New-York daily tribune., 1865-09-30
The Contreller's Dcfensc again" th'
Charge Of Piuckney e. Moulton.
m. rd;,ox ~ Th. AZ v T,;h,,n<

| To the Editor Of The N. Y. Tribune
SIR: The Controller is evidently laboring un-
der strange deluson unhappy prejadice-proba,
bly, the latter-touching Pinckney Moulton ana
their late claim against the city He says.
my objection to the claim Of Pinckuey Moulton OBJ
been originally scbooLhou.e. The city lesed the property
from them and converted il into poice.ta for wheh
Mouon should not be allowed damages for the Improvements
made by the city" . -,
All OF which il iesucaly plausible but wide OF the
truth in its most essential particulars lie will not be
regarded as very close observer Of the signs of the
times who, In his business intercourse with the Ciiy
Government. does not readily discover unmstakaDle
evidence cropping out on every hand among onr mod
ern city officials that place nId power are sought ana
obtained not for the purpose of rendering just and
im aral administration of the Government but to re-
ward friends and punish enemies real supposed and
that the Finance Department is the exemplar and gud
| ing star in this novel course
The property in question originally belonged to
body corporate known and designated as the 1rus-
tees of the Yorkyc School" On about the 10Th of
August, ISIS. the then Police Commissioners sought
and obtained from the said Trustees possession of their
school building. situate Eighty sixth St, near Fifth
ave-. and forthwith commenced fitting IT up for police
station The condition upon which such possession
was given was that lease should be executed
for said premises for the term of five years. dating
from the first day of September 1885, at yearly rent
agreed upon by the parties. The Police Commission
cs held peaceable possession thereof used and enjoyed
the same for something than year. but for some
best known TO themselves, declined either 10 pay
the execute lease Tor the whereupon the
Trustees aforesaid decided 10 sell the property and did
sell it, Mr.. 5. d. Moulton examined the building, and
found IT well fitted up and in good order and, he
thought well worth the demanded for it, and there
upon became the purchaser. November ]. leJ9 Mr..
Moulton in his verdancy. did not stop TO inquiries
the Controller would probably have done-who had
erected the building footed the bills for the said lit
thug up. He really green enough 10 pay his money
aud take good and valid title for the premises and
building just It, stood on the first day OF November
1t is true that certain prison cells erected ad
joining the main building by the city. subsequent to
It's becoming the property OF Pinckney & Mouon and
subsequent too the date of their lease Of the TO
the city. And il also rne. that in their estimate Of
the value of the building destroyed they riD NoT as
the Controller under similar circumstances probably
wOuld have dore include the cost value Of the said
cells, though the Court before which the case was
finally tried decided that these cells were royalty be-
longing TO the estate and in the absence of any spula
ton TO the contrary must cscheat TO the owner thereof
and so instructed the jury.
Repeated and persistent efforts made =. & NJ
to bring the foregoing facts and circumstances TO The
knowledge Of the Controller. but 10 no purpose Any
argument or explanation they might have to offer upon
the subject matter could not be listened TO. They and
their case were condemned without II hearing or, in
the slang of the Controllers Office, they buied
OIL and dare not prosecute
Mr. Brennan in his defense would fain lead the pub
lie who have not our charge and specialization
against him. to believe that We had not hesitacd to
put in eXorbtant unjust claim against the city,
and were detected and brought to our senses by the
Supervisors He SAYS. Ii Is charged that they pre-
sented claim to the Supervisors for g. IN ~ for
building destroyed during TIC ri0ts 9t July lstJ That
the Supervisors reduced tie claim 10 5000 sc.
Here ingenious mixture Of truth and alschOOd,
the latter prcdomnGting We made no snch charge.
nor did put in any such amount or claim " for
building DESTROYED during the riots of July. i-63"
our claim against the city submitted 10 the Super
vsors 1900 for building destroyed aforesaid
on Eightysixhst near Fifthavc sl 90 for rent due
and 20 become due u, which was thrown out or with
drawn, the same beHg oollectable through another
channel; s77 - for the destruction Of property and
damage TO building corner Third ave. and Forty ninth
ST.
The Controller informs us and with some degree Of
vanity too that the whole number OF claims for riot
damages presented to the Supervisors was 20.
thought 1t necessary to have all these carefully exam
med before paying and such the efec, Of The scru
tiny exercised by myself and those whose services
had in examining the various claims. that np To No
yember. ls6 had reduced the amount allowed by The
Supervisors 80 rs 10 save the County about s3Ovc In
settling With the claimants
Now while We shall not undertake 10 gainsay this
statement may. we think. with perfect proprie'y
dissent aud 10 the Controller In all candor that
from experience aud observation In and about the
finance department while in pursuit u tIat which hon
esty belonged 10 US and from more or less Intercourse
with others similarly circumsianccd the sober. honest
conviction II Judgments has been aud stu Is that
large share Of the s7QOCl he thus cNultngy claims 20
haye saved the county was wrung from the wants nud
immediate necessities Of the unfortunate claimants
many of whom had been reduced 10 comparative pov'
crty by the mercilcss rulble-upon whom toe suiIy
doginaic. Take so much. or prosecute. ieA Ike a
winding sheet aud was worse than wasted upon score
or two Of investigating committeeman 10 aver! great
extent both useless and Incompetent
The Controller saws. lastly, "Iinckncy Moulion
consented 10 reduction Of some -sOOOn The amoubt
OF the Judgment ~ they reasonably should their
sciences doubt convincing them that they had re
cOyeTy for than they could justly receive To
this weak attempt at irony we have reioft both pun
gent ard al hand. but pass over and simply saN TO
him that from the Controller al our sense OF
wha, nay be hight wrong IN the matter II IN eN
ccedng bad taste. He could say nothing less likely 10
wound pride Of character or seusbitief our case,
like all others Of he KIND, open 10 appeal IN which
the Controller would have tie power Of tie city "a back
him This II was understood would BE- used against
u.s. and Notwithstanding felt entirely safe n To the
final result, by advice Of counsel We consented 10 the
abatement, upon precisely The same principle that We
consented to accept the 5000 proposed by the Super.
vlsOrs-tO nd ourselves 81 annoyance and the ucOn'
Vcuience OF further litigation and al The same time 10
the city the useless expenditure o slD0 or more
I'm costs PIaCKSrl s MOUtTOS.
ThirG.aye corner of Forty y.n!Dth.st.