New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1866-03-13
pr any action was taken by the Board on my comman

er any action taken by the Board on my eonilnu
cation. - 18th
o. How did the estimates in the letters compare WIN
those in the contract for the New Court pues
ton objected TO, and excluded)
To Mr.. Cram-Mr. Reed, the one VINO caiieu, ~
attention 10 the matter was believe Secretary OF e
Architectural Iron W orks; signed inc warrants 'O
the money for the work wien found ~ had peeh ~
and that the city legally liable LOT lt louJectr
first objected hearing the representations Oh III,
Reed and other gentlemen; my objections arose rum
their information. -. ,.i,oss
Mr.. Charles Fowler. gentleman III INC Hoh puSiN''
the next witness testified: ~ ,,o I'm,
To the Committed employ from 100 to $50 men W.
not so many now; furnished iron Tor the Capl.o a.
Washington at nine cents per pound iron was Io"Va
then than now the last contract made for that was ~
1889; that has not paid me; intend 10 mahe al ~
dtonal claim of seven cents pound for s0ppage
of the work in 1861 and the rise IN prlees tDat seven
cents would be about the amount Oh the rise; 40
know the cost of the iron in the New C0urthou eA
the contract; James L. Jackson first asked IL we were
willing 10 make an estimate for the iron Of the Ncr
Court. House: our foreman made one Tor US; WOMB
have been willing 10 do the work at the price seu IA
TO Mr.. ACKNOWLEDGED Raleigh is our foreman; he
is still in our employ at Morlsana; II We Let a
additional seven cents irom inc o1'eInnc an,
think we shall get any profit at ALL that seven cents
Intended 10 include the increased cos OF IRON aDoI
transportation and freight-not our loss oil tmei re-
ceived letter from Mayor Gunther; nave COY! "
my answer here Ipontng 10 pamphlet the lel..i 10
dated March l6, ls6i; II is in TINS printed penPn.
l2i cents per pound for iron frames pnlleys' &C. was
a pricp which hrln WOulu Hh't lihV" Wv
work; 10 cents for the iron stairs, &C. Tor Tue jeans,
ties at cents and the roofing at cents ana iot le
stone anchoring cents and illuminated tes al 90 per
sonare foot was the estimate at which our hm was VIII
-; q, do rho work. do MT know the prices In the con-
tract of 1868: not requested 10 senu III piopgss
for building the New Court House; lcaied az hr NH
INNS office both before and after the contract was gwen
ont 10 see the plans have not examined the WORK
done on the New Court House lately durlng the past
two years iron has advanced very much IN lsol we
paid Sl7 so for il; have since PAID 600 LOT H. anu
I hoii las pd
q. What difference was there between the cost Oh
iron in 1868 and the highest piice since A cano,
saw; have been most of my time IN Washington aiu
the purchases have been made by my partner; MI
Kelium told me he had inspected our WORK al -" nsh'
ngton before the contract was gwen out ha'e aone
should think, 81 OOQuOO OF WORK Oh the uone anu ga
tensions of the Capitol 80
Mr. Cram-Arc we trying the erection OF the CapItoi
extension or the New Court House
Mr.. Anthon-It is merely intended 10 sho" that our
New Court House here likely 10 cost as mnch as inc
extensions and dome of the Capitol at Washington,
much more extensive building.
To Mr.. Cram-The million only includes what ms
been contracted fOr II one claim u allowed tneie WIN
be about slOO 900 all but about that sum was
done before the war; think II we had done thc u"he
work for the last two years at cents We should have
lost money bar iron has risen ~ high a. so; there u
good deal Of boiler plate iron used IN the New court
Uouse, | think boiler plate is deaTer than bar iron
| In Mr. Jaekson's absence Mr.. Frederick II. Gross
was then called by the Committee against the protest
of Mr. Anthon that the prosecution were entitled 10
select the order OF proof aud that Sir. JacksOns ts-
timony should be taken before that Of Mr. Gross. lie
testified that he Of the four bidders Tor the
iron work the Court House; chat his bid was about
40 per cent above the market price at the times he also
bid for Sienways Hall about the same time al aDont
10 per cent above the markei. ., al.
TAe Chairman then stated that. upon consultation
with the other members OF the Committee be was com
peled to revoke the promise he had made 10 give Af
Ely ten blank subpenas for witnesses.
The Committee then adjourned until today al
o'clock p. II.
The following Is the communication OF Mayor uuh'
Their which was offered IN evidence and ruled out:
MAYoR's OFFICE NTwlo1k, Aprn D. 1901.
To he Honorable ne Board Of SHPrr''ors.
GENTLEMEN: Though no provision Of law requires my
communicating TO your honorable Dody SUGGESTIONS
relative TO tue administration financial CONDITION. or
improvements OF the county not Directly CONNECTED
viii legislative acts presented Tor my approval yet
would be wanting in my duty II iaiea ID eaihs your
attention To circumstances that st&Oub! iHucae TIC
preparation Of gross fraud.
have received information relative TO The prices
charged for the iron work Of the New Cont House no"
| in course OF erection under yOar supervision that
should be placed In the possession 81 the board
IL the statements made in the documents to which
direct your attention are trucaDd there caa De lttc
doubt when three respectable firms come forward ana
substantially agreethen is clear. first that The con
tract for the iron work in question was awarded with
out giving public notice or even an inttmaton TO some
of the principal houses engaged IN iron manufacture IN
this CITY vicinity and secondly that the prices for
the work contained in tie BIDS o. TIE parties 10
whom the contract was awarded are lar beyond those
that OF the meanest cdpIcity NOAiu hioN IN DIS
own business transactions The conclusion u irress
bic. either that tue Special Committee on the New
Court House vas deceived 10y the fraudulent represent
atoms OF interested parties or acted without due m
yestigatOn in recommending so advantageous con
tract TO your honorable body for confirmation"
| The MAYORS communication was accompanied with
three etters-se Of which, from tie Architectural Iron
Works stated that they had Lot received any appca
ton TO present estimates or been invited 10 furnish
proposals for the iron for the New Court House Their
letter continues: I'VE would have been very willing
10 have contracted or the the following prices
namely;
| For the iron window frames and
trimmings at..................l0 cents per pound.
For the stairs and 10 cents per pound
For the doors folding shutters etc IL! cents per pound
For the wrought iron girdefs II cents per pound
For the rolled beams for floors. with
knee pieces bolts. anchors, etc. cents per pound
For the dome. roof and frame. for
supporting ceiling under roof. 10 cents per pound
For the area grating wrought iron ceuts per pound
For the anchors for stone work cents per pound
For the window and door liniels.. cents per pound
For the ceiling plates. cents per pound
For the illuminating tlle -----.-S1 per loot
IL goes on state that they familiar with esti
mates But never before four estimates that
bore so close resemblance and analogy 10 each other
and challenge proof oft There but five firms in
this city all calculated TO do this work namely. Geo
L. jackson Co., Jas. l.. Jackson Bro, j. Il. W 6,
W. Cornell g. Co.. james Fowler. Kirkland Co.. and
| the Architectural Iron Works Three Of these were
not invited TO bid the work had they any
knowledge il was In the market. Such was our case
and the rest so inform u.s. Two Of these who we're
asked TO bid. and whose bids quoted. have no
foundery and never melted tun OF iron in their lives
as every body knows. and do not pretend 10 know the
trade Of founderymen and beside had facilities or
room ~ do such Job"
| The other two letters from Fowler Kirkland & Co.
and Jas l.. Jackson Bro. both state that the
tract prices given below 20 per cent higher than
the prices at which they would have taken the contract
| hnth vprp Al Kidding