits not lost sight OF in this for
the work contracted for at 81 - per running foot,
would have been well paid for at 30 cents per running
| foot.
Other Cases exhibiting further instances of similar
violation of law and disregard of the public interests
might be edded, inclusive of the recent one re-
| specng the regulating and grading Of the New-Bow-
| ery from Chathim 10 Franklin square which has be-
come matter of investigation by the Courts and the
| particulars Of which already before the public.
The unders gned would further call the attention Of
your honorable body 10 the very general practice of
contractors Of overrunning the time specified for the
performance OF their contracts; practice which has
left large amount Of public improvements unfinished
| az Will appear by reference to list annexed, marked
Doc. No. H. appears that this state OF things results
from an arrangement IN vogue among contractors, TO
| wait for the commencement of new works in tho
| neghborh0od Of the work they may have contracted
for, so that greater facilities niay be afforded To them
Of procuring deficiency disposIng Of surplus of
| materials with less expense 10 themselves. Early
occa0n will be taken by the undersigned % have tho
| condition OF all unfinished work particularly exam
| ined, and the circumstances attending the delay in
vestigaed, when he will make further report respect
ing the same, for some action OF your honorable
| body.
In respect TO the progress and present state 81 tho
Battery Enlargement, reference II made % the APP
/ pended report of Daniel Even, esq, the Surveyor
| ha wing charge of the work, Doc No. ). IT. details
will no doubt prove Interesting 81 the public ~ af
fordlng concise history OF the work from ia origin
The foregoing deyelopnent7 show that the busnese
Of contracting for public work under the Street De-
partment, has been latterly reduced 10 quite man.
ageabe SYSTEM confined 10 four parties who serve as
suretes for each other and back out orse out among
themselves as occasion requires or opportunity offers
to 90 70 at the expense OF the property owners; but
fay -.