The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-04-17
THE CANAL FRAUDS.

PROCEEDINGS OF YESTERDAYS SESSION OF THE
JOINT INVESTIGATING coMMITrER--THE EVIL
DENcE OF ExPERTs-
ALBANY, April 10. 1875.
The JOINT COMMITTEE OF the LEGISLATURE to inves-
tgate canal affairs resumed taeir labor this after
noon.
Ex.Canal Commissioner Chapman. being the
nrst witness called. stated tnat he was Canal
Commissioner IRON December. 1869, TO December,
1871; mad general charge Of toe Deunlson contract
In regard 20 building the vertical wall rom Port
Schuyler to the lower Mohawk Valley; the only
reason I had Tor the reetling OF the WORK was
that there was q large quantity OF material on
hano, anu thought II would not be lair 10 Stop
them pntn the material was exhausted;
think that when the quantities named IN The
quantity sheet were exhausted toe balance Of tue
work might nave been done AZ price Dot moro
than the Engneeris estimate; thought that, prsc-
ticauy, the whole power SHOULD DC lett with the
DtyIslon Enzineer; thought tue prices In tne said
contract we're lair prices; when lett the ONCE
about four miles OF the work bad been done /;
never knew or heard anything oil the DeRraw con-
tract until saw II published In the newspapers,
nor TIL 1 lefs the once; knew OF the Williams
wan at Little Fails, ms contract being
ssVeny-nve gents yaIa; .e.!a rom
t,caa nat g. es eoasss W nat r ISs y
over o dollar yard Tor dis WORK; tnen came
4
ioand the contract asered 10 read 81 Is per yard;
Is was N alteration, OBVIOUSLY made IN tue En.
gineer's once wrote 70 Williams, mo con.rac.
anu the Canal Commissioners ana eDceayored 10
ferret sur wno maze Tue alteration n tuai, nov.
ever, | was nDsaccessul; MI. Dayton Was the
Tue conirScs being on file in the AaditOr's
Saving been tempered VITA. the witness Inen
stated that Williams had drawn GU the altered
contract several thousand dollars IN excess
a.
uvering material 10 TIE work. TINS engineer took
ton aud II WAS enough TO make tie state good
80 nothing was lost, althougu mad not the fraud
been discovered tue state would nave oeen
Mr. fauik1er-why did you. after yoa found
t1at quantities. as gwen Ia the original estimate
at exOrDltant Pre- nau been iurnisnc0, allow any
Contractor 70 furnisa tnem 10 sucl very great
excessS
there may nave Dsen Design Ia Il.
Tue vii Tess tnen explained toe system OF canal
lettings, which had already been gwen W previous
xvrDKScE Or 4 DIVISION ENoISEER
TIE uext witness was Charles ~ sweet resi-
dent Of syracuse and a DIVISION engineer VI tne
Mao e Division o. tue Lr1e Canal. lie testified ne
had Deen al engineer before, ia Isss ana 1870; do
Tor raising a leak on toe O.wego Caaal Reservoir;
mace the he'd notes Of tue survey; presume Tue
nvtes are IN syracuse; TIE measurements made
were done Tor tue purpose VI constructing That
work; made tue estimate, and Il wa Tor COM
plei Ell stlucf ure measurements were taken every
montn q, and 50 lar us 1 KNOW Ueneve tueln 70 BE-
cyrTect; the prices were low or that piece -
work: nave not been connected with any 0tner
A CANAL ESGNEER.
William 3. Cooper stated - am an engineer.
ilving al Fort Edward; vas an engineer iiOn l5ly
20 1881: was again installed 10 1854 and nave since
been an engineer; a. dlnerent times nave been
engineer from 1877 ~ 1874: On the Denns0n con-
tract, he SAID, ~ was almost Impossible - kes
menta The witness acre stated mat not naviag
nis BOOK Win hlin ne could not iurnlsn any other
Information. but would have u - - y % re2dJ
Tor the evening sesssOn
KvESISG SESSION.
At the evening sesEi9n oi tie canal invcstlga.
ton. Mr.. Cooper not putting IN a. appearance,
Canal COMMISSIONER keuoea W. STROUD Was called,
and said An = Ssaai com miss.oner; Aaye
MISSIONER slnce 1875 knew 81 toe J. J. Bei1en
contracts; made the maj estimate $40 nothing
ao0ut IL only from tne time 1 came mo ONCE; "a
WAS nearly completed &C that time wa one 81
cue Commissioners that signed tne barnett con-
tract; was famnlar with tue PROVISIONS W.en
signed ~ know but little ABOUT the work, ~ moi
being on my diylsl0n, SIM am familiar win al
prices 81 tnat work Know "a no case where false
measurements nave been taken, ana na0 never
awarded contracts for more tRan the knginoers
Witness here produced the bids Or ihe Cardes
contract cy0 chains 81 siope wal On toe Jofeaa
leys+ y wnleh sOV cnsahs were ~. Nv ,1a nr al
inasmnen ss the contractor nad taken y AZ NeTy
iow figure aud bad lied ooais 70 tae Am9ans "a
5000 tor the perf0rfuanco OF the work. lie SAID
\ there had 0eea great ughtinR Tor years ior tais
y WORK, and tnat II me contractors knew wAat ne
- possible, and lose roe $4,000. he tnOugns
the contractor was dolna caeap piece 81 worS-
dom. II lot 81, ggJ $4,000 less thAn the Eng-
neer's estimate. Az TIE conClusion III Nj. stfOnd's
testimony Mr.. Googer, wno had PVT In a. sppcar.
count BOOK Of lis wosk and was examincd ii
length ~ regard 70 prices, put nothing VI interest.
a. s0od IS anT system that could 0e aeyssa
ne would nave the saDoratnates removed oaly
fnrougn an lnvestaatiOa OF tbs state EnGlaacrl
! he coald lnhkc ~ suKgcstio1s tnat would Ia aug
| war TN prove toe srbtsnh