New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-12-01
TIE CANAL FRI UDS.

DEPRECIATION or PROPERTY WRONGLY
CHARGED ON THE STATE.
ALBANY, Nov. 30.--The Legislative JOINT
COMMITTEES to investigate the canal frauds met again TO-
day Cornelius Glen, chief clerk OF the Appraisers
Office was recalled and examined as 10 the claims Tor
damages caused by the construction OF the Oriskany
feeder He read the record of the claims and amounts
awarded II appeared in al that there was
large reduction from the original claim but interest was
invariably allowed.
sguuel b. Ualleck was examined to the damage
done to the Dexter Mill by taking water away from Tor
the Erie Canal at Orishany. lie said:
The stream Ia not u very large one ana when II ID
low The feeder Affects the stream was one oI the
claimants being part owner of gri5t-ml on the stream;
tho business damaged by diversion OF tie wafer 10
tine canal the mil half mile nom the Ieed-iam
has four run ~ stone; ~ larger tah me oi1Iaty
country mil we have baen aoe 70 opiae tae NM me-
tie feeder constructed. but not al the mc Though
good share oi the time tiis season We haNf run ioSt %
the tiue do not tiink We nave ol over SIN Ncth9 III
wear any year since the dam constructed; We con
sld'rcd the mil "3fth about fl2,JOO MIN al 'o
property there mas dtcfeaS III van "%iS % a., tiiT t"
strioioo oi This dam: should think thls mill depic-
cia;eds 200; do not think now worm over 99oO
have offered 10 sell IT 0l T5OoO we We a"dil nm I'M
ages amounting 10 SlOO0O for diversion OF wafer VIVA
interest, mal,us SiO6tG bd. and $1,000 more for stop,
uac nf business ana interest on thd making total Of
sIs.7 We did not gyt al this; sold out TIE claim 10
various prIs0n~ became The owner oi IL aud SOFA IL od'
- men VINO had mortgages on tle mill.
NJ. su.i,h-Iour estimate IS see 800, and ye{
you pat N claim for oniy ?ls,O'o' 40" was 'h''
Whuc,s-i suppose IL was T23OJO
Mr. ~mith-iiut how wa, that The estimate amounts
ia 500 200 Wiiuc7s-I cannot cXplun mat; We always
considered that from loss wafer NE f.ceNcd uah~Ees
Of $l0GJ0i estimate i1f Mho9 .H 4 o. ane pToPlH
- .u,iti"BHi Won see Won got it Ip to $4,000 what
we want 10 know il. how that Wa, done N!tnc,s-Ihat
must nave been the wora oil the attorney never knew
r. smt-It i. here stated in The record Of The hear
ing the fair value ui this property Is $1,000; No~ II
not that $1,000 TOO muchi Nin,S'-"eu' the value
R,r' smiti-fhcn how did this come to be s25.7oo'
W,nc.,-That uot correct; did not intend to rut the
sufr nl,0ye $4,000.
Sir. smith, ain You have put in $500 for month
or ix week.. detention. i, tia, not pretty large stun
Mr. Coe-But cant Jon say whether it is too much or
~ Mr snth-rhat would be at The rate OF $4,000
year. MImc-s-Ncil, % Is TOO much' ,,.. ,,...
sir tolr-Nrll, how much Too mach NtnesS-I dOnt
think - U'J would Dc too MUCH
Mr. smith looked over the testimony anil found that no
witness had been called ior the state they were all FOR
lhc claimants.
AZ. 5,,1e-What amount Of -four did Won make daily
W.fuc.-Tho regular amount We "ouA bay wheat ana
uI. .o iour of 30. and then buy more ",ici. ,vi.
~. Cnr-Mhat ~odid u average per H'3 "l'he@'
Mr so.t,,iatl Did You not have chars'; ana can't
Won u whether II wa, ten barrels per daJ Wines
,It3 charge. nui c,unot tcii an, ma.
Mr. c,."iiaw ia You get at ne estimates Of your
loss tLou Wldl.,,-l haze no recollection o. Ip" Nc
made up estimates, upon wucn va D'se" oHi Jam
az. Smith, VA. fine y.xtrr Min worth twice rs much
.s vour. previous 90 tAa diversion of tle "atri Wiz
H. I,at.-Was il worth s36OoOl wness-T don't
consider v- u DC Oh such property ANA can form
ST. -uui-uoW much were they do ainedt witness
,ii SMITH sec tAcy were allowed $50 $40 for the d-
r,,u f,il f1Ir -iN weeks Wines thinh That l.
90 1.th, D'l 81, ~ i Wi,. also have an allow
anc. OF - sg7 alleged delay ior month OF So WIT
Mr. siuiI Wcil. lor nat line then, that pretty
-' Sr ish|i md waller b Pierce put in a claim TOR
( t,t1iiig Nd hi, tobacco business.
H. H. tiam,-I. irai Waiter g. Pierce the tax-payerl
! NI.Gcss-lcs sir; Az IS mo man.
Mr smith read Tie testimony in this case, going 10
show hat the claimant obliged 10 remove lis factory,
gcAiurry goods printed labels being destroy cd &c and
vus thereby damaged to the amount OF @i,747 Then
an amended claim was put in, making it aggregate
$50 The appraiser allowed him 1888 30. lie was
/ obstructcd about the same As the others.
4 recess vas here taken until $3.50 p. IN.
! The Committee reassenblod at p. III. A. j. Williams
was called and sworn, and examined AS to the Dexter
/ Mnl IIo said:
when the dam was built the mill had passed through
the hands of several tenants each OF whom was obliged
o give il up. he could make nothing III II; II WAS not
IN use When he dam was bu. all such property in that
locality hld Tor years been declining IN value exam
med the property with view 10 see what danage was
G1ne: Was called AS witness FOR the State in the
ana was asked what 1t would cost 10 put the property m
wafer: said IL could be- done for $4,000; before the
dam was built, do not think the property was worth
| $4,000.
Henry r. Buell. called and sworn, was examined As to
the damage 10 the Dexter-Lom factory by the erection
/ Of the dam lie r.nd
II had been abandoned for nearly ten years; lac then
r,nt. 4 the first season after the dam was bl about
SIX week, NJ ere lost; advised 10y John l. seymour
Ia, hiring claim against the state, ana not against the
Landlord eight ten Ncrhr, AMI maze calm
fr 900: we did know at that time Out that
v.rc ruined profits at that time were 5000 or
Nv SMITH want to find out how you got at the
amount OF damage by T7timahs tue u1b!,Ii3n oi tHe
| don't know u was not mine. .....
Mn smith, the estimate for lost time Is $40 per
day. Wa, that right NtBrs5-Ihat - Too hIbh, SO or
so would be enough; don't know whose figures these
| Mr smi,h-IIow many days did you run the engine 8
| Wiiuc,s-Aboui 100 DAYS. 1900 ,
Mr. Sritii-But ! that you charge $500 for that
boW's thatl witness lnughugl-Wcll, that Il pretty
GOOD charge lllugbtrrl; but VIII tell You how 1t
| wa- Mr. smith; were told to make out oar bills for
/ lufI time aud expense.
| Mr. Sinith~And you did ia witncss-we did but it
| was by advice.
The witness was asked 20 other items charged and
his answers wer" similar lie said II NIL by advice
he had never before had claim against the State and
hoped he never would again. he said that he told to
make out the bills by John Seymour, aud did not think
he would advise any man to deiIaud the state.
Nj smh-What do you think that property was
worth Wine.s-I would not want 10 pay over $4,000
| for 10. -,
| Mr smith-D0 you know how II was then that he got
$4,000 damages. and still retained the property Wit
Dess-NO, Sir; do not.
VIM C. Hsllett was examined lie thought the prop
erty, any going to It for manufacturing pur
poses worth $4,000 $4,000; he u partner VI
Buell.. but had no hand In making out the bills.
b. Adjourned until tomorrow.