The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-02-24
OUR COSTLY DOCKS.
The Commercial Associations Commit
tees Swinging Report.
EXrRAVAGANCE AND JUSTIFICATION
Outlay Without Cneck-How II Should
Be Curbed

miilce No l made a report through their chairman,
Mr. Gustav Schwab, in which various recommenda-
tious arc made The report sets with the stntc-
ment:-li tho conclusions OF tho committee found
to reflect severely the nianags ment OF the Depart
mcnt OF Docks will be proper Tor them state that
at the commencement Of this report II is tho
m,ttee's intention blame the present
Dock Commissioners, who have inherited and
by law obliged to follow vicious system, and
who also labor under difficulties imposed upon
them by the action of predecessors and that when
applied 10 for information they have shown every
disposition 10 satisfy the committees inquiries fauky
and openly This committee had originally been In
stutcd examine INTO the cost and character OF mo
81 one bukhcad then in OF construction between
Eleventh aud Canal streets. Following this direction
tho committee devoted IT'S attention at first mainly
this qucs OF bukheads, and did not doom II
sary to 20 particularly into tho cost Of PIERS since 1t
was known that at thot time with exception, the
department had confined itself TO the erection OF
wooden piers which had been found to answer all pur-
poses and could not be supposed 10 have given
occasion to any extravsgant expenditures.
The committee did not Goem It necessary to make
special inquiry INTO tho cost and character OF tho tex
ccptional' structure, pier No. North River, which
the present COMMISSION, while compelled to nush
demn as much the committee. Tho purpose OF IN
vestgaiion has served with the that with the
OF this pier in the opinion Of tho comm,ttee exceeds
81 OOU, 600 and wthal stands to-day unfinished after
years work upon it; has an insullccncy OF water
along It's face, is unrented, and Is monument OF Tho
period OF extravaganza and olly
The actual cost OF stone bukheads in Of con-
structop from October, 1873 10 the commencement OF
this has been difficult 10 obtain, the
Dock Department has never classified their expendi-
lures under the different heads Of specific work per-
formed, such making leases, collecting rents
building and repairing piers, NC, and dredging slips
buiiins pier No. l North River, constructing Stone
hut hcnd car nj
BLIND BOOKKEEPING.
The committee say that lar as Is possible TO
mystify the public the system OF bookkeeping OF the
Dock Department is success. The Conferences was
sioners In this investigation as long tho
Council OF Political Reform which had originated
the movement, had any part In It, Tho only way TO
sct at 1t was TO extract the OF the bulk
heads from the figures given In the annual reports,
and where these figures provo Insufficient to take an
estimate of The cost the work therein reported
have done The originally stated cost OF the work
comprised annual reports OF the department for
1874 1875 amounting 10 Si250 per ncal ioot was
found appro ximately correct and that a submitted
statement by tho Dock Comm ssioners calculssng
this equal to about $405 per neal foot vas not
consistent with the facts and figures us stated the
CLASSIFYING THE OUTLAY
The commission, alter at first rsHsng TO cooperate
with this Conference, finally acceded TO the request
made OF them and proceeded TO revise their previous
calculations and undertook 10 classify the total ex
pehdturcs during the years 1874 and 1875. This OK
animation resulted IN tho submission Of sne annexed
ing the above mentioned Two ycaSs:-
l. Cost oil stone buikheads SOL, 66S
z Amount expended IN repairs for account OF
private owners, collected from them and
paid into The sinking fund. ......... s,l7S
3 Purchase Of lease Of Spring street basin.
necessary for tho prosecution oil work on
buikhcad Observation-Disclosures. $500
A. Materials paid Tor in ls74lsi5, and on
hand April 80, ls75. Observation-Disclosures. 1915
g. Machiuery, tugboat dredges, piledrivers.
&c, paid Tor IN lS74-5. $500. :. 100, 525
g. Grading and filling up Ganscvoort street
Iand,nl and river wall. 24l397
g. Expenses OF collecting ST. 096 062 rents, &c 90 $40
0. Building and repairing piers NC, incud-
ing dredging other than Tor stonework,
and building temporary connections with
piers slips ,oos 1877
ing an addition of o 1900 per cent to
each of the above items. ............... 2O7 92S
Total expenditures in 1s74-5 . So 46s Ola
The conclusions 10 be drawn from this classification
may be stated the following remarks each The
different items:-
DlssEcrIxG THE FIGURES.
Item 1.-The cost OF stone bulkhead here gwen with
the addition Of 49, 100 general expenses
ana an allowance OF $50 oOO made for depreciation OF
plant In the separate calculation Of this item shows
cost about $462 per nca loot, thus allowing
OF about s57 foot over the previous estimate
OF the commission, but still Affirming very far
below our previous estimate. The Commissioners
however had TO assume In their estimate eigE
feet OF finished wall that had been taken by this
committees FIRST estimate. Not questioning the
rcctness OF the Commissioners estimate this CON-
|
cost Of stone buikheads estimated in previous cal
culatOn The remaining difference Will be- found al
wholly accounted for by the analysis OF the other
Hems.
Item 2 Inadvertently changed by tho committee to
stone bukhead. is properly classed by ss; tho same
Item which, though incidentally increasing the cost
of tic bukhcad has no reference to any particular
Item4 -The report Of the department of 1875 having
| made no mention whatever Of any material hand,
this large amount necessarily entered into the
| tea,s nrpylf cSt q Nv
beng classified by itself II Is not charged to any work
DONE carried forward TO swell the classh cxpcn-
Of future years. 1t WILL however, never appear
in sight again unless very much improved system OF
bookkeeping and accounting is adopted by the Depart
ment OF Docks.
| Items and 6.--The committee summarize that
some 1900 600 had invested IN stone work which
May j. 1875 and still has on hand floating and other
property costing $500 000 which is very inadequatc
en- loyc Cd and II sold would realize but small per-
| centage on It's cost
Items and s require explanation.
Item 10 shows the general expenditures Of the depart
mcni which the Commissioners propose TO distribute
ovcr the other items In proportion to the amounts
pended. which classification, though perhaps not
quite proper and just Is not questioned by the CON-
mIttee.
Item o brings the most important poInt--ho cx.
pendlture for building aud repairing piers and other
wooden structures and dredging other than Tor stone
work, which, with the addition Of 1910 per cent Tor
general expenses. but without any charge Tor depre
cation OF inventory oil material on hand, or Tor inter-
est the 5000 900 Invested in inventory, shows an
expenditure this work OF about ST. 096 0O0 abou,
5000 600 more than tho previous caicuiaions Oh the
committee has assumed possibly chargeabc TO this
item As indication OF the character OF this cxpen
dture the committee points TO the fact that according
to the details given In the classifying statement OF the
COMMISSIONER the vc barge piers Nos 40 TO Al North
River, containing superficial area OF l35.63o square
feet, have been built by the department ut cost,
including nine per cent for general expenses, OF
$30 900, being average Of 81 ~ per foot, while
| pier No AZ North River, OF similar character and
DIMENSIONS contracted for In 1875 and buiit at
cost, including the Same percentage Tor general OK
OF 81 IL per loot although the builder was by
bound to take the plos used IRON the depart
| ments stores, allowing for them their extravagan
cost of $50 piece.
When !, Is considered that this great outlay is alto
gcther made for work oil perishabie nature, which
has to renewed within comparatively short time
the rents derived from pcrs &c, amounted IN lS74-7t
10 81, 0j5, 0O0the committee thinks that the que5
OF cost OF the stone buxbcads built up to April
1876 lost much OF It's practical Importance, the