The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1875-09-09
Some Facts About the Brooklyn Bridge.

50 exhausted the lode that, sick of the
very name of East River bridge, the people
Of New York and Brooklyn would have
left the incomplete piers to stand rs they
are monument OF their folly in intrust-
ing so great an enterprise to a school Of
sharks.
The charter of the bridge, obtained in
the heyday of the twin Rings of New York
and Brooklyn, was almost too preposter-
GUS in its provisions for belief. The cities
OF New York and Brooklyn were to fur
nish nine-tenths OF the stock of 5000, 900,
and yet private corporation, which as
sumed but one-teuth, was to control the
entire expenditures. No such mine was
ever before offered in the country for the
working Of Ring. 1t was easy enough to
make the bridge cost twenty-five millions,
or, If fortune favored, thirty or forty mil
lions. Even now, after the Ring sharks
have been driven of, 1t cannot be finished
Tor short of somewhere about twenty mil
lions.
Seeing with the eye of hawk how fat
this bird ,vas. the twin Rings Of New York
and brooklyn forthwith swooped down
upon II. The one-tenth part Of the stock
$500 OOO-thcy pretended to subscribe for,
and thus they got control under the won
derful charter. The bridge hawks COM
prsed TWEED, KINGSLEY, CONNOLLY,
SwEENY, HUGH SMITH, aud IA few others
They made up nominal pool subscription
of $4,000 aud though few ofthem had put
in "a cent Of money. the stock stood in their
names, ms having been paid for TO the
amount of thirty per cent. They now
proceeded to make their first swoop. On
July 3, 1870, WILLIAM NJ. TWEED rcsolu-
ton was unanimously pissed, voting fif-
teen per cent. on the entire expenditures
TO w. G. KINGSLEY foralleged advances. ="
KINGSLEY had actually advanced only a
few thousand dollars. and this money had
long before been repaid him, every cont
of IL. Yet the resolution was unanimously
passed by Messrs. MURPHY, SrRANAHAN,
HCsTED, SLocUlI. and SMITH. BY its
operation the Ring were to Immediately
get back all the money they had put into
the stock. and more besides, and it opened
up IA very FL Dorado of wealth for the flu
ture. They drew out fifteen per cent, or
Sl75,OO0 on an expenditure OF Sl,179 600.
while they had nominally paid In thirty
per cent, or S120,OOO, ON their pool sub
scription of 100000.
KINGSLEY was appointed superintendent
Of the Bridge Company, TO net under the
direction of the Executive Committee. He
was not n director. but was the largest
voting stakeholder, he and his partner
KEENEY representing the nominal sum of
sl5O,0O0 out Of the 100000 subscribed by
| private capitalists. Next stood IL. w. SLo-
CUM with $4,000. KINGSLEY had things all
his own way He bought at the prices he
chose, and where he chose. There is no
record of any competitions for supplying
material. Two. three, or five persons only
were selected to price materials. When
bids were asked for no regulation is dis
coverable showing who was to open them
The pool entered resolution that they
themselves should audit all the bills of the
company, that is, check their own pur-
chases from themselves; they employed
an attorney for the Executive Committee,
not the company and instead of paying
money TO Others of whom they purchased
supplies, they drew checks to the order Of
KINGSLEY.
A to the fifteen per cent. haul, KINGS
LEY told IA reporter IN 1872 that some of
the committee talked OF giving him, in the
generosity of their souls, twenty per cent,
others a little cooler would put at fifteen,
Others stll chiilier AT ten, and others COM
paratvely frigid would allow only five per
cent. 1t was finally fixed, so said KINGS
LEY, at five per cent. No such discussion Is
to he found in the records of the commit
tee, nor is any just reason discoverable
why even five per cent. on all the salaries,
real estate, material, and other items of
expenditure should be given to the super
intendent who was neither a contractor
nor in any way had assumed risk for the
company. Moreover, KINGSLEY was "a man
of many employments, and he could give
only Il portion Of the time so extravagant-
~ valued 10 the Bridge Company. 1t
would have been strange, out OF accord
with his antecedents, and display of self
sacrifice spasmodic in KINGSLEY, II he had
really waved away the fifteen per cent, aud
taken only FIVE. The records show that his
virtue was indeed overcome, fer we find
that on Jan. B. ISL, the committee had
paid on this percentage account Sl75. 600.
The expenditures to that date had been
S1,l70 81 .40-of these Sl75,OO is lust uhout
10 per cent The word and figures 49,
fifteen have been erased and 1--WE 10 IN
serted in the original entry.
Iu the Executive Committees statement
Of June 1872, 1925 GOO appears in the "con-
struction account no salaries except his
being included-as having been paid to
KINGSLEY This sum was first charged to
commission account" then erased on
the ledger and charged as Especial ex-
pense account; then transferred to econ
strucron.' The haul had been too impu-
dent, and KINGSLEY was obliged to make
a show of decency by returning $4,000 of
the $4,000. The records of the committee
show that on Nov. Is, 1871, the following
resolution was passed.
ResOirel, That the claim Of WILLIAM c. KINGsLEY,
under resolution of July ., 1870, ana the Is
hereby quiiard, with MS consent, at amount not
exceeding sl25 900 In fun, including his eryoos uutll
IN" c0mpruoA OF the Foundation VI the towers 10 hgn
water mars"
The reason for this action is not given,
and on Nov 81 we find the construction
account credited with $4,000 from KINGS
LEY, but no explanation of the handsome