The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1875-09-01
EXPOSING THE CANAL RING
THE CANdL BOIRD'S RESPONSIBTL-
ITY FOR THE FRAUDS.
The Chsmplain Canal Contract Lot, .nd
s@j3,OOO Expended In Plain Violation Of
the lava Paithlcss Onicinrs Excuse.


Henry Smith, Of tho committees counsel were
present The committee Immediately went into
private session. On reoponing the doors, John
d. Fay was recalled and examined as to the
Black Rock 1larbor contracts. He said:
, As Canal Commissioner l had charge Of the work.
annct nad the contract aud assigned TO George y.
% own tools wnen he .bandoned the contracts. dont
get them. rhsd nothing TO do with giving Lord his ex
ira allowance on the wors Mowcry succeeded vandeu
d,u en-. Stone, &c, aretfrcqucntiy stolen from the
Bridges or other spctures ,hey he oa ma "a
doing.
Francis s. Thayer, Auditor OF the Canal De-
partment, was recalled and examined as to the
enlargement Of the Champlain Canal. The cost
Of that work Is estimated at S3.OOO0OO. The nrst
APPROXIMATION was Si25.0C0 and the second
100000. All the 0rst aud about half the last
amlned In detail as TO the contracts on this work.
VIOLATING THE LAW.
Senator Cole-what authority had the Canal Board
70 use part Of the s5OOooO when there was no law
Mr; TGsyer-I don't know upon what authority they
T@sre Tere rS no plans survey, for the WORK
n he me e0h'rsSts we're ist before ne surveys &C.
them prior the surveys yet they were let. The law
TIE SURVEYS made and submitted to the Canal Board
a0at Ga ny Sna auay saf Of
law whntevef "
Mr.. Smith read the proceedings OF the Canal
Board, showing that maps, Sc, were approved,
aud asked whether any other action on the mat
ter had been taken.
NJ, ii Tsayss-No Sir Ths maps. &C. ssqn adopted
tracts ip Of seaSepis s1 Sd np NAP ana let con
seting. They required TO have new survey made
RST SS SiSs o e.. wo Sfy M %efsy s s
SsgSmsn, en- an nov done aud part OF the 1900 900 used
under tho OIL contracts.
rnE WORST DEVELOPMENT YET
Mr. smi,h-Then you sa, tina, all the morcy c1p.nd.
ea u2Sn nc Sors wsnon, new maps. plans &C.. was
M MI In.yer-les ar. The law expressly required
Senator Cole remarked that this was the worst
development vet made In all the investigation,
He said the Legislature understood this uues-
the law which was TO govern tho action OF the
Cnnal Board, and yet that board Immediately
plain violation Of its provisions.
Mr.. smith inquired why complain OF tho un.
dinAtes-when nigh officials act in this way.
=, The committee here took recess until $50
Mr.. LORD DECLINING TO rRsrIrY.
On reasseu bling Geo. ID. Lord, ex-Assembly-
man was called to the stand and sworn
:, Mr.. Peckham-hr. Lord. do you know Mr.
Mr.. W. F Cogswell. Lords counsel. here rose
and said It was undoubtedly known TO the
instituted against Mr.. Lord. and 1t would be
highly preJudtcial TO his case were he to submit
" any e1dmiDdtiOn tOuCnlng the matters
VOWED ~ the proceedings alluded to, aud he
would, therefore, under his (Mr. Cogswelrs)
advice, decline To answer any questions touch
ing these matters. lie did not think ~ would
be proper for Mr.. Lord 10 disclose his defence
Mr. Peckham said the examination would in
yOiye those matters. lie then asked Mr. Lord II
ne mad entered into an agreement ~!.a Lswis J,
Assemblw ta ,st n h,ii T., rno' 'neinpet oi the
Relief bill,' through she Legislature, he I.ordl
20 receive two-thrds of the award, when made,
Mir. CoGswell snid his client would have to
decline To answer tnat question on the ground
Senator Cote said the witness was privileged
TO decline to answer on the ground slated, ana
Legislature.
louS KrLEr's MOUTH CLOSED.
John kiley, whose ...-e -e - .-.s -!-.-s TO have
been inthe agreement to represent Lord, was
called and sworn. lie was asked the same
questions put 70 Lord, when Mr. CogswelI as his
counsel, said the same reasons for declining 10
rnswer applied To Mr.. kfey. Although no pro-
ccedngs had BEEN to his knowledge, com
mehced Against him yet his connection with
the case was such rs . make it,imprOper at this
time to answer the question. Alter some dIs.
cussion the question was put again, and tho
witness decla 10 answer, ~ II might tend to
eliminate himself. Other similar questions
were nut, ana the witness declined to answer
any question on the subject, on the same
ground, by advice of his counsel, Mr.. CogsWelI.
Chairman Cole then announced ia at IL would
be the duty OF the Committee to report fir
kHey as being IN contempt 10 the Legislature
"HN hS W. bht 6Aaihs
THE VOORHEES, CLAIM.
Mr.. ". w. Wright, the Canal CommIssIoner
was recalled anu examined concerning the pay
me OF the Voorhees, cllim. He sNplaine mat
he hesitated long wnilo before drawing hi.
certificate, made fuil inquiry aud InVestigattOn.
gOt cOntrad ctOry testimony, and determined
not to pay H.. Time PASSED, and he lost the
riRnts OF appeal. linen a mandamuS was brouyht |
T. compel MIN To pay 1t. lie then put it into |
the hands Of the Attorney -Geners. Then ho |
heard nothing more about II for some time.
Mnen at length Judge Pratt him. toll
said "'"'S'
san notning lie then asked me nnty 10 inycsi cate
M he % nat,T @ iurtner renewcd ny Inquiries. anu found
pay my drait, and again tsatel and bceamc con-
Hncsd htt tne claim ought 10 be paid aud that $1,000
NJ; reeSesnIAad nam yet he claimed only 1900 when
Mr. Wright This man a very ignorant man. lie
iha the state Officers would sso bui tGsy neves
the sa1s o Ss you'd no iSsa ss %sq he
others O
GRUDBING.
MIR Peckham- What do you understand by crubbing2
, Mr Wrght-Dlggi"s out stulnps ana clearing land
MIR PecSham -Chopplng and clearing is only to cut
down trees ana clear on tne brush
AZ PseSI%Ma aId S9a authorize the gruoeng o, the
Mr. wrght-Not uli after law had been PASSED
Mr. Peckhim1If You VIII look at the supplemental
contract you will see tnat there Is no gubblng provided
Mr.. Wright-There was TO be some grub0ng.
Mr Peckham-ieGi but you Will the enect OF
tha contract was inst the contractor the ex
taVagAn price OF $40 per acre for simply cutting
clearing. They did no grubbng.
Mr. wright Well, admit that WAS the fact but this
contract was presented tome, and thought II wins nil
right, Inc fact is never the ground and never
saw the reservoir II had seen the work never
have aowedt
WHY HE DIDS'T no MS DUTY.
Mir. Peckham-Now. why-you beng canal Commis |
sion IN cnarge-whY dd you not see this WORK.
Nr. Wright had TO take the word OF others In some
things. ! could not see eyerJ Thing.
Mr.. smith But The cost was extraordinarily large
should think 4 would have attracted Your attention.
Mr.. wright But II dld not, rs impres-
sion that II nas cOrrect nom the Information gwen 10
me, gave my attention to those parts OF my division
where thought my presence was most needed.
MT. Smith-Mr. Wright you see that this WORK ex.
ceedcd the maximum prce OF the contract BY three
tunes and without change OF planp
Mr., Wright-Yes, sir,
Mr.. sm.th-Now, Do YOU know Of any other such case
Mr.. Wright-les, bir. have known Of several cases
where the cost was double aud that, too without a
change oi plan.
, Mr., smith, wish you would took up those cases. !
thlnk you VIII hnh there we're changes Of plans,
Mr.. Wright viii do 81 with pleasure.
Mt Peckham-llee nnd 100 days labor charged the
state Tor building dam Tor the benefit OF the cOntrac-
Tor: now, why dad You allow that clATgcP
MT, Wight cannot now eCt the case but MIR |
Sole must have satisfied II reht and proper or
all ABOUT IL.
senator Cole -Ahl but We have called MIR. Sole and
N.l.