Wilmington daily commercial. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1866-1877, 1875-02-19
FIRST EDITION.
The Water Department Inquiry.

| postponement.
| MIR. Burke, Chairman OF the special committee
offered the following All a substitute for tho ma
jority report
| Resolced by Council, That the course pursued
by Joseph Hyde. Chief Engineer of the Depart
ment in deducting per cent. of the wages Of
tho employees of tho Water Department was
very imprudent and that Council disapproves oil
his action in tho promises.
| The resolution failing for tho want of a sec
ondcr, Mr.. McIntre moved to substitute the
minority for the majority report and to amend
the same so that it should read
Resotred, That the charges pending be, and
the same are hereby, dismissed.
Mr.. Pickles, who in the meantime had obtain.
cd Mr.. Burke's resolution from the clerks desk
offered it as a substitute for Mr.. McIntires re-
solution as printed above but during the debate
he changed the word !" deducting to reque.t-
be" bee" 10 - ''"'' " MANI II '' '"''' a' p0''i-
The subject now being in proper shape Mr.
Vim. NJ. Canby arose and objected to the printed
testimony OF the employees Of the Department.
saying it was not true and denying that Mr..
Hyde or any one else had deducted the money
from the wages of the employees.
Mr.. Picllels, interrupting Mr. Candy, inquired
i the money was not deducted, how WAS it that
the full amount of the wages of the employees
was not put into their envelopes?
Mr.. Candy. IN reply, said, in effect, that the
money was given by the employees as voluu-
tary contribution, put together in lump sum,
and no arbitrary action was exercised in its col
lection. ResuminG his remarks he again said
the report was not the testimony of the employ
ees, and he had the documents with him to
provo it. He then read from papers which pur-
ported to be the exact questions and answers
made at the examination as recollected by the
employees themselves, each duly signed, and
which he said the deponents were willing to
swear to, showing the Inconsistencies i'll the two
reports, and that the majority report was not
verbatim, as had been claimed by the chair
man of the special committee. [Ihe papers
all affirmed that the contributions were
entirely voluntary on the part of the employees
were made without any fear of discharge, and in
many ways flally contradlcted the printed report
of Tho special committee, who admitted that
notes only were taken at the examination, that
these notes were not read to the witnesses and
signed by them and that the printed report be-
fore Council was prepared from these notes. A
note of self-censure from Mr.. Burton because of
his failure to meet the committee, accompanied
by an explanation as to why lie did not attend,
printed heretofore, was also read,
as was the agreement of the employees Mr..
Candy then bore testimony to the faithfulness
and efficiency with which Mr.. Hyde had dis
charged the duties of his office, and said that he
had all eady saved to tho city in the application
of his judgment more than the amount of his
salary.
Mr., Pickels arose to advocate the passage of
the substitute and not the report of the commit
tee, AZ he believed tho Water Committee was
ignorant of tho whole affair and not deserving
of censure. He read from the report and un-
dertook TO show that MIR. Hyde was guilty of
wrong, and If for nothing else, he should be
censured for requiring one employee to sign for
another The keeping of the five per cent. de-
duction out of the envelopes of the employees,
while they signed for the full amount, he char
acterized as IA similar proceeding as that by
wncl Boss Tweed robbed the city of New York
and Shepherd the city of Washington As for
both Mr.. Hyde and Mr. Burton he knew they
were capable, honest officers and was satisfied
that none of the money went into their pockets.
lie also claimed that MIR. Hyde had no right to
Mr.. Baker 80 long as he discharged his
duties, even if he did keep saloon, and in re-
ply to questions said that he wouldnot discharge
a drunken bColl-kecper If he was faithful aud
capable.
Mr. McTnire. Tnen you are pretty temper.
lnce man.
Mr.. rickes. you wont undertake to compare
vour rccold ~ tha. respect with mine will you ?
,'ifoat h ,,hU.Ll
Another :" NJ e. tliiag" which Mr.. Pickels
said Le saw il the action of Mr.. Hyde was the
.ednction of s per cent from mon who were
getting 80 arI 10 per week for an aid society
which was intended to be supported by men with
much larger incomes. He denounced the affair
As wrong in principle end must be wrong in
results.
Mr.. McIntire. Have you not asked tho en-
ployees Of tho Departments for funds with
Mr.. Pickels. l acknowledge it, but in such |
cases the money was expended to help keep the |
men in Office by the election of their friends.
In conclusion MI, Pickels asked censure that
it might prevent a repetition of such acts i'll the
future.
Mr. Hayes defended the action of Mr.. HYDE
that the like had been done before, if
not precisely i'll this way, by men i'll the
different departments of the city. He
denied that the five per cent deduction
tu1ro tha ~ n
employees, and read tho original agreement,
showing that the act was voluntary and exercs- |
ed as the right of an American freeman. he
read an affidavit from John G. Smith denying |
statements printed as his testimony, and in
which Smith testiiies that he was asked il Mr. |
Hyde understood the Cornish pump and the ma
rhinery at the city mill [This statement Mr. |
Burke denied, but admitted that such question |
had been asked Mr.. MAXWELL Mr.. Hayes de-
MED the tendency to coercion, and claimed that
the effort to modify the report 80 as to
censure Mr.. Hyde only rendered the whole in
veshgation worthless.
Mr.. McIntire also defended Mr.. HYDE speak |
ing from Il business knowledge of the man,
saying that it was no new thing for |
him to raise money in this way, as he had fire. |
quently done so when superior officer i'll the |
T. W. ~ b. car shops, that then all the men did
not contribute and withheld their amounts with
out fear of discharge.
Mr. Lynch called the previous question, which |
was lost by an aye and nay vote of 10 to 5.
The subject was then further discussed by
Mr.. Febiger, who said that the Water Commit |
tee wore deserving of censure because Of the
defence which they had set up for Mr.. Hyde by |
Mr.. W. NJ. Candy, who denounced such pro-
position as monstrous by Mr.. Baker and Others |
until MIR. w. NJ. Candy moved that the further
be postponed until Monday even
ing next, when the employees be afforded an |
to give their own testimony before
Council.
Mr. Baker moved to lay Mr.. Canby's motion
on the table, which was carried.
An aye and nay vote was then taken ON Mr. |
Pickels substitute to Mr.. McIntire's resolution |
with the following result Ayes, Messrs. Baker, |
Burke Downing, Febger, Murray, Pickels, Un-
ierwood, and Alaris-S; Nays, Messrs. Bickta |
W. NJ. Candy, Farrell, Hayes, McIntire, McAIen- |
amin and Taylor--7.
Mr. Farrell had previously denounced the ac-
ton of Mr.. Hyde.
Mr.. Baker then moved to strike out of the ma |
jority report that portion which censures the |
Water Committee, which was adopted by an aye |
and nay vote as follows Ayes, Messrs. Baker, |
Burke Downing, Farrell, Murray, Pickles, I'm |
lerwood and Maris--8 Nays, Messrs. Bickta, W. |
NJ. Candy, Feblger, Hayes, Mcintire, McMena-
min and Taylor.
Mr.. Febigcr first voted yea, but as, he said |
the Water Cammittee seemed anxious to incur |
he would change his vote to nay.
MIR. Candy next introduced the following |
That while Council disapproves the assessment
of employees of the city for any purpose, it sees
no improper intent in the conduct of the |
Chief Engineer of the Water Department, and
AZ.