New-York tribune., 1875-02-05
DOCK DEPARTMENT CHARGES
THE DEFENSE OF THE ACCUSED COM.
MISSIONFRg


STATEMENT FROM COMMISSIONERS wEsrERvELT AND
BUDD-THEY ASSERT THAT THE MAYOR HAS NOT
PREFERRED cHARGEs-THErR ANSWER TO COM
MISSIONER HowE's ACCUSATIONS.
The statement published exclusively in The
TRIBUNE Of yesterday that charges OF mismansgemen
had been made against Dock Commissioners Westerve
and Budd created much excitement among city officials
yesterday. The two Commissioners implicated were
called upon and their views OF the report Of the
Commissioners Of Account. They united In saying
that the charges amounted to nothing and
could be satisfactorily answered. Commits
sioner Westervelt gave his explanation of the
charge that the Commissioners had made large pur-
ehases or articles that not needed, and Mr. Budi
said that the complaint referred mainly 10 points Of
law upon which the other City Departments had beeD
at for long with the Dock Commission.
He referred TO the giving OF ferry franchises without
advertising for proposals. ana asserted that such action
legal THe reply Of the Commissioners Will be ready
IN few days.
Commissioner Jacob A. westervet when asked con
cerning the charges which had been made against him
self and Commissioner Bndd said in the first place. the
statement that Mayor Wckham had preferred charges
against myself and Mr. Budd Is entirely incorrect We
have received no copy OF any charges whatever The
facts far as am acquainted with them, are as fol
lows
On Monday Of last week the Commissioners OF Ac-
counts. who had been for time investigating the
book and papers OF his department. submitted report
>.
Wickham. This report was accompanied Dy opinions Of
| the Commissioners. which reflected upon the manage
ment Of tue department. Two days anerwdrd the
We did 40 immedlateiy and he handed us COPY OF the
report Of the Commissioners, remarkng that he had
only glanced at II cursOry and was not familiar with
| OF msmanagement were made against us. Hc
asked e & US & 70 write ,or FSpg TO tns re-
nyestigatedtas soon possible and reply would be
made TO the report We inmedaiely set TO work upon
the matter our chef bookkeepor Mr whitney Instruct
ing hun to explain clearly each cnargc maie against Us
He began the work, 0ut las Monday was taken SICK and
Is stlIi connned TO MS mousse LeHIling eI hIs iues
went 10 Mayor Wckham's Office on Wednesday ana eA-
planned ~ hun the OF the delay IN making reply
TO the charges He told me hat we might take our own
tme as there was no haste required IN tue matter:
There has never been any Limitation hNed, so far as
know, to the lime when an answer should be made
What truth there may be In the statement that during
the coming week mYfelf and associate Will be removed
do know. do not believe shat such action IA
contemplated however, because the Mayors sense OF
justice and prOprety and his language TO me lead mo
to infer tnat nothing of the kind will occur. II any
political influence has been brought 10 bear
sntireIy witSont nv knowledge or authority arm
anxious for any place, and the position now nave
came to me uns0ught. To remove me, however, upon
the ground that have been directly Indirectly galty
of any thing which would merit discharge ignomini
ously will be most assuredly UNJUST Tor am abie 10
demonstrate satisfactorily that the affairs this de-
partment, far as cOgnizaut Of them, have been
administered honestly, faithfully ana win single ego
| to the public good
But the charges az understand them do not charge
maleasance, peculaton, transportation ot funds
briefly theft but serious enough asserting misman-
agement, improper conduct, failure to adyeruse iOr
proposals the law requires. and the ignoring OF me
advisory officers OF the department suppose tue
persons referred advisory are the Corporation
Counsel aud the Chief Engineer. don't recall any
occasion when the views OF the iOlueF bhFe Dteh
dlsregarded and as TO- too later later we bon,Se hsEe
| given them the weight 10 "nen VIC IuVGHns viD
| they were properly entitled No more; our lItns
have not always been in harmony, but i am unaware
dsagreeAents have led to any results Injurious
charges inuely and nave left the explanation and re-
ply to them to be made by Commissioner Buck VINO -
assisting Mr. Whitney In investigating the accounts ana
particular matter referred in the report can say
|
| Will be shown to be entirely unfOunded.
As recall them the principal alegatons are that s we
$4,000, and that the purchase was unnecessary
aud uncaed for as these srtces @ NJ GfJ now Snu @
used and that we are paying for Their storage. Inls
matter susceptible Ot satisfactory explanation.
! When the purchase was made it was supposed they
would be used in very short time. but circumsances0c
Cured which no human foresight could have anticipated
which prevented ther being used as was anticipated
Another charge that largo quantity Of cement was
purchased higher price than 1t could have been OBJ
tnIned for This charge also be satisfactorily and
easily answered. All the other counts IN the general
hail not wait for Nj Wlitneys recovery make up
our >spiy, but hasten II as quickly as possible and
gender 4, 10 Mayor Wckham at the earliest possible
! opportunity.
Commissioner Wm. Budd vas found at the Metrop0li
tan Hotel where he resldes. He said the report OF
Commissioner Of Accounts Howe had been agreeable
surprise to the Dock Commissioners generally, and that
he personally considered 1t rather complimentary than
otherwise. Mr. Budd asserted that the complaints
of law which the Board had been at variance
with the various departments OF the City Government
In all OF these questions OF law which had been
previously decided by the Corporation Counsel the
Board OF Commissioners had been victorious. One
question which is not yet settled referred to the right
of the Dock Commissioners TO control the ferry fran
chise Commissioner says that the charter provides
the Commissioners Of Docks shall control the whole
waterfront OF the city, and he claims that the ferry fran
ohise under this provision In 1873 there were
persons the Board OF Dock Commissioners, but the
number since been reduced 10 three. The charter
framed while there were five commissioners and
in 1t has been used to make illegal several
actions OF the present Board one Ol lese instances re-
to clause tho Charter which provides that all
work OK improving the waterfront snsn
dered by affirmative vote OF four or the
Commissioners When the WORK OF improvement az
Chrisopher-s was done there were only three Commits
soners and thor vote to have 1t done without contracts
unanimous. II was done as they decreed and thO
Controller, upon receiving an explanation OF the facts,
paid the bills This fact served 10 strengthen the claim
of the present Board that the Old charter could not ap-
ply them in such cases
The report OF the Commissioners OF Accounts also
missoners and the Board OF Commissioners OF the
Sinking Fund and the Board OF Appointments There
mlssOners had carried ON the work or tho Departments
without properly consulting the Cher EDglneer. hr.
Budd says the Commissioners perfectly competent
superntend the affairs IN connection with their De-
parent, and that when 10 Is advisable 10 consult tie
engineer invariably done. His business ~ do az
directed by the Commissioners. nos 10 give them
advice ComDissioner said conclusion that there
is nothing IN the report which has not been published
The Cly Record Ia the abstracts OF tie minutes Of
meetings OF the Commissioners.
MEETING OF THE COMMISSIONERS.
At a meeting of the Dock Commissioners yesterday
the only members present President Westeryelt
and Commissioner Salem Ii. Wales. The contract for
furnishing the Department with 5000 pounds OF fresh
burnt English Portland cement was awarded TO s. L.
Merchant Co., at s. 3d. they being the lowest bidders
On motion of Commissioner Wales the following was
Roesi Th., no purchases be made Of material supplies oi