The New York herald., 1866-06-27


an9 tho Adoption OF the Report, sc.
The Board Of Supervisors met yesterday the President
In the chair resolution offered raising the salary
OF Robert G. Hutchings Assistant District Attorney
from ~, 500 to 81, 900 per annum. Adopted.
Supervisors Fox, Bleakley and Hays. OF the special
committee OF the Board OF Supervisors to whom
ered for investigation the charge that grossly extrava
giant and improper contracts had been made by the per-
directing the construction Of the Court House,
In reference to the purchase OF ron marble and bricks
and the payment Of for personal services which
Involved the reputation Of the Board Of Supervisors
scented their report.
This report states that thorough investigation had
been made thirteen sessions having been held that
che Supervisor making the charge admitted he had no
personal knewedge of any frauds but based it upon the
communication made by Mayor Gunther twho also ad-
mite ha, he had personal knowledge of them to
che Board of Supervisors in April 1854. No evidence
whatever was produced slbstanate tho charge of col
lusion among the bidders Tho bids for the iron work
submitted the Board OF Supervisors for action
who then authorized the special committee TO contract
with the lowest bidder and who also approved of their
course on submitting subsequent report. The first at
tack the contract made six months after It's APP
proval when Mayor Guniher took to ascertain
from three other firms what iron was worth at the time
the contract was made The estimates OF these firms
mate on being based the prices of labor and materials
in September and not taking into consideration tho adj
vance prices One Of those firms, Of which Dir
Kings county Court House, and has made
claim for allowance OF fifty per
cent and there great uncertainty In the
kst at the time the contract made. The advance in
prices from 1861 July, 1864. 2s2t per cent and
the parties who stated TO Mayor unther that they would
have been willing to have taken the from twelve
10 thirty per cent under the price paid, were compelled
10 admit To the committee that at such prices they
would have lost heavily; and the committee also knew
that the usual custom Of claiming extra allowance would
have delayed the work for years The prosecution did
not attempt to show that ths paid under the
contract extravagant above the current market
prices and the committee believe they fully
ntet ia Pronouncing that the contract for the iron
work neither exravagant nor improper but, on the
contrary is the best that could have been made with
parties OF sufficient foresight require what proved
be fair price and OF sufficient character not To
in when the work is finished with demand for extra
compensation The evidence of the one witness called
by the prosecution In reference to the price Of
marble showed that the county was paying less than
the market al the time the contract was made.
The committee offered 70 consider this request If Mr.
Ely would charge that more iron &C. had been pad for
fhan had been furnished bu. to ascertain by
ment the weight Of the iron in the building would in
vOlve great expense and require large portion of the
work to be taken down. the request only implied That
iron had been paid for VIII ch had not been furnished
she committee in the abscnc, of any direct char2c did
not feel warranted in going Of the line OF their duties
to order expensive examination without the
cuors assuming any responsibility II seemed also the
bills Of the contractors who sustain high reputa
ton honorable business men, should be deemed sul.
ccnt this point The brick had been furnished from
eimc 10 time, required at the usual market rates.
The testimony as TO personal confined
the paid the architect and builder The arch ect
compensation the same as ha, paid by parties erecting
other extensive buildings in the city. The builder Is
only paid about one-hah the compensation ordinarily
paid by private parties.
unable discover anything either in tho and
dtions or said contracts the furnishing Of materials
under them wtch can be deemed extnvagant i'm
proper and The prosecution not only failed TO subau
taie the charges but the witnesses proved directly that
the prices favorable and just aud that the
charges Of Supervisor Ely only not sustained,
but are wholly disproved They asked To be relieved
from the further consideration OF the subject
After the report bad been read Supervisor ELY asked
% have a,d the table and he would submit the
ncxt meeting minority rcport-that L.. view Of the
fore the Bosra was signed BY COMMITTEES Of investgn.
tOn in which nobody represented the prosecution. He
himself was placed in the position OF prosecutor and
he therefore, moved the report be laid on the table
that he nigh. have the privilege OF presenting at next
meeting his views OF the investigation and IT'S results.
Supervisor Fox said nearly 10 months had elapsed
since the investigation and that was sufficient time for
Mr. Ely prepare any report he desired TO present TO
she Board and he therefore hoped the report would be
adopted.
Supervisor Fly replied he did think tho begin
ming the would make unanimous report and
sherefore b" report not different from what he
tcipatcd wonld be- But the committee having taken
three months already one weeks delay now would not
make any practical difference. He thought was i'm.
portant, public justice concerned that both
sdes should is allowed an opportunity OF reaching the
public ear aud he should have opportunity of being
heard aud cuufuvcrting contained in
che report He supposed the matter would b. reviewed
ai a future time before different tribunal and II would
be better 20 have the matter on record entirely in
Supervisor Txxsp said Mr. Ely had stated that he was
placed the position OF prosecutor; but In hts jndg
ment he hat placed himself n that position Any nah
making charges could no, expect TO be placed
In the position Of judge in that II
vas entirsiy a novel ida that a person who was
allowed Ia cal. witnesses and be represented by
sol and Who had received every consideration prose-
cu0r entitled 10 receive. should be allowed 10 place
any communication the report Of the committee who
took the evidence. 1t seemed to him novel way OF
conducting iepslstive proceedings. II well known
shat during the entire affair the gentleman had Of
ehe city newspapers under his control which In the
habit Of attarsng the members OF the Board and the
members OF the committee who trying the cnsc
and he presumed he could give the public. through rs
columns, which were entirely al bis disposal.
dence other matters lie wished And now the idea
Of laying IA o.sr for another week seemed 90 him
ching the Hard could grant and which the gentle
mans own n,odsty should prevent him from asking
supervisor ELy replied that he had had the privilege OF
calling Witnesses. but in this report Gere
ally IN the Of the brick work He was promised
he wosIid " inr1shed with the quantity NJ brick n the
building. bu. sben Mr.. Kollum was asked how many
cubic feet of brick were IA the building he would not bo
allowed 20 rcyiy. Now, he wanted what wa per.
mt.ed hc made public after mouths would
not b. ailowsd sf that time.
Supervisor foy explained that IN regard 20 entering
into thai II would have entaied unnecessary
Denss. Thrre architects should have been employed by
the and three By the other sdc but stl n
Mr. Fly had made the charge that there money
spent ia the run and brick than furnished the in
vsst,aatinn uonld have been made. lie reviewed Mr..
Eiy's cobdart this matter, who, he said bad
that Board md received at the hands Of his associates
every sen"rtny respect anu cUn-ideraiton ana vet lie
had charged his colleagues with dishonesty AMI with
being party fraud And that the report of the
committee made be desired 70 make a minority
port Ne Mr. Forl saw no nee ,ssity why the rcpor,
should he lad over
Supervisor ftI remarked that the committee AZ thc
sime OF the bve figat.on. rcfuscd To enter into the
details OF the br,ck work yet since then seems they
did 60 into n
supervisor yo1 replied that committee did for
thctv sstsiscttou.
On the question Of the adoption Of the report being
put by the Chair,
Supervisor XIV objected 10 is being considered then
Superv rvEfD said Bir Ely should have objected
before the question had been discussed ana apsr
half au hours debate.
Considerable discussion ensured on this poini when
she Chsrnss ruicd Supervisor ky out and the qretl0n
upon the adoption Of the report ~ the committee
put and sd,pt~t nine memUcrs voting FOR and on.
tsaper VISOR flyi against H.
The Committee on Annual Taxes 10 whom re erred
che annual Application OF the Institution for the Deaf
aud Dumb and 10. Nursery and Chds Hospital reported
fhat n the duty ~ the Hoard Of supervisors to
make the appropriations asked tor the supror of those
institutions They also presented the opinion OF the
legal adviser that the payment proper charge
upon the This report approIratcr q, O0D tor