The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1866-03-27

statement Of the brick used possible" Two
days afterwards the Chairman said he had determined
not TO have Mr. kellm furnish the statement OF the
brick and other materials in the ednce and whom Mr. kol
bum was examined witness all questions designed 10
prove the deficiency OF the ieria objected 10 by
the counsel for t defence and the objections sustained
by tho comm ttee. The fourth itemthe payments for
personal servces-noeds but little comment Toe com
penaton of the superintendent who originally devoted
has whole attention 10 the work for three thousand dol
lars Per annum the OF June last raised 10 Ave
per the cost OF construction, which gave him
$22 100 10 for his services from thai tmc 20 the end
o. tho year period OF seven months Aud the archi-
tet who did not furnish the original design and plans
o the building aud who has lab0rious duty 10 Dis.
charge, paid about t3s 900 dunng the years 1894
and 1865 being three per cent on the expenditures
Several witnesses, who have recently erected large
buildings for different Institutions testified that they
pa tho architect three per cent but they paid
perinendem and the amounts were small compared
with the Court House. upon which 500 700 was OK.
pended m 1895. The Court House Committee pay their
Two employees eight per cent which viii take forty
thousand dollars from the half million which has
Just been placed In tho levy carry the work
'or the present year That these salaries extraya
CANT and unnecessary was sufficiently proved by ,he
chairman OF tho committee, who testified that no
aware that ono OF those employees had paid $40 600
out OF MS Court House fees IN another person Any
salary which viii admit % this must b. and
proper THIS witness also testified that was not tho
desisn OF the contract with the superintendent tina, lac
should De paid hye per cent the architects salary,
but the records OF The finance department show thai this
hve cent the architects three per cent has boon
regularly paid from the county treasury The greatest
wrong however contain II In this with tho au.
pei1ntendent executed under seal In that II binds the
county OF New YORK 10 keep tho en management OF
the Court House, including all purchases OF materials and
employment OF workmcu, his hands until II IL finally
completed and fitted up oven n tho Board OF Super
viso should DO abolished by tho Legislature The cost
OF the building was estimated by the architect who
drew the original plans a. not TO exceed $500 900
Since then the plans have been altered by add ng
large amount Of ornamental work, and placing upon
u an enormous IRON dome, which will cost incaicua
bic sum These additions unnecessary. Tho present
architect, when examined, could estimate how
TO completion the building was nor what would BIO It's
probable cost think II reasonable IL little
more than half completed The roof the dome the por
tico and oil the interior construction be dono
Thus far the ground has cost $3.50 600 labor and
rial 81 500 900; besides 1922 55i 20 raised by and
pa d for interest money borrowed maxim present
total Of over two and half millions In tho tax levy
for the present year 5000 900 II inserted Mr. Ely
then alluded the commu nicaton mado BY Mayor Gun.
Their 10 the Board Of Supervisors In 1894 charging fraud
In relation 70 the Court House He thought that this
document had been pockecd by the parties accused and
concealed from the public for nearly two years and
wa now produced compalson 70 rather late
for tho gentlemen 70 the character OF injured
nocence
During tho reading Of the charges Supervisor Fox
asked II Il was she Committee Of Investigation that Mr.
After Mr. Fly had concluded Mr. cRAx arose and sa,d
that Mr.. Ely had now turned tho into upon
the Investigating Committee. Hc made ausion tho
evidence that had bsen given before the committee Mr.
Ely had said that proved u be mako
contracts for supplying mater nj 20 carry other
tracts at tho time that such contracts awarded aud
that this was misrepresentation OF the evidence
n nothing Of tho kind bad been proved. There
such proof Agan the statements made In reference
Mr.. Tucker we're NOT 70 be- found the proof II
shown that bis compensation only commenced last June
and was not for the time Mr. Ely intneied Hs had
talked about the architect receiving $40 OO0 bis
commission PAID him that much since his connection
with the building when he knew thai had boon proved
that $40 ooo was given 70 the former srchcct out Of
even smaller than that Ne would 70 all
the allegations made by Mr.. Ely ~ this sss moment
Walsh we're sos s.iv aasuppos< bss sous0sessd y shs
supervsor yox inquired be wss v unAsss.sA sAss
chs case eloscd
couussl replied saas ~, ..d ne ss.ni,sss sAsa
sdboarusA.