New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-11-10
TIE ARGUMENT AND THE VO


To day, TO consider the OF the suspended
engineers, Yates and Babcock. The whole Board was
present. Judge Yates and Geo. W. hfr appeared for
the defendants, and the Deputy Attorney General for
the prosecution. Judge Yates, counsel for Engineer
Yates addressed the Board He said that Col Yates had
come into the service of the canals without previous e&
pcTence IN canal management For years before ne was
appontcd there had been lull in the talk about canal
frauds, that there was nothing To arouse lis sus
melons In that direction. In all that he did, ne followed
thu course pursucd by Of the best men In the stse
Uo did indeed take certain things tor granted and fol-
lowed certain lreeedents All men had to 90 ike"sc' ia
whatever position they placed Col Yates had had
DC years experience railroads and in the army, anu
in his career had had TO cultivate suspicious OF
tuoso around him. Judge Yates argued that MS ch'
had not been derect the discharge OF his duly as eng
neer Directly after his appointment he went op tour
IL observation mp the Champlan Canal ana do"h "le
Erie He arrested the work on some vertical WALL Oh the
r,,lnd that there authority for IT, HIS clent
had found system vogue Of allowance for excavation
and embanhmcut and had cont nued II under what might
no called the law OF the canals Col yates dh
not 20 Oh the canal lawyer and To have competed
literal compliance with the terms OF the contract would
have resulted and lasting damage to the state
Mr. Miller began his address to the Board bY remarkln4
that the public mind IL very peculiar state jnst now
There is great cry for REFORM and "a Commission is SIT
ting which the functions OF all The Departments
OF Government. He referred 10 the Governors Cani
Commission socalled. He then referred 10 he personal
examination made by the members II the Canal Board of
IL work on the canal between West Troy and Port
Schuyler and argued that such examination refuted the
statement made by the Canal Commission IN one OF tir
reports the quality Of the work in -sid section OF
the canal Mr. Hillor argued that there IL nothing 10
show that the neincers have not enforced shsabaa
comrlauee with the terms Of the contracts under which
yor was done. Counsel siid that he left the case with
all confidence to the canal Board knowing full wei that
thcy would arrive az q decision unlnhuenced by pop
! MAR clAmor
MI rarcbild said he had Only fcw words TO submit
20 the Beard. had contcnted himself with taking the
testimony of these two engineers, and had charged
simply neglect of duty. The Port schuyler eontract
callrd fora certain amount ~ sl"e ana v,rtrii wall
col Yates VINO according to his counsel had bad no es
snni,iey 10 read the for the Port Schuyler
work Tn,a shows pro-s neglect on his part H,d Col
terms we're not b. ing complied with
Mr. Miller read nom TIE evidence TO prove mat COL
VAC. new the terms of the contract in question
Mr. FaIrchid read from the cNticn'" Ia prove thai Cob
Yates had not reid the contract III 9mr,hon an tn9ng
ZION TO IT, Mr.. farcld argued that " made no differ
p,wcr o compel tie contractors tr live mp 10 the terms
ri their contract Toe p"fei system III vogue on the
canaIs IL utterly destructive ~ tnat provision
Of the Constitution which provides that WORK
ou the canals snail lee let to the lowest bidder.
Mr Fachid cuincdy nat the engineers have not done
ncir duty toward tho state; IL" Mgued that ne wan
which the canal Board nad examined Is not what II
ought 10 he; Only piece " tue VAL opened contains
any good cement, and that II opp"aiie il" Harmony
| uils, Conoes; for the most part yellow dust
| was used to make the ccneDt, and paid Tor
| at SO per yard The wall VIZ, not built accord
| ing To- rontipct, and contract OF no contract, was
moi such Val ~ priyht, individual would build. Tue
blano belonged To- tnesc suspended 'nglnerrs Again,
these engineers IN certified 80 "oh n"he on inc pam
side oj the which in reality d"ue on the otner
side A. Ia Mr. Bancock, u was proved nat NJ lay Tor
Mr. Dosnciner explained his position IN regard To The
Engineers beng III favor OF connnink me SUSPENSION of
Vat. ana Of removing Ra,cock, tie later having been
| l.nger in the states service and nole ciIan,H.
Iur b,ard recess until 800 T. ~. On reassem
| bling MIR. Willets offered resolution removing =. f.
| Bah, ok, Division Engineer
Treasurer Iainrs t'Uk tie n00r and reviewed Inc MS
tory of canal inyesgatlonA rom iro 70 me pres AZ
day He claimed that the exposures by the Canal tom
m.ssoicrs az bad they have been IN times
past lie attributed nearly al te Ird and corruption
To had legislation and tie usag's IN practice ON the
ley folowed the law and usage, boh OF which
wI6ug lie claimed that laws have been passed author
zing the anal COnmlss onrrn 10 and no additional
| Work uIiCr existing cUntr1cts, and the DcR'son
| contract AT Port Schuyler 40 strongly denounced
| allowed extra or efdlti"ral work 10 be done 10
| an extent of blan'. " dollars Wfb such things cy
stng; h. asked how it is possible 10 pr vent frand
n, said ne these otii
Gers, but would vote for their reinstatement. He con-
10 also the ats of the egdsatuie The construction
given acts ~ the State Engineer ami Canal Conn
miss"ue,s; hut knowing oat no act of corruption mas
been found against these oics, he would not vote TOR
their removal. lie moved n substitute that Engineers
| Yates and BdbcocA be- reirstatcd
Ihe President decided motion diyisible, and put
the question on ren'aline YATES, winch .as carried ~
Thoysr, ,; Nays-DoisheiineI Pat Mllieis, AID Jacs
son, (.
Tie question ihcn taken on repataing Babcock,
and was follows: Yeas -i.iin"s, stroud, aud
Tnayer, 3: Nays-Iorshtmer. Pratt sweet, JACKSON,
| and willers, . MIR Hopkins not voting.
The question: Iben REQUIRED on the motion Of SECRETARY
oi state wcrs 70 Babcock aud it was lost az
follows Yeas orsbeiler and Willers, 2; aSs-lole
Eins, Raines, Prtti, Jhayer stroud. JACKSON, AMI
| Sweet, z.
| Commissioner Stroud then moved That the charges
against ates and Babcock ne dismissed, which was ear
rcd az follows: Nras-ilOpk:ns, RaiTes Pratt, stroud,
TnaJ err, jackson, -weet-7 Says-DoFsneher and VIII
| er>-l
! Mr. Stroud moved to renstate Babeock. motion 20
lay table os:, and the mo.ion Ia ienstdte
IIabcuck carries. follows: iea- Hopkins, i.aIes,
| Pratt. ThIyrr, Stroud, Jacsson-G Nays-Dorrhelnler
| aud Wlllcrs-2, sweet not voting.
Mr.. jackson iuoycd the appointment of charles D..
Olmsead, Division Engiuecr on III" western DIVISION
Laid over aud the .IOard adjourned until tOmOriow.