New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1861-05-04
THE sTREET.CLRANING FRAUD.

For some months our citizens have been labor.
ing under the conviction that in the award Of the
STRENGTHENING contract to Andrew j. Hackley
the Common Council of New-York were guilty of
criminal Abandonment of duty if not Of gross
corruption. This conviction. siren gtheued by the
flying rumors and the peculiar circumstances Mt
tending the passage Of the contract has now
cystazed into absolute certainty under the pre-
sentiment Of the Grand Jury of the county, which
we print elsewhere this morning. FROM that
document, it appears that the contract is owned
jointly by Thomas Hope and Anthony S. Hope.
the wealthy grocers, Benjamin Wood, brother OF
the Mayor aud member Of COogre.s elect, and
Andrew j. Hackley, tue OstensIble contractor.
From the testimony of the Hopes before the
Grand Jury, we learn that in February last
Thomas Hope. drew from bank $4,000, in bills
OF $50 and 800 each, taking the same mme-
dlately to the store Of Anthony s. Hope, where
he met Hackley, who bad told them that he re-
qnired that sum ito carry out the contract
The money WAS handed to liackley. who, in TAX
lug it, remarked "that he thought there was 10
" doubt he could get tho contract"
The paying teller Of the bank testified that this
money vas drawn on the 18th OF February
On the same evening, in defiance OF law, reso'
luton was hurried through both Boards OF the
Common Couuci-Jebate, amendment, explana-
ton, all opposition being overborno by the cor
rupt pbalapx who were pledged aud paid to per-
feet the villain. awarding the contract Tor cean-
ING the streets of New.York for five years. at
s279, 900 a year, to Andrew j. Hackley.
though there were twenty-five bidders az much
lesser rates, and one, well guaranteed ard Sc
cured as low as $4,000 year This nefiri'
Gus transaction was coosummsted by Fernando
Wood, who remained in his Office, contrary T.
all custom, till late in the night, in order to sign
the resolution Immediately upon its passage, fear
ing, if it remalned over till tho following day,
that an injunction would be issued, and the
scheme thus BIZ rendered uugatory.
An attempt was made to reach the consplra-
tors by injunction, and prevent the contract from
bring made; but the laws and ordinances In re-
latlon to making contracts and awarding them to
the lowest bidder, which had heretofore governed
all such TRANSACTIONS, had been cunningy put
aside so far rs street cleaning was concerned,
tho previous Winter at Albany and an act
pissed permitting the Common Council to give
such contracts to whom, and at whatever price,
tney pleased. Under tbs act, which was un-
doubleday passed without just appreciation OF
its importance, the courts sustained the action of
the Common Council. But this proceeding OF
the Grand Jury is uDearthing the transaction in
all its responsiveness. The money is traced from
the Hopes 10 Hackley, and on the evening of the
day that he received it, they get this contract
awarded.
To whom did the money got Hackey refuses
to tell, lest his answer should subject him to II
criminal prosecution, and he is sent to jail for
contempt Supreme Judge. who formerly sat
upon tho Bench OF the Sessions, and there charged
far otherwise, inspired by his sudden elevation,
sees new legal hght and decides that the prov
ince of the Grand Jury of the Sessions is to deal
with petty Dliercrs, xod fellows of low degree,
hut tnat beyond those their inquiries must never
60. so Mr. Hsckley was set az liberty.
The Grand Jury say, however, that it was
clearly proved that no part Of the $4,000 was
used Tor or about the dong Of work under the
contract, and that although the action Of tue Su-
preme Court took Dir. IIackley out of their
hands, they deem 1t tie imperative duty Of the
Dntrlct.Attorney Z" 10 renew the investigation at
- the earliest pract cable day" To which We
most cordially respond, Amen