New-York tribune., 1871-08-25
cuLEILNE THE LO1D.


of difference whether the responsibility for the
extravagant expenditures by the corporation
il accepted by Mr.. Oakley Hall or Is Distributed
generally around the Tammany King; for IL ~
very well understood that the Treasury mas
been plundered by an organized band OF con-
sprators, whereof Hall, Connolly. Tweed, IN
gersol and Garvey are the most important
members and nobody cares how the different
parts in the job were distributed. 1t seems 10
have been the duty of Ingersoll and Garvey 70
ask for the money, of Tweed to vote 1t, OF
Hall to say it was all right, and OF Connolly
to pay it; and it would puzzle a casuist to de-
eide which of the five was the most directly
accountable for the fraud But since Mayor
Hall has laid so much stress upon the purely
"mnisterialn character Of his own action III
the case, we may as well see whether he Is
what he pretends to bean innocent tool III
the hands of wicked and designing men.
When the new charter was about coming
into operation, it was provided, in order that
the reorganizcd government might start with
clean set of books that call Liabilities
"against the County Of Ncw-Iork incurred
"previOus to the passage" of the act should
abe audited by the Mayor, Controller, and
present President of the Board OF super
"visOrs" [Mr. Tweedl and the amounts found
"tO be due" should be provided for by the
issue of revenue bonds. Mr.. Hall says OF this
enactment: at was clear that the duties of
"the officers who were to give the certificate
"were merely ministerial q. and that the
"oficers named did not constitute a court for
"claims, but simply a ministerial board for IN
"spection and certfcation" If board ap-
pointed to "find what is due" is not board
for the decision of claims, then we do not
understand the English language. Mayor Hall
writes as if bills" and liabilities" were the
same thing. The city is not liable for
unjust bills, or fraudulent charges, and
no man of common sense can be-
lieve that a quarter of the sums
paid to IngersOl and Garvey was legally OF
equitably due. Yet the three audtOrs-Hall,
Connolly, and Tweed-seem to have assumed
that every bill rendered was equivalent to a
debt incurred, and they had only to pay what
ever was demanded. They accordingly in
structed the County Auditor to transfer to
them all bills which had passed the Board of
Supervisors (whether approved or noD, or had
been .favorabIy reported by a committee Of that
question. And this is what Mayor Hall calls
ascertaining what was due! The suits of Cor
nell aud Garvcy for work performed on the
New Courthouse show that all the bills were
not paid off by this board of audit, yet it is
understood that i'll few hours Messrs. Hall,
Connolly, and Tweed signed away more than
S6,OO0,OOO.
The courts have held that the purpose of
requiring the Mayor to cOuntersign warrants
was to prevent frauds upon the Treasury, and
the decision of Judge Mullin, cOncurred in by
Judges Barnard and Clerke, in the case of The
People VS.. Wood (Barbour's Reports, vol. 35),
says of the Mayor and Controller: "lf these
"Officers are to act as guardians of the Treas
"ury-if they are to protect, so far as in them
"lies, the city from the payment of unfounded
"and dishonest claims-they must have the
"means of knowing whether the claim is one
"proper to be paid, and it is their duty to in
form themselves in regard to it, and counter
"sign or refuse, as they may deem proper,
"after such investigation" Mr.. Hall, therefore,
as Mayor, had no right to approve any resolu-
ton of the Board of Supervisors to pay bill
unless he believed the bill to be just; and, as
member of the Board of Audit, he was
equally bound to scrutinize every account that
came before him. He may be no worse than
his comrades, but we really cannot see that he
is any better.