New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-04-21
DIP. WOODS CANAL INCOME.
LOBBYIST, CLAIM LAWYER, AND LEGISLATOR
AT ONCE.


oYYICT BUsINEss-RxoRBIrANr CLAIMS AND Ex-
rRAyAGANT AwARps-oSE PER CENT OR FIFTY.
tYRoM A STAFF CORRESPONDENT TIE rRIBUEE.l
SYRACUSE N. Y, April 2O.-Senator ID. p. Wood
while not in the Legislature, has been in
the lobby. He was graduated from the lobby to
the Legislature ard returned to the lobby, when
Ms terms were ended. II has always been the
claim Of hi. friends and the admission Of his enc
mice that he ceased to be lobbyist when he became
Q legislator. But the records Of the Assembly show
that during the years 1865, 1865 and 1867. when
Mr. Wood was serving his second series OF terms IN
the Assembly, he continued the floor and as
member Of the Assembly, his practice as lobbyist
and canal claim lawyer.
A number of the most suspicious claims on which
Mr. Wood obtained large aw ards from the Board Of
Appraisers were either 20 old 40 TO have become out
lawed the Board La ked jurisdiction 10 try them.
Before they could reach the Appraisers therefore,
special act of the Legislature required empow-
ering the Board to try them and this became one OF
the necessary steps Of the These bills were In
many cases introduced by Mr.. Wood, in some cases
pushed forv ard out Of their proper order and passed
Of HE request and in most his vote is recorded
In their favor There is not record, so far as l
can discover, during the period referred TO- single
claim bill which Mr.. Wood introduced where he did
not subsequently appear before the Appraisers as
attorney. 1t may be said that his connection with
the claim as attorney did not begin until after the
passage of the act but il will he difficult TO explain
the curious coincidence by which his In the
legislature invariably followed by an attorney
ship before the Board Of Appraisers, and still more
difficult to palliate the oense of mans conducting
his practice as q lobbyist lawyer and legislator at
one and the same time
INTERESTS OF STATE AND CLIENT
About the natureof some of these claims there will
be something be said further on but for the pres
ent q mere recapitulatOn Of some of Mr.. Woods
eases before the Legislature will be in order. pc
ttion for bin empowering the Board of Appraisers
70 hear the claim of Alonzo Crppen and Dennis
Scanlon was introduced by Mr.. Wood Feb. 25, 1867,
and the bill was voted for by him it's final passage,
March 10. Mr.. Wood subsequently collected on
Crppens claim 81, Ala AZ. Ii should be said here,
by way of parenthess that the practice to refer
the petition 10 the Committee on Claims, which
invariably accompanied favorable report with the
bill prayed for SO that the presentation of the petit
ton equivalent to the ordinary introduction OF
bill. Gu the Sd of March, 1865, Mr.. Wood pre-
sented petition in behalf Of Nicholas Cooney, Pat
rick Cooney, Andrew W. Mason, John McCann, and
Jesse Mckinley, and voted for the bill, April 10. On
Nicholas Cooncy's claim Mr. Wood afterward col
lscted $500 50 Oh Patrick Cooney's, s., S32 sc
on John cCann's, 81 $40 81 and on Jesse McKin-
ley's Sc liz so. On Feb. % 1865 Mr.. Wood intro
duced a petition for Hiram X. Edwards, but did not
vote on the final passage of the bill, March 90 On
E,iwaJdss claim he collected $3.50 so. There Is
nothing in the Assembly journal to show
who introduced the petition for Ira Peck and
Robert Robinson, but it reported favoraby,
aud the bill passed April 10 1867, Mr.. Wood voting
in the affirmative. On Peek's claim he collected
s4,329 As; on Robinsons, $3.50. A petition In
behalf OF Margaret Shannon, Michael Murray, Mary
n nd hnda l..
Lynch, James Spencer, and j. +. Barns, was pre-
sented March - 1867 by Mr.. Crandell who seems
also to have had considerable to do with claim bills
March 90 week later, the bill was reported, but
April Is Mr. Wood appears TO have been IN charge
OF the bill inasmuch he asked unanimous consent
u suspend the rules and order it to third reading.
1t was passed, Mr.. Wood voting in the affirmative.
On Margaret ShannOn's claim he collected $2,2Si S};
on Michael Murrays $942e; on Rhoda Mara's,
Si.126 so; on James spenceFs, $2,014 rs; on
J. +. Barns's, which afterward became that Of
Rhoda Mara and J. o. L. Lynch, $4.634 96.
Another instance of the assistance Mr.. Woods vote
gave his practice was on the bill of John i. Hager,
which came from the Senate, and for which he
voted, April II, 1865. He subsequently collected
on this claim s., S32.
The amounts collected refer, of course, 10 the
awards and not to Mr.. Woods probable half. 1t
will be noticed that these among some of MIR.
Woods largest claims. At the end of this year,
1867, Mr.. Wood forsOok the Legislature for the
lobby, and continued the same operations there In
1870 Mr. Patrick's famous Claim Revival bill was
passed and special acts ceased to be necessary In
Justice 10 Mr. Wood it should be said that in voting
t0r these bills he generally acted with large ma
,ority that being o time Of epidemic with canal
Slams. Mr.. Wood was, apparently, In charge OF the
al allowing the notorious claim OF Peter voorhees,
20 he heard. and fought its way for 1T through the
Committee Of the Whole and in the House. But 1t
hardly necessary to 20 further. The claims gwen
above prove with remOrseless certainty the nature of
MIR. Woods canal claim practice while in the House.
ExrRAvAGANCE OF THE sALT-BLOCK CLAIMS.
Several Of the foregoing were selected In the
letter in THE TRIBUNE, to which Senator Wood has
taken exception. as examples of Lle kind of claims
OH which be is freely charged by his constitu-
ents with having grown rich. These causes have ac
CURED notoriety from the apparent extravaganza IN
tie of the awards and from the general belief
in the neighborhOod in which they were made that
they were largely fraudulent in character. How far
the popular impression is sustained by the facts may
easily be- seen. The salt-block may be briefly de-
sclibed as a rough frame building, one hundred or
more feet in length, sheltering two rows of kettles
10 which the salt water is boiled probably contain
ing altogether thirty OF forty kettles, which are sup
ported by series of furnaces makinga tunnel shape
and called the "arches' These arches become SO
affected by seasons fire that every Spring. before
work is resumed they are reaid, and the kettles are
reset The claims about to be described for the
cost of raising the building and the arches, and
reflling the lot to depth OF gig
feet said to be made necessary by the alleged over
flow Of the canal The first of these claims was
that of Oscar w. Clark, in which the amount