New-York tribune., 1873-02-06
LOCAL MISCELLANY.
TAX-PAYRRS WRONGS.
TAA-PAfERS WRONUS.
SECOND ASSESSMENTS FOR PAyEnENTs - Pro-
POSED APPEAL TO THE LBGIsLArURH-As
ExrORTIONATE CONTRACTOR.

|
POSED APPEAL TO THE LEGrsLArURE-As
RxrORTI0NATE CONTRACTOR.
Tax-2ay of this city are greatly interested
IN tbe matter OF street payements complete history
whereof was published In last Saturdays TRIBUNE. In
many streets where patent wooden and concrete
ments have been aid for which property owners wers
assessed large amounts new payements nave been laid
and propertyowners have been taxed the second time
therefor This Ia contrary 10 Legislative act OF 1870.
which provides that assessments for paYehenS SHAH
not be made more than once the property owners.
but has arisen from the inability Of the latter TO
satisfy the proper authorities OF their exemption IRON
the second assessment The law IL stated to DE iauy
inasmuch 1t does not state that the COntIone VINO
makes payment TO the contractors shall be authorized 70
make examination and ascertain who the persons afo
who have already been assessed for payements and are
consequently exempt from second ASSORTMENT. Tho
along the line OF the street sssessed
for the new payhgs and their only remedy Is TO employ
counsel aud bring suit In the Supreme Couft 0f To
recovery OF the second payment TAs IN
wolves an expense OF aDolt % per cou' oi
the amounts involved. aud works injury to
the complainant, who has no other redress-
In the light OF Mr. Van Norts report showing the gen
ea worthessness Of these patent pavements and ths
need repairing the streets whore such paremens arc
DOw laid, Taxpayers earnestly considering the SUD
ject OF assessment and tho pToDrety OF importuhlnH
the members OF the LEGISLATURE TO framo Dill gwng
question of previous payment An act Of May T. lSI1
was passed appointing three Commissioners, consisting
of Judge Sutherland, James EuOtt, ana hooper Y.
Van Worst inquire into any irreguaFlty thAS misHs
exist In existing contracts for paYemens ana take bucn
action in the the public interests might ro-
qure The OF this Commission extended 20 days.
and the titles and general character OF all existing
contracts were examined and reported upon by the
Commission; but the law did not give them the power
10 examine as to any frauds that might exist In tho lay
ing down Of the payomens or the general execution OF
the work. aud as a consequences many fraudulent trans
actions overlooked, foremost OF Which Hdo lAs
paving OF Scventh-aVe WIN WOouen PAgci%1.I,, % a.. ~
charge 10000 allowed for eNcaVauon' When inc
cost of tno work is stated " Numerous qu4he"
Taxpayers state that after the assessment for the
paving tagging and curbng OF any street 5 oeen pad
all further repairs should be done az tne peso
Of the city, the streets have become highways or th9
use OF the city large and under its fu cOntrs
and from general OF which, by the granting ot
licenses and in other ways, revenue Is derived oy tne
city It Is also urged that uniformity OF methOd Ia
pavements should prevail throughout the city. ana that
The granting of permissons TO experiment with patent
paVemenJs should cease.
Among The favored few, who received large amount
Of patronage from Mr. Tweed when the latter controlled
the Department Of Public Works. was Charles Gudet,
whose pavement differs only IRON the Belgian OF Trap
block pavement in being composed OF smaller blocks Ot
stone and being rectangular instead OF square. But as
he had patent for it, he placed his own price
the pavement which was " square yard as aedlhst
laid IN the city Sc square yard was the inYaIaDe
price Among the last OF as contracts maze WIN ir'
Tweed was one for paving and repairing Mestss. Oe-
tween railroad tracks and additional Tour Ieet on
either side or nCm Guidet agreed 10 do the whole
work at a charge Of s. square yard and the contract
was given TO him Fall of 1874. MIR. Guldet somo
time ago rendered his bill to the city, and 1t gwen
te Mr. Hatfield, Examiner for the Board OF Audii. FOR
examination GuIdeps bill calls for the paving ana
reyaving OF West-st., for 1882 yards. whereas
Mr. Hatded's surveys made by throe per
sons make it only o,O79 yards. An exam.
nation of the work showed that three-hfths of
IT, consisting Of payements laid between the double
tracks aud either side OF then was simply
reaying Of the old pavement and that the space DO
tween gle tracks the only place where new
pavement was laid An examination Of the oids Wnlch
were made laying payemeuts OF similar char.
ac at the time Gudet received the contract sho .en
that highest bid 81 30 square yard and that
price reaying old pavement was ABOUT 10 cents
square yard The following statement was rendered 10
the Board OF Audit Monday by MI Hatfield As u the
value the 3.O40 $500 yards new pavement at
S. S9I2l 65 5Oj 7SOO yards reaid pavement at soc,
S26Io %. Total, sllsiO So Mr. Gudet claims for 9Je3
square yards at - IS yard. S532 or nearly three
times as much would have been PAID 10 the bgness
bidder for similar work at the tine the Contract was
made at ruling rates nearly S2i,OOO more imam tho
work could be done for at the present time.
Mr. Hatfield will make a further examination into The
matter at request Of the Board Ot Audit and report
the next Monday although he has no reason TO
believe that he will discover any cause why he should
alter the repOrg already made.