New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-12-31
A CANAL SUIT GAINED.
4 JUDGMENT OBTAINED AGAINST DESI,ON, BELDEN
CO. FOR S7,000-OTHER SUITS BEGUN
IBr TELEGRAPH TO THE TRIBUNE.

BY TELEGRAPH 70 THE TRIBUNE.
ALBANY, Dec. 30.-Attomey- General Fair
child Informed yesterday that tho suit brought by
him asanst Il. u. D,uison James j. Belden, A. Caldwell
Bedcl, and Thomas Gale, TO recover nearly 100000,
oyor-plyuens for work done by them under the Port
SCHUYLER contract. had been decided In favor tine
state by the referees. DeLsou * Co. announce from
syracuse that they viii appeal the General Term OF
tine supreme Court from the decision that the State
cannot vet apply the money awarded itla,nely, $751;
O0o-towagI tl oxtingnslmeat OF the canal debt tn.
defendants VAL have to give boaas, however. 10 the
amount % he judgment against thn Tor It's pay men, IL
the sLer courts decide against tacn.
This suit the first broJglt against the Old canal
contractors AFTER the revelations made concerning their
fraudulent executions OF contracts Dy Governor Tdrus
Canal Investigating Commission. This commission, it
VII. Doe remembered composed Of Mes5rs. Juo. Bge
low. A. /. Orr, Daniel Nagoue ir.. aud Jno. D. Van
Buren,. jr They were appointed March 81, 1870, and
formally organized FOR their work April Il following
Tor six weeks aferward, in company with experts in
engineering they inspected the canals where contract,
had recently been fulfilled During the remainder OF the
year obey were busy IN taxing testimony respecting
these contracts, and the character % the work done
under them. From time 20 me they made reports 90
the Governor about whatthcy had discovered They made
twelve Of these reports before the ended and then in
final report Later they rccaptatcd hat they had done
reviewed tine numerous ways I'm which the state hal
been robbed suggested methods Of canal manage.
mcut by Nlcl the state could be guarded from like
punlerng. In the first OF their reports issued July 81
1879, they made statement concerning tae Port
Schuyler contract upon which the suit spoken OF above
was based. The Port Schuyler contract covered a
section OF the Erie Canal OF little over seven
miles in length the city Of Cohocs Mr..
Denison on the 9Th Of September, 1862 contracted
do needed work in repairing and strengthening
the canal his pont for S7iIs3 TO- and in May 1879
when the canals opened the Investigating Commits
sion declare only twO-thrds OF the work complete
and Mr.. Denison Lad received for that two-thrI the
sum OF S-i17j71, and had been credited in addition
thereto with S73,6s9 percentage reserved guaran-
the completion OF the contract The commission
in their report asserted that the contractors had been
paid twice Or the work; paid for work not done
aud paid for work done with the fathfulness
prescribed by the contract Furthermore they stated
that the state officers had not o5eyed the commands Of
the law respecting certain on the granting OF
contracts, and after granting had changed its con-
dtons In disregard Of another law They showed also
that Dcnison, although apparently the lowest bidder
when the contract awarded. had recevedOwing 70
rs ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS money than the State would
have had to pay the highest bidder II the contract had
been awarded
Atorney-Gencral Faircld brought a suit on this re-
port shortly after as appearance in 1879 recover
back from Denison the amount he oyerpad. The
first hearing in the held before Judge Daniels
AZ this city, In Nay, 1876 VITA the consent Of the
Attorney General AID the counsel OF Mr. Denisol, three
referees Hppultci 40 that time Dy Judge Daniels
10 take testimony, and decide the dispute These referees
were James Emot of Ncv-YorE Charles o. TaPpan, OF
Poisdam. and Isaac Lawson. OF Albany The referees
began 90 take testimony Ia 1916, aud during lie present
wear they have opened court, 10 were, times for
the taking OF testimony In the case o. Friday last
they gave iiem,ut for tEc ste Tor t-7 900; this
including interest from tht time the ONc1ay nts were
made.
E.ubo.deued by his success IN this sut AffIWey-Geu-
ertl Fatrchd has determined 20 set tAe iaachurry OF
~ department IN motion 90 recover money obtained
from he state carrying two other contracts, which
were investigated auI reported upon ny tA- Canal Com
ms.0ncrs Yesterday. before one Of the judges u the
Supreme Court this city, he began SAT- against jar
M. Lord Geo d. Lord sud tie bIuA 81 Monroe Tor tie
ANN of so 600 Ola tA- John Hand award. This award
formed the subject OF the Canal commissioners liih
port They asserted that the Lords obtained g large
award for Hand upll work alleged Co have b'en
done al Buffalo for the state, bat which, I'm fact
had not been executed. and took tue bulk ~
the award Attorney General fairchlld also formally
demanded Yesterday from The contractor ~ work done
M Billarls Bend. the C.umpaiu Canal, a, rtsutu
ti,u for ovcrpayments the OF $4,000, and from
the contractors Of done at the junction Of the
Cbcuango Cnnal with thr Eus Canal near tea, the
of 800 600 The Canal Commission described how the
Ualara'- Bend contract executed IN their sixth
port and he Utica ntract IN their second report Mr.
D1uisOn viii DO made the defendant In the Ballads