New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-06-10
HEMPSTEAD RESERTOIR PROTESTS.

ANOTHER MEETING OF BROOKLYN TAXPAYERS TO
OPPOSE THE ENLARGEMENT sCHEME-THE COM
MIssIONERs AND CHIEF ENGINEER OF CITY
WORKS UNDER EXAMINATION.
Another meeting of the joint committees OF
the Brooklyn Board OF Aldermen Law and on Water
and Drainage, held last evening" to hear persons
interested in the Hampstead Storage Reservoir Enlarge
ment scheme. In opening the meeting, Alderman Strong
chairman called upon City Works Commissioner Fowler
To respond to the questions asked at the previous meet
ing.
Mr. Fowler said that only two questions had been un
answered by him. He read in answer TO one or these,
from report of Gen. McAlpne in 1852 an engineering
opinion favor Of constructing storage reservoirs The
dam of the present reservoir, Mr.. Fowler said, was
strictly within the dimensions Endorsed by Gen. McAlne
in 1852 In replying to Gen. WOodfords question to
when it was decided by the Board OF City Works to en-
large the reservoir beyond capacity or lOOOOOO,OOO
gallons, Mr. Fowler declared that the Board had
never decided to enlarge tho reservoir, but had
only recommended its enlargement to the extent OF
300 900 gallons to the Board of Aldermen Feb.
15 1879 Some excavation had been done outside the
boundaries of original plan, measure OF economy,
il being cheaper to remove earth from the sides OF the
reservoir instead Of excavatng to greater depth In the
center.
Mr. COthren Brooklyn lawyer asked Col
julius W. Adams, Chief Engineer Of the Department
Of City Works. why numbers Of the various sectional
plans had omitted from the contract. Col. Adams
answered that the numbers omitted because the
minor details had not been completed He also answered
large number of questions asked by Mr. Cohren, Alder
man strong and other Aldermen and citizens concern
ing details Of the proposals and plans for the work.
~ Adams desired to DC excused from answering ques-
ton as to whether he considered Kingsley d keeney
better contractors than Messrs. Bangs, Cummins. or
Beard After urging he said that he knew morning
about Mr.. Bangs; nothing good OF NJ CuiDIlns mat
Mr. Beard opposed To the plan FOR the reservoir from
the start, and that he had always found kingsley q
Keeney ready and able to do their work fafhfuly Mt
Os asked Mr. Fowler the price OF NicOlsOn pavement
per square yard lIaughterl Alderman strong ruled
the question out Of order as having no bearing on the
object OF the meeting. Mr.. LOOMS then wanted to know
the cost Of the IusOnave. main sewer but was again
ruled out of order by Alderman strong.
Mr. Arnoux OF the Law firm OF WoOdOrd 4 Arnoux, in
giving detailed answer to the argument OF BENJAMIN d.
Sman OF the previous evening, said that the PROPOSE
ton to enlarge the reservoir only intended to give
the contractors anohor chance to put their hands into
the public treasury and take out more money! In
speaking OF The declared engineering difficulties OF the
work Mr.. ArnOux said that Of the sum estimated for
work 100000 simply for excayating earth,
which any men who cared TO take up the shovel
and the hoe would be competent to do
az Kingsley Keeney, the contractors for constructing
the reservoir For eXcavang mud under water the con-
tractors received SO 80 per cubic yard while commodore
Vanderbilt paid only II 50 per cubic yard for the removal
of solid rock in the FOurthaye Improvement Mr. Ar
nox severely criticised the Water Commissioners for not
having reserved per cent Of the contract price
guarantee that should he properly done, and
continued his argument till late hour.