New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-04-12
CANAL CLAIM FRAUDS.
THE HON. D. P. WOOD AS A CANAL CLAIM
LAWYER.

IECTkD-hANG OF lHE CLAIMS NhanD'-D Az III
FRAUpuLENT-C1AIMs AND CLAMANTs---THE
ONEIDA RIVER IMPROVEMENT cI-AAs-AMPLE
ROOM FOB INVESTIGATION.
IrRoM A STAFF CORRESPONDENT OF THE TRIBUNE
SYRACUSE n. Y, April 1O.-To frauds in canal con-
tracts public attention has been universally directed
Of frauds in canal claims there has been little said But
while the contracts larger than the claims they
areoutone by the latter in their proportions OF fraud
There is generally some work to show for contract,
no matter how high price has been paid for it or
how palpably fraudulent the agreement may have
been but canal claim may not only be swollen TO
fwo three five. OF ten times the amount of damage
done but awards have often been made on manu-
featured claims, where, if any obligation had been
created, the individual was indebted to the
State. The story of the means by which
claims have been invented by men who make
il business TO travel about and drum them up; how
attorneys for the State and attorneys for the claim
ant have been in collision with each other and with
the Appraisers: how Yightful claimants who did not
seek the proper channel kept from their dues,
while defrauding claimants received prompt and
generous awards would be, if all the facts could be
made known the most disgraceful chapter in the
history of the canals of the State of New-York.
There has been Canal Claim Ring as well as
Canal Contract Ring, and its members have gone too
long unwhipped Of justice.
CLAIM REVIVAL.
The Board Of Canal Appraisers was created by
statute and is so far without recognition in the Con-
stitution The necessity for its creation grew out of
the enlargement Of the Erie Canal, when claims
multiplied and grew. The land originally acquired
for the construction Of the canal taken by the
State by the right of eminent domain but the
country being new the land of little value, and
large proportion of it was given outright. The
claims from the opening of the canal until the
enlargement were small and were settled by the
Canal Commissioners. When the enlargement took
place, however, the adjoining land, which was
necessarily used had greatly increased in value. and
some more methodcal and trustworthy mode of
award was desired. Such the origin of a COM
mission which has been often so widely diverted
from it's original purpose as TO become mere ma
chine of fraud.
Fraudulent canal claims are by no means a new
thing They have been cOeval with the appraisers.
But in 1870 grand claim revival took place. Mr..
Patrick Democratic member of the Assembly
from Chemung, introduced bill which contained
the following innocent provision:
The claimants shall file their claims in the Office Of the
DAMAGES Shall have accrued bit claims damages peh
shdU hGce accrued more S one year Tor 70 INC PtSsdge
o. nis act shall be pied ''h'n one year Prom inc d0'e
hereof
The second clause of this was more important than
the first, for it removed absolutely the outlawry
resting upon old claims and permitted anything and
everything in the shape of claim against the State
10 be fled provided il made its appearance within
year. Under this act claims filed that were
thirty and forty years old-there is still one undis-
posed of that dates back to S35and the totalof
those warmed into life by this bill was many mil
lions of dollars. The immediate effect of the bill
was seen in the increase of the awards by the APP
praisers to $4,000 in 1872, and $4550OO In
1879. 1t may be somewhat gratifying to know, by
the way that Mr.. Patrick subsequently went to the
State Prison.
THE METHODS OF CANAL CLAIM LAWYERS.
The methods of the dishonest canal claim lawyers
are simple enough. They have emissaries who scour
the country for leak in the CANAL or few feet OF
overflow persuade the owner of the property of the
Importance of the injury done him, if he needs per-
suasion and draft his claim, generally attempting to
induce him TO give TO their principal an absolute
power of attorney TO argue the claim and receive the
money. In where there meTitorous claim the
figure will often be swollen far beyond its legitimate
proportions. The men who are understood to have
largely performed this Office for Senator D. p Wood,
the most successful of the canal claim lawyers,
Nathaniel Deyo and Oney Sayles, whose names figure
also on the books Of the Canal Appraisers in various
useful capacities, sometimes as witnesses sometimes
as attorneys, and sometimes as claimants. The ex-
travagance of many awards leaves no room for any
inference but that the appraisers claim lawyers
have been in COLLISION and the in which the
interests of the State have been dsregarded renders
IT evident that the Canal Claim Ring has often
included in addition the attorney for the
State. The political prominence of Senator
Wood, who may be taken the highest
exponent of the Canal Claim lawyers, might lead
TO suppose that the influences exercised upon the
Board of Appraisers Of political nature, but it
is difficult to avoid the conclusion that they have
been Of q rosser kind. Such is the uni
versal Judgment of public opinion here But
while the history of this Board is long story of
fraud, it should be remembered that there are
some, perhaps many, individual exceptions to this
rule, and above all that the present Board, consist
ing of Vivus W. Smith, Thad. c. Davis, and Charles
g. Myers, has preserved an unsuIied reputation
SPECIMEN FRAUDULENT CLAIMS.
Probably no better specimen of fraudulent canal
claim could be given than that of Peter Voorhees, of
Onondasa County, the history of which ought to
interest taxpayers. Between the years 1864 and
1857, part of the farm of the claimant, who lived
at Jacks Reefs, on the Seneca River, in Onondaga
County was temporarily appropriated for the work
of draining the Cayuga marshes He claimed that
rock and shale deposited on the farm the teams
and laborers temporarily occupied other portions of
IT, that fences broken down, and that there
were other minor items of damage. Eleven years
went by before there apparently any step taken
toward claiming damages. In 1868 bill was passed
allowing the claim TO be heard by the Canal APP
praisers and Feb 2, 1869, Voorhees, fled his claim
for 81 200, solely for appropriation Of the land.
When William WATSON and Beman Brockway, the
two Canal Appraisers who awarded the Black River
claims, which have been fully exposed in THE TRIB-
USE- met to try the claim, the 18th of September