New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-08-10
THE COMPLAINT.

j. Il. WESTBk0OK. Judge OF supreme court.
THE COMPLAINT.
SUMMARY OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE ProrLE
AGAINST HENRY ID. DENIsON, JAMES J. BrLDEN,
A. CALDWELL BELDEN, AND THOMAS GALE, FOR
ILLEGALLY COLLECTING MONEY FROM THE
STATE UNDER A CANAL CoNTRACT-THE FRAUDS
sPErFIED-NEARLY $500, 900 CLAIMED By THE
STATE.
The complaint filed in the Supreme Court by
the People of the State. through Attorney
General Pratt against Henry d. Denison, James
j. Bcden, A. Caldwell Belden and Thomas Gale,
sets forth the facts contained in the re-
port of the Governors COmmisson which was published
in THE TLIBUNE of Aug. 4. and declares that all the de
PENDANTS interested in the contract entered into by
Henry D. Denison Sept O. 1869, for strengthening the
Erie Canal from Port Schuyler TO the Lower NO
hawk Aqueduct. Before the writing and signing
OF the contract, the plaintiffs say. the Di-
vision Engineer had estimated the cost OF tie work at
$s4G45, although survey, maps, plans, specifications,
and estimates such required by law, had been ap
proved by the Canal Commissioners, submitted
to the Canal Board or Canal Commissioners. BY
the terms OF the contract, which is made
part Of the complaint 1t was agreed that Den
ison should perform the work, and that the
Canal Commissioner in charge should pay cut OF the
moneys appropriated therefor in full compensation for
the at the rates specified in the contract provided
the total should not exceed In the aggregate the
amount estimated by Division Engineer including
expenses Of engineering The amount which Denison
was receive under the contract at the rates and for
the quantities stated in the contract, and estimated
by the Engineer, was S74,1s3 40. After stating the
manner Of altering the plans of work contracted
for, the complaint declares "that no consent and
approval Of any alteration in the plan Of this work
was, In fact, made by the Commissioner and
Division Engineer, nor was any description OF any
alteration ard the approval thereof reduced 70
writing and signed by the parties making the same,
and copy thereof filed in the Office Of the State Engineer
and Surveyor any written statement, setting
forth the objects TO attained by any change OF plan OF
this work. and the expense thereof submitted to the
Canal Board and their assent thereto obtained at
meeting thereof any new work or work on change OF
plan nor maps plans and estimates thereof submitted to
or approved by the Canal Board"
AMOUNTS PAID FOR WORK NOT DONE.
It is further declared that the defendants through
Denison, have obtained s417,5T from the State "by
means Of frauds devoes false pretenses and vouchers
and corrupt combinations and collisions with State
officers" aud the following gven ae Que Of the fraudu-
lent practices:
The defendants. through the sn' Deni.sn entered upon
the work mentioned in sad contract and AT divers times
between the 23d day Of November 500 and the LIST day
of June 1879 while the said Denis9n was so pretending
TO be at work said contract falsely pretended and
procured false certificates from resident and assistant
engineers on the eastern division OF the canals that they
amount, and for which they were entitled to the Sums
hereinafter mentioned,
1s,: 8 sSIS 90
$500 cubic yards excavation Of earth esti nm 40
CUBIC yard: s SO ss$s =
1851 cubic yards vertical wall dry and In &C. ..
se7l OF cubic yas vertical wall in cement S. 9sis ii
66269 feet board measure, docking pine SO. 1925 3s
Amounting in the aggregate to.......s15O 337 OF
And the plaintiffs upon information and belief that
in fact part of said work had been performed or
erals furnished but that the claim therefor wholly
fraudulent and fictitious; and that the defendants well
knowing that said materials had not been furnished
said labor performed by false representations and the
false and fraudulent certificates aud vouchers Of the said
engineers obtained and received the said last named
from the Treasury OF this State, lees 10 per cent thereof
retained
THE AMOUNTS COLLECTED ~ EXCESS OF THK con-
TRACT PRICE.
Other responsible bidders it is declared offered to do
the same work at lower price The amount Of dry
teal wall to be built under the contract 1900 cubic
yards but the defendants pretended, during the time
mentioned, the plaintiffs continue "tO have built,
under color Of said contract, In the progress
of the work, large amount OF dry vertical
wall in excess of the estimated and in of
the only plan under which said ract was pretended
and be made, and without any legal authority
building of said wall, and without any authority of law
whatever" The amount OF dr.. vertical wall pretended
excess Of the amount which could have been
legally built Under under ne contract s,,a Ihs En-
without right and under the false pretense that e said
Yccss Of dry vertical wall built under their contract
Re s or Assistant Engineers. d at yaricu.
times between the 2$d day q NSyemser, 1869, and
1sm te T E 81 Of @ money!. owned By and
belonging to the State the sum OF <l16O76 less ID per
cent thereof retained, and have converted the same 10
their own use that the said work fer which said moneys
were received authorized and the state
became liable tOpay therefor, and the claim made there
for by the defendants was fraudulent and illegal"
The defendants also charged with having Illegally
built 2lO693 cubic yards OF vertical wall, laid IN &C.
ment, Tor which there was No provision IN
nS Of ssS2o 7S les. 1, ptr cent rsaned
from the ses under the false that the &
were entitled TO receive for rock excavation In
excess of 800 cubic yards the COMPLAINT charges them
with having aimed from the State Treasury tne OF
$lO5O42 less per cent without ght and under Che pre-
tense that they mad exeavated 54,os1 cubic yards Of
Maid Denson for the said rock xcavatiou the plaintiffs
say much higher than the actual value Of such work,
and higher than the amount bid by any Vi the other bid
Gers.
THE PAYMENT OF CLAIMS FOR WORK NOT CALLED
The complaint then declares that s21 04e 49, less Is
per cent was rrauipsntly obtained for ei,lo5 cubic
wards more than the 10000 cubic yards OF earth
excavation provided for III The contract that nos
withstandlng only LOO cubic yards of emsapkncnt
were called for the defendants received and obtained
from treasury OF tho state at the contract price Tor
the construction OF 1890 cubic yards OF eapalEen,,
amount payable by said contract FOR embankment aggre
gated only $780," that, although In the contract
and the estimates 10 which II was confined, no
pine docking timber was called for or required In the
work could properly be furnished nevertheless the
defendants under s9e pe snse ol ns ceyeS
obtained from the Treasury Of the State. without Eight
tue sum OF Ss,29l'7l, less 10 per cent re-
called for "e dofcndaIts under the preensc OF having
furnished by said contract S2779 feet board measure,
received and obtained from the treasury Of the state,
.Iattf ri fla