The New York herald., 1875-12-22

and reasonable prices as 10 enable them wrongfuly
| improperly and fraudulently TO obtain large sums
OF money from the city OF Brooklyn, without Vaiue
\ received therefor - .
IL That after the said OF February is, 1871 the
defendants, Fowler Lowber and Bliss, comprising the
said permanent Board of Water and Sewerage Com
missoners, caused specifications Tor the work upon
the said reservoir be prepared but that IN Wilfu
disregard and violation OF their aforesaid duty and
of the provisions OF the cnafter OF the clty OF
1 BROOKLYN, and OF the general practice and Of
the policy Of the law in similar cases, they abstaned
from publishing for proposals for such work. and from
giving general invitation for bids therefor That they
did for the fraudulent purpose OF preventing public
competition and OF enabling the defendants William Q.
Kingsley and Abner G. Keeney TO obtain the said
tract at extravagan prices that in further pursuance
of such purpose proposals for the said work by
the said defendants composing the said Board OF Water
and Sewerage Commissioners invited only from certain
persons especially selected for the purpose with the
intention that they should furnish proposals at prices
which should be somewhat larger than the prices
at which the said defendants William c. Kingsley aud
Abner q. Keeney, proposed to do the said work.
TO give appearance OF business TO the prices which
should DO proposed by them that the said defendants
William Kingsley and Abner @. Kecney proposed 70
the defendants comprising the said Permanent Board
said work at prices which in tho aggregate for the
specified quantities, so far included in the contract
amounted 70 the sum OF over one million three hun
dred and seventy seven thousand four hundred dollars
ISL 400 and that the said other persons furnished
proposals 10 the said defendants comprising the said
Board TO do the said work at prices which, In the ag
gregate somewhat exceeded the aggregate price pro-
| posed by the defendants, Kingsley and Keeney.
| IL That this done under and In pursuance OF
arrangement to which all the defendants were par
ties That Notwithstanding the efforts OF tho defend
ants thai none OF the said proposals should be At
prices less than those contained in the proposal of the
defendants Kingsley and Keeney, proposal TO do the
said work was by the said defendants Fowler, Lowber
and Bliss received nom one party az prices which
amounted In the aggregate 20 the Of the specified
quantities $50 far included In the contrac ST. 377 400
and that thercupon the said defendants Fowler Low
! Der and Bliss permitted the be known by the
defendants Kingsley Keeney, and consented that the
prices OF their proposal should be diminished 50 as In
thus making the price offered by them the lowest OF
the prices offered by the several persons from whom
! bids received That the aggregate price to
/ which the said bid OF the defendants Kingsley and
Keeney was thus reduced, exceeded by the sum of
$3.50 600 and upward the fair reasonable value OF
the work. well known to the defendants; and, ap-
prehedsive that the extravaganza of the price would
call public attention the proceeding and might re-
suit defeating the schemes OF the defendants they
subsequently arranged that the aggregate price for the
work at the specified quantities should be reduced to
the sum OF 81 LISA lS upon changing the specca-
tions is shown in the paragraph next following,
at which sum the said contract was given to the de-
! PENDANTS Kingsley and Keeney, as aforesaid.
Ia That the site of the said reservoir consisted in
part OF previously existing ponds deposits OF water
he s, be re
duced and that after the said proposals OF the SAID
ora persons had been received the defendants Fowler
Lowber and Bliss, arranged 70 draw of such water and
thus correspondingy 10 reduce the cost TO the
who should construct the said Of the
tion thereof they having wlfuly failed previously
TO do to create apparent occasion large
aggregate price for the said work that they communi
Gated such an arrangement to the defendants Kings
ley and Keeney, and that II thcreupon that the
aggregate price bid by them reduced aforesaid
but that the defendants, Fowler, Lowber and Bliss,
wilfuy and Intentionally omitted to communicate such
arrangement TO the other persons from whom pro-
posals received with the purpose that there
should not be extended to those of them, If any,
whose bids were honestly offered, the opportunity OF
reducing their bids correspondngly with such reduc
| tion of expense
a. That before the execution the said contract one
| William Beard, responsible person, was willing and
desrous TO construct the said reservoir price in the
aggregate for the said specified quantities. far
cluded the said contract OF hundred and thirty
one thousand six hundred dollars the defendants
Fowler, Lowber and Bliss were informed, and then and
there well knew and that efforts made both by the
said William Beard and by other persons taxpayers Of
the city OF Brooklyn interested in the economical
construction OF the said reservoir procure oppor
tunty 70 HIM to make the said defendants, Fowler,
Lowber and Bliss, offer to construct the said reservoir
for such price, and they repeatedly requested OF said
Commissioners TO see the plans and specifications for
such work soon prepared but that they purposey
and wlfully denied and refused such opportunity not
wthsandng the promises 90 give the said contract TO
the defendants Kingsley Keeney, and that they pur-
posely and wlfuy conducted all their said proceed
ngs in secret and hidden and as to prevent
knowledge thereof by the taxpayers and inhabitants
OF the city OF Brooklyn whose interests we're concerned
with the intention thus TO prevent Interference with
their SAID scheme.
Is That further to aid their said scheme and to en-
able the defendants William G. Kingsley and Abner @.
Keeney 70 wrongully obtain money Of the city OF
Brooklyn the defendants composing the said Board,
subsequent receiving said oner pretended offer
greatly enlarged the OF the said reservoir thereby
enabling the defendants, William Kingsley and Alb
ner Keeney to obtain their said contract
price upon greatly increased quantities. though, all
the defendants then and there well knew and intended,
It thereby made impossible work should be done
within the said limit fixed by the said act Of February
Is 1S71 and although IL necessarily resulted that the
said reservoir could not be built with that part Of the
said limit of ST. 400 600 applicable thereto and that it
must remain unfinished and Of no use to the city of
Brooklyn
done In concert between the defendants Fowler Low
Der and Bliss, and the defendants, Kingsley and
Keeney with the corrupt and fraudulent purpose OF
enabling the defendants, Kingsley and Keeney wrong
1
city ofBrookyn, and with the expectation the part
of the defendants Fowler Lowber and Bliss of bene-
fits and advantages to themselves, but whether such
expected benefits we're pecuniary whether they
political otherwise the plaintiffs have not yet been
IT. That the defendants, Fowler, Lowbcr and Bliss,
desrous OF public and political position influence
and control and that TO the obtaining and enjoyment
thereof there requisite they believe the expen-
diture OF considerable sums OF money and that in adj
dition 20 such other benefits and advantages as
expected by the defendants, Fowler Lowber and Bliss,
from the defendants, Kingsley and Keeney there
the expectation on their part that from the moneys
which should be obtained by the defendants, Kingsley
and Keeney they would furnish considerable sums In
aid OF tho public and political purposes Of the defen-
dants Fowler, Lowber and Bliss
That II the defendants, Fowler Lowbcr and Bliss had
honestly and faithfully discharged their duty in tho
premises Il would not have been possible for the de-
PENDANTS, Kingsley and Keeney to obtain the said sum
Of 1885, 125 and upward, and that they iraudulenty
and wfully, and by corrupt coluson and confedera-
ton with the defendants, Kingsley and Keeney,
ranged that those defendants enabled TO OBJ
tain the same, and that as the plaintiffs are advised
and believe, hot only tho defendants Kingsley and
Kceney, but well tho defendants, Fowler Lowber
and Bliss, thereby became liable TO return the said
Wherefore the plaintiffs demand judgment against
the defendants for the moneys obtained from the
city Of Brooklyn in the sum Of four hundred aud
6fty-six thousand, hundred and twenty five dol-
lars with interest thereon from the commencement Of
this action with costs
DANIEL PRATT, Attorney General.
City and County of Nep York. ss-John E. Par
being duly sworn deposes and says-I have been
especially retained by the Attorney General prose-
the above entitled action, and for the purposes
thereof act for and the representative or the At
torney General; have read the foregoing complaint
and know the contents thereof the is true to my
knowledge except 70 the matters therein stated
information and belief and to those matters be-
lieve IL TO be JOHN Z. PARSONS
Sworn TO before me this goth day OF December in
the year ls76-JoHS J. JoUTH, Notary Public, Kings
county.
SUED CONTRACTORS SUE THE CITY.
Yesterday the for the reservoir Mcssrs