The New York herald., 1875-11-28
Referee Parsons FaVOrS the Prosecution
Of Its Members.
ATTORNEY GENERAL PRATT ORDERS SUITS,
The Accused Officials Wei
come Litigation.
FOWLER WANTS AN IMMEDIATE TRIAL.


matter OF the complaints lodged with the Attorney
General or the State by certain citizens OF Brooklyn
known the Taxpayers Association, against promi-
officials and Of that city caused great
excitement in political circles The coaclusions as
will be from the subjolned documents were that
there ground for action against contractors William
C. Kingsley, Abner G. Keeney Water Commissioner
William A. Fowler, Engineer-in- Chief of the works
julius W. Adams and ex- Water Commissioners Al CHI
bald NJ. Bliss and Z. J. Lowber
ATTORNEY GENERAL PRATT
wrote to Mr. Parsons November 8, as folows:--
SYRACUSE, Nov. g. 1875.
JoHs 4. PARSONS, ESQ, NEW YORK CITY
| DEAR sIR-Having had presented to me by the Tax
! payers Association Of Brooklyn complaints and evi-
i dence asserting fraud and msdemeanors In the
agemen OF public affairs in that city, herewith refer
the same to you You will please examine the matters
thercwth presented and report to II there be good
Counsel William G. Dewitt is the proper person to take
charge of the suits against the persons named therein
In case You recommend that suits shall be commenced
Respectfully, M ta.a DANIEL PRATT.
MR. PARSONS REPLY
| LAW OFFICE or MAN 4 PARSONS
! No % WALL sTREE AMP NO 90 Pisf STREET,
/ NEw York, Nov. 20, 1875
Hon DANIEL PRATT, Attorney Genera- II
DEAR SR-I did not think II necessary TO answer
your favor of November inst until should have con-
sidered such as should be presented to me and
should be ready to report There have been placed in
my hands papers, which have examined and repre-
sentations by respectable parties have been made To me
upon which, assuming that the statements made can be
proved am Of the opinion that in actions brought for
the purpose thore should be recovered considerable
sums OF money improperly obtained from the city OF
Brooklyn. a.l llsa#T
1t has boon my view that the question referred to
me Is In elect the same as would be the request of
private client TO know II In my Judgment he could
maintain a suit upon case presented me- | should
assume that the statements OF fact made by him could
be proved should examine the points of law in
voved, and IT. assuming the truth OF the facts were
Of the opinion that the claim could be sustained /
should advise its prosecution. So here am not able
TO say that there may not be defence explanation
but taking the case as presented have no hesitation
In giving II as my judgment ''that there are claims
against certain Brooklyn parties; that there
sonablo prospect OF recovering from them amounts
action 10 be commenced
came TO this conclusion with greater confidence in
view Of the necessary
DIFFICULTY IN OBTAINING EVIDENCE
which, from the nature of the transaction must be in
hostile control Doubtless 1t will happen that when
prosecution shall be instituted testimony strengthen
the be obtained which without the process OF
the law, II viii be impossible TO reach
have not thought It within my employment to hear
representations explanatory or otherwise, from par
ties implicated IL has seemed TO that was Your
intention that should only consider the pro.
sented by the prosecutors esubject respect
TO which ! have no personal knowledge Were
representations made TO by way OF defence
could not examine into their truth There are
by which l can compel statements on
the subject from those possessed of Information An
investigation OF this character therefore, would be
greatly 70 the disadvantage OF the side compelled TO
rely upon unwilling testimony. have, therefore con.
parties implicated and merely TO report to You my
judgment based upon facts communicated by reputable
and responsible parties who Interested the pros
ecution Of the claims.
The parties concerned claimed 70 be associated in
various relations and to constitute combination some
of the members of which have been tho
INDIVIDUAL CLIENTS AND PERSONAL FRIENDS WILLIAM
c. DE WITT,
Corporation Counsel Ii Is my opinion without anv
imputation upon Mr. De Wits fidelity public inter-
ests willingness TO proceed against persons who have
been hts friends and clients that his relation TO
them must necessarily hamper and impede his action
/ have assumed that 10 would be with him. as under
similar circumstances il would be with myself thai bs
preference should be 70 have any such prosecution
In other hands, and for this answer your sec
ond inquiry-"ls ihere any good why the
claims should not be prosecuted by the Corporation
Counsel In the name of the city Y"-in the Affirmative
The particulars OF three claims have been furnished
20 me- Those the prosecution of which am willing to
advise at the present time the following
L-rHs HEMPsTRAD STORAGE RESERVOIR CASE.
: Contractors William kingsley and Abner C.
Commissioners by whom the contract was awarded)
William A. Fowler, Archibald Bliss and Z. J. Low
ber Charge-That by favoritism and collision of the
commissioners, with the assistance OF the Engneerin
Chief the proposals were arranged and contract
so framed and awarded S456 l25 was obtained by
work should have been and could have been done
2-rHIRD AVENUE sEwER CASE.
Contractor Abner G. Keeney; same water com mission
Charge-That through the colusve action or the
water commissioners an original contractor, Jo-
seph II. Van Wnkle, driven from the work and the
matter so arranged that the new contractor en-
abled 10 obtain $2070 900 more than the work could
have been done for under the original
feel very highly complimented by the expression Of
your preference for myself to conduct such prosecu
tions as may be instituted II counsel shall be employed
Public business, in my experience of it. Is anything
but remunerave recognize the duty OF aiding every
effort for public reform but feel f had discharged
my fair share Of public duty professional character
during the last three four years and II my
choice 1t IS TO avoid becoming involved in an en-
gagement which is likely to require such constant
labor will be requisite for the successful prosecution
OF these CLAIMS without expressing any positive de-
termination upon the subject at tho present time |
wish 10 relieve you from any consideration of
to say that will be my wish that other counsel
should be retained There this further reason for nv
choice, that am unwilling that II should be thought
that judgment has been in any degree influenced by
any expectation Of having the prosecution or these
claims placed in my charge Very respectfully your
obedient servant JOHN r. PARSONS.
on receipt of the above the Attorney General wrote
the following note TO his in Office, the
ATTORNEY GENERAL ELECT.
SYRACUSE, Nov "a 1875.
Hon. G. S FAIRcMLD;--
submitted some time ago the Brooklyn matter to
Parsons, OF New York, to examine and II action
should be brought against Brooklyn officials and he
has made the annexed report l have therefore, ex-
ecuted an authority TO him 10 60 ahead with the pros
ecution. have, however thought best If the Cover
nor Is In Albany to consult him before sending the
authority to Parsons WIN you please to present 10
the Governor the report and what have done and n
he approves II hand the authority and letter
panying II to the gentlemen VINO viii take II to Par
sonsl II the Governor Is not IN town you need not
walt for him, and will assume that he will not dis
approve. d. PRATT
The desired approval having been obtained from the
Governor, Attorney General Pratt then authorized Mr.
Parsons proceed prosecute 'in the name OF the
Attorney General Of the State" in the letter ap.
pended
STATR NEw YORK
ATTORNEY GRSERAE's OFFICE
ALBANY Nov "a 1875
| hereby authorize and appoint John T. Parsons
ESQ., the city OF New York 10 institute and prose.
cute in the name OF the Attorney General Of State
such actions for tho recovery OF any public moneys and
property which have without right been obtained and
received from the city Of Brooklyn he may deem ex
pedient under chapter 40 Of the Session Laws Of 1875
with full power and authority do name all acts
necessary in the premises.
DANIEL PRATT Attorney General
WHAT Mr. KINGSLEY SAYS
Mr.. William Q. Kingsley in conversation with
reporter of the HERALD at his Office in Montague
street yesterday afternoon said that he knew nothing
about these suits than he had seer in the papcrss