The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1879-04-22
SUPERINTENDENT DUDLEY.
Further Inquiry Into the Annirs OF the De-
partment OF Buildings.

In the continued investigation Of the
Building Department yesterday Superintendent
II. ]. Dudley was again on the stand. He said
that there is not in the department any record
OF tho appointments and removals made by him
except the pay rolls. Some certificates Of ap-
pointment wero offered. ono Of which showed
that tho personal affldavits OF competency OF
Inspectors McCarty and Van Orden were not in
the usual form Of nlled-out blanks in the book
provided for the purpose. but written out on
lega-cap paper and pasted on backs OF leaves
OF the book These exceptions the witness could
not explain except by the suppostion that tho
book was locked up in his desk when the am
davits were made before Chief Clerk Webster
and consequently unnttanabc 10y him. II mp
penred that the witness. Ms Chairman Of tho
Board OF Examiners. knew on the 4th
Of March OF the rejection Of Inspector
Van Tasscll. but did not give him no.
tice until the 22d OF March. and made II
certincation on tho pay roll that enabled Van
Tassell to draw pny for eighteen days after his
rejection by the examiners for lack Of COM
potency. The witness could not explain four
spots on the back Of one OF the leaves OF the
affidavit book. which bore the appearHnce OF
having been where sheet Of paper had been
gummed and then torn on and said that he had
never inquired whether any Of his aDpolnters
took an oath OF office or not. This brought up
alleged his appointment Of Robert MrGiunis as
Acting Deputy Superintendent. Hn office not
known TO or recognized 10y the law. Mr.. Dudley
testified thnt he did not know of any such olliec
~ Acting Deputy Superintendent provided Tor
10y the law: that he npnointed Mr.. McGinnis on
the 2d of January 1872. mt salary oi e2ToO
per annum. and that his duties were To- take
charge OF the office IN the absence OF the Sup'r-
lntendent. and to Inspect buildings. The wit
ness continued:
. know thstM McGinnis isnota rractcai architect
lie m "de an AFFIDAVIT IN q hat he was lracmcn build
Inspection when went into o0ice created the oncc
do not Know asa matter Vt tact that Mr. NcGinui. was
rcectedby the Hoard OF Examiner h9 have h,ari that
That was some time thu. year. but could not say when
building law. appointed him and created the oflso be.
cause chose TO- without asking anyhody's advice.
Concerning o. c. Putnam, who, it is charged.
holds n sinecure position the witness testified {:
Oliver g. Putnam wasa clerk In the DEPARTMENT sH
years ago retained MIN alta salary which was CON.
aSds Mr. Means %dS%s TSt n Inc IRON Bureau and
hl. duty Is TO make ogi noncc. eoy nocc, make 9a'
he At the efiiec atsA N deiy ami is then under the
he sfend. in the once. wins 10 swear that be
Is her. hours DAY ami cannot sive anN lea ." re
in the department. counting the chiei cl.rs The a.
tendance book does not show tc time spent uN c,fhs u
the once but only that they put IN appearance in the
morning
CONCERNING the appointment. duties, &c. ot
Frank ID. Smaw. who ~ 10 churg"d. mas been
created senrch clerk" an office unknown TO
the law. the witness testified:
have known Mt Frank b smaw i've wears He wa.
a lawyer laplolntcd HIM sarch clerk ON th, % ui
January. 1873 There wasno such employee in fhr dc
pAruucnt before nobody who did the duc, Tor which
appointed him. ! don't know whether CAV. hiu %
written appointment There !. rtcurd 90 ms
appointur IN In The books the rparim,nt pav Mr.
sinAw sl Go wear His duty j. 60 search ut's To
property Tor the department There i an attorney
dcputfd to my department by the Corporation Counsel
lie isalye aud was alive when apponted hi. search
clerk his name Is John A Foley He - One of NY
present counsel here ! bad no personal Know edge
that SnAw was lawyer de- not KNOW that he wHsVNrr
admitted 20 practice ~ this stat created the gni,e OF
search clerk IN the department ON my own nutuuri 8
aftcr consultation with our attorney. Mt furt. VT
Smaw searches Tor the proper owners of PRO- eriN t
tn j. OF unsafe hudiu-s rtquir
ing immediate attention Tor which snn can uU
found. II necessary that the proper owners should he
found. so that we can serve them with noiio.
Q.-Is there not a provision in the law for the
service OF notice IN such cases. whore the
owners OF property are unknown; A.-l"s cir
Q.-And does not that law declare thnt yud
may attach n hHndhill or notice 10 the building
not being abb" 10 ilud TIA" owner OF the properly
and TINT In such case that shall be- dromrd .
personal service Of III" motto" on the owurrj
A.-The owners nam" must hs inserted 100 tu'
notice. rs understand the law Mr.. Snluw Aus
been paid f399.99 tor the three months pi JAiu-
AIRY. February. and March. In that tim" no LHs
furnished the names IN probably 100 cases.