The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1875-10-20
CANAL CONTRACT FRAUDS.
yvGfNEER TITES'S 1NSWER TO THE
CHfRGES or NEGLECT.

the Stnte Hehd.
ALuANY, Oct. 1o.-The Canal Board had
tct Yates, one OF the suspended engineers, be-
fore It to-day. lie testified that he had dis
charged his duty fully and to the best OF his
ability for the Interest of the state, but that as
an executive nicer he had to depend very much
on his 4ubordinstes. He knew the provisions OF
the contract Of H. ID. Denison for the removal
ami building Of walls in the Mohawk river. The
work done during bis administration. The
contract was let some time in 1869. He did not
know when II TO be completed. did not
know the details OF the contract, and could not
tell whether the walls removed and rebuilt were
built under the contract. They were not during
his time. During the time the work was going
ON he did not look at the contract. lie looked
at the work. and was satisfied that II was going
on properly. He had full confidence in his
subordinates, and did not believe they would
make false estimates.
Mr. Fairchid read a description Of dry verti-
ch wall and asked Col Yates whether he had
examined the work to learn " II complied
with it
The Colonel answered that he had made ex-
animation Of the work and found that some OF
che walls were not made IN accordance with the
rontract, and he objected to them. lie did not
object to the whole WORK, as some Of 1t was
correct. Engineers differed as to which cement
Was tue best. lie always examined tn e sand
and the cement 10 see II thev were right. He al
ways told hts subordinates TO see that the work
rA done according to contract. Someti mes q
work IA not done exactly In accordance with
The specifications, and yet 1t is properly done.
THIS Is the case when the materials at hand are
not exactly what are called for, and the work
hiss TO be done. Then they do the best possible
hing under the circumstances. There was not
single piece of work on the can al from AL
bany 10 Buffalo that lie done In exact compliance
with the specifications; II is impossible to do
II. On his division he examined all the work,
10. lowed me practice Of Ills pre,decess9rs & and
faithfully as possible. THIS. he said, was his
answer TO the charge OF neglect.
A WALL AGAINST A ROCK.
Col Yates then showed that he had frequently
lnspected the work. He said that he had been
Informed that there had been a piece OF wall laid
given which was satisfactory il was, that It was
really less expensive than TO skip IL. He was not
Of his own knowledge Informed Of this work.
rhe Lieutenant G Goveruor-By what authority didyou
ssH ana iorN A. monthly esIins,es Of vs work -aien
..i 70, o5en END dons SSeetHsgto c9nuaet ~ da a., ~
best the state hao done and followed the
Mr. Fairchd produced specimens Of cement.
which no had pulled out OF the wall OF the work
Yesterday, and submitted them TO Col. Yates,
who sad that SOME Of II was good, and some of
hr Fairchd also produced several pieces OF
stone which be had pulled out, and witness said
tthey were not proper stone TO use In such work.
,Sc face of l. He had % not iooied o into SOs tns
back Of the vail He would not have aDy OF the
S OF s%oh saS been ss ;. s
In cement all the way through. ne could not
ny whether thi. was done; his assistant engi-
ncer could tell that.
Nj Fslrchd-You are here ts answer for yourself.
pay look 70 see 4 this ,as done to see the wall
sssdns upon my assistant TO see that The details we're
'PeT s5ssS.s4 sS. SsSE.s at a. accounting for IN.
r.sot e as stopeSy doa. ss M Ses
Si Where VA, Their, .pv recorded author
to aryng. vertical Val Val N n1. worS The Tue con; ns
Ie tsfe VA. 81 sis Ssfes Of vertical wal eonsiTnc'sd
Ed o. none va: s .SsSS 9sSTs
ron 'pe 70 vertical wal whenever the best Interests
I'7l witch provided that vertical walls mi sht he
substituted for Others by the board.
hr fnrchid-1he contract authorized 900 yaris q
Ss ana q yoS oa CSnS Se iers m n, va; 80" {AIqs
{. slieln4,lye.
Treasurer Raines found that Attorney General
Barlow rad giyhn an opinion that the Commits
sJuer- could make the change.
ASSUMING THE RESPONSIBILITY.
CT Yates said Commissioner Thayer ordered
che work done. He had nothing TO do win
taSs sl the responsibility for IT,. Col. Yates
Len road another which authorized the
fns nsl when deemed necessary by the Canal
Comnis.loners.
~ AZ Nil-ln All thete thlngr tnht YOU dld ana
uo,' A-Yes. cir.
Nr Furchild said he would like 20 have the
board - up and see this work. II would in that
way getnore Information In half day than II
eo9id "a four days examining witnesses here.
The Treasurer moved that the board 70 and
examine the work at 10 4. NJ. tomorrow.
Mr Falrchild read the canal accounting in the
Of iron used. He asked Col Yates how he
folnd so much iron bad been used. The Colonel
sad. this iron had been used before he came
Into Once and the amount was passed to him,
he to9k Il for granted 1t was correct. He could
Tue work down for investgaton.
THE AFTERNOON SESSION.
A. the afternoon session s. f. Babcock, tho
teHdent engineer against whom similar charges
were made, was examined by Deputy Attorney
General Fsirchd He said that he APP
po,htei 70 his present position IN ls1i. lie de,
de,erl6ed the manner q building walls. lie
s-la tpat II contract call I'd Tor s1-inch wall.
nSnsion m was used, il was always regarded as
I4flllng the requirements OF the contract. His
atsenti IN was called TO various pieces Of work.
wnch he mad accepted and certified, and ne
siid he had considered them properly done, or
~ ne the requirements Of the contract as was
Attorney G eneral Falrchild then read the tes-
tlnony of WIN. II. Taylor, state Engineer given
De said that Babcock had been guilty Of irregu-
Tes and irsad 10 & his eSHrGmates and he fay
that he had been discharged.
Mr.. miller, counsel for Babcock, asked him TO
give tne circumstances anu he proceeded TO
explain, showing that he had done nothing
wrong In fact, he said the estimate was not
estimated at al; II was Mr.. Crocker's estimate
when discharged he was not Informed Of the
TesOns for II. "rhe estimate made" he
sad, ,' contained considerable rock. handed
It 70 Crocker and he said had too much rock,
Gnd IL was cut down"
Mr.. Mler-Is 'o-- ,.u.e IN all contracts
-uua provides that whenever there Is extra wors On
irtct TO be done the contractor can be required 10
d.tf A.-Ies, sir, .. - 1890.
Your -uporors az inst any work Yon ".l acccptedY
a 81.
Mr MlerDid you have anv voice in the selection or
Hiint.tuent OF YOUR subofdlnstesY A.-NOnr Mnat'
e,tr -0ent all the time could take assy from the
GU, 20 Dn tIe works Inspecting them.
BABCoCR's POOR MATERIAL.
Secretary OF State Wlers read a portion Of
the te,iimony taken by the Commission, In
wtlch it appears that Babcock had allowed the
N-s Of poor material because there was nor
umo iD get better Witness explained thAl such
Va tue 'rse,
Mr. Farchild said he could not SEQ any ne
r",-ity ir- further testimony. The charges were
al admitted with explanations, NOW, ne
Thought. all tnat was necessary was an lnspec-
N'n nt mis- Work a. proposed and agreed 10 oy
thr DulfI,
IT,. q hat II wa