New-York daily tribune., 1865-09-26
ruR CHARGES OF CORRUPTION.
The Mayor md thc street Cic"n'ne oo"'
tract-His Honor's Answer 10 inc Ai'
Legations Against Him.

IA transmitted to the Governor 10 tne chhrses VI CUT
rup,ion made against him, as member OF the o'fee'
Cleaning Commission:
To His Eroeileney RrtBEy +. FESToS. G0r~Hor Of the
STATE Of Ner York: - 80. c,.
Tho answer orc. Godfrey Gunther, Mayorof the City
of New.York to charges of official mlscohaue,' IIc
ferred against him by James Gregory oil the sd ehy
Thot The respondent admits that be. together with
| Nattbcw T. Brennan Controller OF the CITY oi New,
York. Francis T. a. Boce, City Inspector oi ihc sa9
city; John H. Deven, Conhsei 70 W. az, wore
| authorized and required Conmssioners by an Ac,
of the Legislature of the State OF New ioik passeu
Nav l. 1855 ana to which he refers to make cohrac
q planning tho streets of the said city. as In the sald
charge stated and he denies all the residue Oh the
matters contained in the said charge SO iar as they IT,
| late to him. - A.. - he,
This RESPONDENT further answering says that he has
heretofore at all times been engaged In acu'e onsl
ness es "A merchant in the City OF New'lork' ana nus
no aoouap,Guce or knowledge in the practice or pro-
sso of the law that his professional legal adviser as
| Mavor of the City Of Ncw.YoIk, by the terms and
nten Of the charter thereof is the officer known rs to
Counsol TO the Corporation. who was MEMBER Oh ,e
Commission referred in the said charge. and thal
the Hon. John +. Hoffman, another OF the saa No"',
| missioners Recorder of the cry OF Ne" ioih 70 u
lawyer of long standing and great aDilty ana oi hth
moral and professional repute and TINT In the matters
hereinafter mentioned, this respondent uid noI az !
time deem it right. proper or consistent WIN n ny
as public officer, TO dispute or act IN Opposioh 10 nc
united opinion of the torpDTuliVh N"u'h0i """ A
upon any question Of law. ,,,
This respondent admits that proposals. were demanded
by public advertisement TO be presented on the ga dn
oi Nav ls6s and that such proposals so received
and this respondent did as Chairman ana III
of resolution OF said COMMISSIONERS return tho saiu
proposals being as he believes s OF r he - and
who recognized them fIOm the endorsements theteoh
respectiyely but this respondent could Bot no." sl'
with certainty by whom tie same were presenlea' nhn
10 whom they were returned but he believes that JOhh
L. Brown was present and did receive one oi SAID pro
posas though this respondent does not KNOW Hn,tno
. q, hoV1I IN id NJ
IA Deyoe or whether such proposal was BIS lhdN!ll'
ay or whether IL was due forn or whether adequate
security was Or could be furnished a. required, of
whether he or they intended Thereafter 10 oher lro
That upon motion Of the Controller aforesaid 1t was
referred by the said Commission 10 the ,ofpotHloh
Counsel 10 draw specifications for the snld Nois iS
resnnnden, affecting that no specifications should be
made bat the Contractors left TO state what they would
do ard for how much and such specicatiohs were 30
drawn by the said Counsel TO the Corporation
That this respondent was informed by the members
Of the Commission. that the first were 80
I framed as 10 deter fair competition ior the "oh uuu
i'm reliance upon said advice be agreed o IA adjourn
ment and change Of specifications, wen knowing tha'
the same applied alike TO all contractors or propots
pest or fnne and acted himself solely ioT lAe reasons
aooye mentioned.
Ihs RESPONDENT further says that after the adjourn
ment aforesaid amendments made in the specihea
tons Of the said contract which this respondent Sas
advised by the said to the Corporation and Re,
e corder right and proper In law and IN iae' ana
which were recommended by the other members o' the
II Commissou AS cxpedcu induce honest contractors
~ 10 put in pro osa and rey ng upon such ADVICE ana
es with other motive. and Influenced also py tAe aci
40 that such notifications applied 10 all coHlrheIos ll'
respondent assented thereto
,o This RESPONDENT further says that the alterations,
mentioned in the third specification Il the charge are
brief and relate wholly 90 matters oi legal nteTprea
"A ton and the respondent not being Of TIE profession OF
. the law ignorant whether or not they bear the mean
M inc and produce the effect In law. which Is asserted IN
tie specification that tley were agreed To- by TIE Cor
marathon Counsel and Recorder, and That the respond
,e ont relying implicitly upon the legal opinion OF sAll
T. Counsel TO the Corporation ana hc'oLa.f anu
inc Lis own ability intelligent! 10 cTtcl1 Tue NefbdI
construction and legal effect OF law paper after tue
votes of all the other members of The COMMISSION "eF'
recorded favor Of the said eraton agreed thereto
and he denies that he acted in the premises Wniuy
coIruptly or neggeny. with any such Intent as Is
u mentioned in the specification.
This respondent also shows that upon the new inyi-
Is taton for proposals three several proposals were re-
" ceiycd IRON The Neg-lork Sanitary and Chemical
q Compost Manufacturing Company, being the same
men'ioned in the fourth. sixth and seventh specihca
Ons Of the charge aud tat this respondent was ready
u and willing 10 vote l fagor o awarding the said con
tract on one of the said bids being the lowest offered
but that thercupOn the Commission was advised by the
IL said Counsel to The Corporation ana EeeoIacF thh le
said company was not authorized BY the laws Of The
State Of New York 10 make the SAID proposal or TO do
the work Of cleaning the streets aud that any contract
T made with such company would be imperative.
This respondent Gays that upon receiving such ad'
vice and solely in reliance thereup0n he her an inc
other members Of the Commission hau no'vu ~. wy ~
lection Of the said bills OF proposals agreed IN sIen re-
riop ana he AYERS that he is wholly Ignorant whether
as mater Of law the advice and opinion OF the SAID
local officers be correct or not ana hc denies thst ne
w influenced in the matter by motive or interest
oer than desire 10 award The cohaet 10 thc lowest
; bona ide bidder, capable of executing the same.
This respondent further says that Daniel ID. Badger,
in the eighth specification named never made any pro-
posa either in his own name or In that OF any citizen
az therein nent oncd and that If he made any offer,
that such proposals should be made thereafter US III
SAID specification stated. this dep0nent AYERS that IL
WINS in a private conversation after the opening oi the
PROPOSALS and he denies evil intent in the matter.
This respondent further that proposal was in
,,ue form made to the said Commissioners by Patrick
McC afferty Charles Gudet, aud William e. Kingsley,
beiur the lowest offered the said Commission except
!, the bids o. the New York sanitary and Chemical Com
- post Manufacturing Company. and proposal OF Ed
ward L. Hembold Of Philadelphia, which was not ac.
compancd BY any surety. and was irregular.
That thereupon resolution was offered by the Hon.
John r. Hoffman at meeting OF the SAID Commission,
held on the 9Th day of June IN the words following.
l. namely:
K,I.ed That he be awarded 60 the Lowest bid
der those already disposed Of namely TINT 81
llenbod, which is informal and those OF the New-i ofk
Sanitary aud Chemical Compo,t Manufacturing Company,
y which Is incapable Of entering into contract
. That thir respondent and John 4. Hoffman,. Re
a corcr as Aforesaid voted for the passage " this reso
uon but that each ard every OF the other members of
. the Commission voted against H. and 1t was not
adopted
! That the effect Of the said resolution if adopted.
woud have been TO award the said contract to Mcssrs
y McC afierty Guidet aud Kingsley being the lowest
: bidders except above set forth, and that this
respondent voted therefor with that intent and mean
ing. and no other.
This respondent as 10 the matters in the ninth and
tenth specifications contained 30 far as they relate to
y himself denies the same.
AS 10 the matters In the eleventh and twelfth specl
cations contained ho says that be not present at
the meeting in which the alteration In tho eleventh
= modification mentioned was adopted, and that ho
signed the contract after tho alterations the said
eleventh and twelub specifications mentioned were
made and after the insertion Of the covenant relating