New-York tribune., 1875-10-12
OFFJcJu AccOTNTABILITY.


port of the Canal Investigating Commission,
which we published yesterday are those re-
lating To the conduct of officers charged with
protecting the interests OF the State. No tresh
revelations of the rapacity of the DenisOns and
Bcldens Will now occasion much remark, their
methods of doing business being 80 well known
that whenever we hear of their holding con-
tract we take it for granted that there has
been wholesale swindle in it of some kind.
Hence when the Commission reports that
Henry ID. Denison, having contracted to do
half mile of improvement on the Champlain
Canal for 5000. cheated the state
by unbalanced bids and false measure
mcnts and unfaithful work. and managed at
last to get S146,3l6 for the job, we only say,
''-Of course; that is about what one might
:" have expected of Denison." But the Com
mission goes behind this notorious contractor,
and drags forward the corrupt, careless, and
incompetcnt officials 10y whose cOnnlvance or
neglect ne was enabled to carry out his fraud
ulcnt plans. 1t is an unpleasant exhibition,
for there are several very respectable gentle
men put on view; but it will probably do
good.
The wrong began with the letting of the
contract i'm 1871. The law requires that be-
fop+ any contract is made the State Engineer
shall cause surveys, maps, plans, and estimates
of the work to be prepared and submit them
to the Canal Board for approval. This was
not done. The State Engineer Mt that time
was Mr.. Van Rensselaer, Richmond The Canal
Board included, besides this officer, Lieut.
GOV. Beach. Secretary of State Nelson, Con-
troller Nichols. Treasurer Bristol. Attorney
General Champlain, and Canal Commits
sioners Chapman, Wright, and Fay-al
of whom must he held in Il certain measure
responsible for the fraud. 1t is true that
tracing from the general map of the canal WAS
exhibited. but this was not such plan as the
law contemplated. 1T is true also that COM
putations of quantities were prepared by
Division Engineer +. H. Crocker from certain
data supplied by Assistant Engineer ;. +. Bab-
cock; but these did not meet the requirement
of the law for detailed surveys and estimates,
and they were so grossly and ludicrously
erroneous that no one can suppose them to
have been made in good faith If il is any
satisfaction To the Canal Board to plead that they
were hoodwinked by these false and evasiye
papers, they are of course entitled to put for
ward that excuse. Dcnison now proceeded to
swindle the state at every step. lie put in
I
work of the most wretched quality, far below
the speciications of the contract, building
walls so weak that they fell into the canal as
soon as the water was let in. He charged over
SS5, 900 for work which was never done at
| all He did great quantities of work in excess
of the estimates where the price was high, and
none at all where the price was low. And all
/ his bills seem to have been paid with
ktfsn
/ of the State doing while all this
cheating went onl The Assistant Engineer Ill
charge of the work was helping the contractor.
/ The Division Engineer was helping him too.
! The State Engineer and Surveyor was doing
nothing. He says be believed the contract to
lie conceived in fraud, but he let it go. He
! approved the final accounts, and he failed to
report the fraud to the Canal Board, IA the
law strictly required him to do. More than
that it was he who presented to the Board the
resolution by which Dcn>on WAS authorized to
substitute vertical walls. at cost of $4,000,
for slope walls which would have cost 81, 900.
notwithstanding that the law expressly prOhib-
/ tied such change except where the necessities
of business demanded it-and this was in an open
/ farming country. far removed from the marts
of business. The Canal Board. who passed
the resolution, wcro quite as much to blame
a. the State Engineer who offered it, The
Engineer and the Canal Commissioners were
all to blame for permitting these frauds to
run on two years unchecked. The State En-
ginrcr during the progress of the work was
! William Il. Taylor. and the Canal Board COM
prised Cbesides this officer Lieut.. .-Govs. Beach
and Robinson, Secretary of state Scribner,
Controller Hopkins, Treasurer RaincS, Attor-
ney-Gcnera Barlow. and Commissioners Bark
| ley, Wright, Stroud. and Fay. of course among
these gentlemen there are perhaps one or two
who can give a sufficient account of their
/ stewardship but the Commission declare with
! emphasis that every State official in any way
/ "connccted with the work was culpabiy in
different to his duty or faithleSs to his trust D"
1t is impossible To suspect all these officers
of corrupt motives, but it is easy to see that
they must have been gravely in fault. If
| there had been such frank and fearless censOrs
of public men i'll former years a. Coy. Tilden's
! Canal Investigating Commission, we should
have very different state of things to-day.
Our State functionaIics would comprehend that
when they accept the honors and emoluments
of Office they incur moral obligation To dis
/ charge its duties. and if the State is plundered
under their very noses they are diSgraced.
THE MISSISSIPPI OUTBRE4H.
We presume il is not necessary al this stage