New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-11-03


no more resolutions The increases amounted to
many thousands OF dollars.
The Lord family grew fat on the Chenango Canal.
jane 2, Franklin " Lord a son of Jarvis Lord, gets
S20S11 by resolution from the board, as the sum to
which ne was entitled on suTTondering a contract,
Mr.. Beach voting for it, of course The next day,
Lewis Lose. "attorney for William Mndgett7 part
of JARVIS Lord gels from the board, on the res
CLINTON Of Mr. Beach, S32 252, again owing 70 IN
| expected difficulties" In the CbenaBgo Canal. The
same day, William MeRae. since indicted gets
| SJ571 with Mr. Beachs vote: also, /. NJ. Mills gets
SIS, $50 90, and Fayette Bristol gets two sums OF
| al 931 IL and 5000 10, j. Nelson Tubbs Jarvis
Lords engineer at Rochester. certifying that the
materials surrendered to the State were worth this
sum, and Mr.. Beach voting FOR II.
Jane 10 Geo. ~ Case. an ally Of Willard John
SON. who was conspicuous in the notorious STAN
wix Hall letting OF 1866. gets 1892 "a for
tools" etc. he surrendered to the State. The Canal
| Appraisers awards to G. w. Winter and George j.
MesseTeau increased respectively to S29S9 ~
and 50, 155 40, under Mr.. Brstols lead also n. g.
Jackson agan-ths time getting of his price for ex-
| cayatiOn up 10 80 cents; also John Hosch, at
| tOTney Of Ihilp II. HOsch-well-kDown Canal Ring
panes, and very we'll known thcn-gets 1882 ~ Tor
tools" ETC.. surrendered; {. +. Braman gels p
07O 81 OF one contract; Myron A. Mills S1.coZ a.
part of which was 20 compensate him for not having
received inst prices on ms contract; Thomas Oale
partner OF BelGen and benson had also enconDtered
! unexpected difficulties IN the Oswego dam, ana
70 reimburse him and for the use o. tools got
| and Clark Shook. 81, 800 n.
| This was a good days work for Mr. Beach and his
| eolleagues-betweon $4,000 and 100000 voted
away actual grants, with considerable more that
! cannot be computed without single attempt 10
amend, and without dissenting vote!
July /. Samuel Donaldson gets S18,636 90 on
surrendering mis- contract; and July 2. James J.
Belden gets IS, 265 So also for surrender Very
| often il paid better 10 surrender contract. with
the right sort of engineers to certify as to the value
of "toqis" etc, than il I'D 70 inihl IT. Aug o.
| tanned on NT. Beache report and vote His vote
was given fer all Of the awards mentioned.
1871.
There viii be GOOD deal surprise at learning that
Mr. Beach seems 10 have started the famous Oswego
High Dam job in the Canal Board Ills first import
ant act in 81 was TO Offer November q, resolu
ton ia reference to the change of plan from wood
to stone which was the entering wedge of that
swndle There is no room TO give it, history mere.
! The same day Mr. Beach voted TO award Geo. W.
Phelps $3.50, f. g. Van Dcnsen $1f.5O2 -, VI. Il.
BiTdscye 81 13S 40, and Thos BrGzce 80, 1872 ~,
and to increase the price under one OF G. T. SKINNER
contracts % 81 centSfoT all excavations, aud GIVE n
allowances of IS, 1872. This last action was direct
routrad,cio of Mr. BeaCifs own report early IN the
year. when ne reported that the Canal Board should
refuse 70 after prices IN certain c0atTact because
! the Constitution required AZ contracts 10 be lsi 10
the lowest bidder. This is the only instance have
been able 90 find where, in four years Mr. Beach
decided against the contractor, and he was oOmpar-
! auyely umiuAueEtai. HH name was JAines Ii.
| Sheriff..
Bnt that is a mistake. lie did vote against Will
| Lard johnson December O. with his colleague, and
| at the next working meeting they-reconsidered it.
| December0 Clark and Douglass obtained 1912 SO
! extra compensation this seems TO have been Che
| FIRST of he Black Rock iarbor sviIdlcs ScOyille
and Eaton for breaks" $191&9 -, and far
small claims amounting to $16.Sj2. Dcceuber d
Willard Johnson lad igsce done m, and g0i his four
%
lev got SG,73S a. and CLARK Snoon aud four others
/ cot g3S,ji1. Another good days work at voting
y 20 900 this time. December y, Mr.. Beach stood
| Dr. the OsMego High Dams AGAIN. ano voted Tor 1t,
aithuugh j. ie recorded thai tho Board heard the
| objections Of the stare Engineer" rms was on Of
the worst OF tie RIG JOBS. The cost ny the CONTRACT
| was 80 BE- $4,000; She actual cost was $ZZl,-
| oG0 James j. lelden being the contractor.
/ PARKER Levi !. Brown, was awarded $15,1i0 for
his services in defending the BACK River claims
but did not vote. December p, Charles I. skinner
was the recipient OF another resolution declaring
that the former resolution al2WhiS - c'Hi5
| a yard for excavation, was intended to he " IN add
Ion" 10 tie former price, and very comfortable
! price that must have made II. Mr. Beach voted
4 ioT 1t.
In Febrnaiy 1872, en- Instructive incident oc-
cured in the Canal Board. Mr.. Raiaes offered
| resolutions showing the enormous increase la the
| cost OF canal managcinent-the amounts paid super
! iutendents and contractors alone increasing from
4 ~ l.kJ,I
| asked an investigation by the Le2sia'nTe AT
| Fay q ring commissioner offered q substitute fall
! OF mig excuse. and Mr. Beach voted for J, with
J Mr. FAY and Mr.. Wright, and When thai WAS lost,
agaius. the original resolution The division -eeBs
- have been party Hea also, oht Dir ay resou-
! ton 81 upiy @n apology for the rag iiJuds.
! Perhaps the most damaging fact in tie whole his
tory Of these four year., tAat sir Beach voted 10
release Geo. D. Lord from one Of his Black Rock
Harlar contracts, on which be- found inst he would
| lose money if be were held to If strictly. The re-
lease involved The State in considerable loss and
was accomplished By LORDS friend, Commissioner
Fay. whose snare in Lords Black Rock Ilafbor
frauds WIS fully exposed by the Canal Commission,
and Who made tins report 10 The Canal Board. hr.
! Bcaci siOCd by tiiis with his eyes oPen Tor a.
meeting. soon aftcf, A 0lHr! -,rrlicful Bar
| low, VINO Distinguished himself al tAc Canal Board
/ "a, well as IN the AttuTW-G 'Herals Office, by
his uurcea.IuE opposition lo the thieves who found
ia Mr Beach so good q friend, presented q long IT,
port. showing that tAe STATE could nave an action
for damages against Lord it the Canal Board would
! 1901 persist "a tins action. Mr braCh was present
and heard hs report, bul 70 produced 10 change IN
| his attitude. General barlow brought suits about
fins lime 10 unlsh certain canal frau and bitter
/ Controversy arose III the board IN consequence.
Times chosen 10 puf through jobs IN ms absence.
and December -, 1872, these claims are charged,
on nigh authority, 90 have been carried through IN
! this way: Peer punn TI,O7,i Hro' NJ O"se'
30 7Gs Il: Gardiner Wells. $'207 30.
These are Only the most conspicuous instances, and
the cases in which there is reason to suppose that
iberr was the greatest proportion Of frauds. Bat the
smaller cases snow the same thing. Nh Beach only
said No" ouee IA four years. except when lie con-
! tractor wanted " No"
The plain aud Just differences from these facts Is
that Mr.. Beach presided tie board in time Of
/ great fraud, know tine men with whom the board
was dealing. and never lifted his finger TO protect
! the State. II viii bc urged in his favor that he
4 voted as his colleagues voted. and that their
| action was often uraHlmCus Az 10 that. II
! Is only necessary to Say tina: few members
81 ia Sc boards have saved enough character from
mol. tn