New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-12-28
DOCK DEPARTMENT SUITS.


discussed at great length ana was finally Ialu over
DOCK DEPARTMENT SUITS.
The subcommittee of the Assembly Comnltleee
on Comm, rec and Navigation now INVESTIGATING 'ho
Dock Department devote its attention ll'iGy S Ssl
torlay to the Tracy suits. IOrpoIa. ION Inns,
Whitney and his 4,.istan, W, H. mHorier Mr.
Whitney first testified that he was IN partnership
with Mr.. Dimock formerly Dock CoWhis'lonrr'
from 1850 to 1870 but ne was not related 10 nm
lie had had No conversation WIN MI llmoVN w
the duty IF the Dock Commissioners IN inc ttc"stiS
of penalties for Ol'Sructing piers; 'ohtu't liz
busincs, Of my department with the Si,ng ial.n
that would for private clients, SAID MI h''n'S
in answer to q question. ,,;.,.,.. 20 find
did You ever instruct your subordinateS 70 p- lnm
ont whether the Judgment parties Un Tue iI"Cf
cases. had real estate r Mr.. Williams asked HIM.
Il know nothing about these tnIis' except III a
general way, a they were turhe" oNc' /" "''
assistant for prosecution. .t . a.
MIR Whitney then examined NJ iehg, rs W
the dates when the actions IN ihe,e SuI'I W.
begun when lutgm Mt was entered MHcl an" Wy
in 0ppnt was returned unsitls ct, ana VARIOUS
other points He sand the actions we're r"ughl lnst
a. the cases could be rut 'nt" SlaP'' M - -
not rccDllect having any correspondence WllH "
Tracy or the suretIes IN these cases. ne N,u't
have tue books looked through, II desired ne nal
no personal acqualntanc" with the lN'"S 10 W
su is an probably would not know them II ne saw
them tie rcmc!nboTca having seen ou'Y one "I 'ho"
n red whiskerrd man named Tracy VIII once nau
come to his Office. lie did not remember whether
the visit was IN connection with the sullS VI n.y.
Being questioned concerning me PuIciaHe VI 'uI
no interviews with agents or counsel Tor iie Ihhdu
COMPANY. lie turned the whole matter over 10
Hugh /. Cole, bls assistant at that time iie sup
posed the dock was sold Tor WHAT 'iie '"Ilu!IS-
toner's appraised il at He had no conversation
then or before with the Commissioners co"ce ming
Rene asked il he knew that BENJAMIN p. Fair
chi d and other su'ctieS, who had been san 10 ne
bankrupt IN the Tracy lease, were now payilng
taxes on sums ranIihG from No,OOO 10 F-"''"' i''
Whitney said he did not
Are these the people whom you Said me o' i
day everybody knew TO be bankrupt :! Mr'
| Williams asked, 49,, 49,. 9,
lit was generally supposed TO be so at the time
! Mr. Whitney replied.
| merry or those shown by the taN-TO To be paying
| taxes. This lien is good for twenty years. Mr.
| Wheeler NV assistant informs me that one OF the
persons YOU mention MIR. Tone has been dead some
| time. If you will give me any information snow,
ing that any Of these persons nave property WI
Ice glad to proceed against h,m. heSe cases that
| have been presented lay The Dock Department
represent CLAIMS that have been dead for ten years
private person wonld probably never eite t ,c
claims to lawyer at all or some oil these par 10
the suit dead, and various reasons SAo" IL 10 pe
unadvsabe 10 proceed"
Have you asked the DOCK 10 parlhlehI 4oI III
formation on this point !"
Mr.. Whitney thought that IN the case OF private
client the latter would know thr grounds on Which
he wished TO proceed. In reply 10 question rs 10
his procedure III the case of private chcIt VINO
had lease of this kind, and who told HIM 10 50 on
Mr.. Whitney said: When taxing judgement LOT
private client against an individual ne ought 10
know the condition of the persons proceeded
AGAINST | gave no specific instruction IN TINS
case, If YOU wish particulars you must get them
Mr.. Whitney said he had never counted up how
many leases these persons controlled; lie mao
ne yer written opinion on the rights OF the
Pennsylvania Railroad Company on the North
River from Pier No. > to Pier No. :. lie rcmcnl,
oered one such case a. a contest over the " oahal
dist rict,' between Piers No and NO. Z, Last
River Mr.. Williams here sta ed that there were
thirty-one leases to David :, racy. covering iory
w. H. Wheeler testified that he TOOK charge 9I 'he
present bIancc of his business early IN lNSO There
were thea three cases peudiug -ain-t the lracys
Tbrv defended the first three. There Wa, another
suit against John ID. Tracy. Four additional SUITS
lave since been instituted. The eight surs
covered from fifteen to eighteen lenses here was
no contest in court over The hrSt three cases;
! Judgment was taken. The general defence ha9
been a deaia of use and occupation The suits had
been brought at the earliest possible dumrht.
When the sheriff had sent 10 know where property
in judgment could be levied on, tHc witness hai
generally referred III, deputy - tIr DOCK Dcpir'
ment. In the first three cases h"th sufeucs ana
principals defended the suits. There was no CON
test IN court over the three. In the DINER cases
| there was one in which the eAecutrlX OF thomas
! Tone in a suit now pending, set up III defence a
| counter claim, Mr.. Wheeler believed. Judgment
| had been entered in all the other cases
| When asked why thirty days had lutcl ygned be-
| tween the entering of judgment in these cases and
| the execution, Mr. Wheeler said otuer MAJ ters had
| occupied his time. When asked why, ~ the cases
| not defended, judgment had not been entered
sooner, be replie! that he could not Iec'hect the
time hen the actions were begun. lie asked TO
look up the records and report today. Concerning
| the levying upon the property, he sad After
issuing execution. the sheriff has invariably sent a
| deputy to find where property could Ice levied on.
I'm most instance, he has been referred 10 the Dock
| Department" In the case against Thomas I.
| Burt one of the suretes pleaded proceeding, IN
bankruptcy. There was a Judgment OF Tl3ooc;
In the Bnckhoster case JUDGMENT was returned
Mir. Williams stated that Mr.. Buckhblster paid
| taxes on $4,000 IN property according 10 the
| books Mr.. Wheeler was then examined IN detail
| npnn the various suits against the lTacys the
amounts involved the time when the suits were IN
| Ntutcd. the times Of judgment, etc.
The hearing will be continued to-day at II o'clock.
DIR. TALMAGE'S CHURCH NOT TO BE FREE.
| The Rev. +. Dewitt Talmage announced on SUM
day that the Brooklyn Tabernacle would no longer
be free church, but that the pewS wouli he rented
| AT auction January %. FMS statement caused
much SURPRISE in view of the reiterated stat eHcnts
Of the pastor that the Tabernacl: would he a free
Church as long as he preached IN l. and the extra
| IFS Indebtedness IN order 10 give the voluntary
| contribution system a chance of success HE
| change was brought abOut by the pTr,Sur- brought
10 bear II pOn the Board of Trustees nrn the lr7i
| Tabernacle was built eleven years ago shortly
| after Mr.. Iamage went from PhlladclphIa to
BROOKLYN, the seats entirely free, the envelope
| system being adopted. As IL was found that per
sons occupying the bcst seats dd not pay moro than
Others three years aiteTwaru "a schedule picc was
put on all tine best pews. This has been i una
| iusnfiirieut TO meet running expenses and when
| the. .Tustees met on December -, the treasurer
| showed that only Sl7 900 was subscribed for pcWs
! of which the schedule price was f25,G53. A. the
annual expenses about $4,000 tins left large
deficit and 10 was voted alter much dl-cHS-inh 10
| change the SYSTEM Mr.. Tamage stated that he
had been 50 severely denounced for saying the
church was free while Others said II was not free,
! aud the people seemed determined not 10 support
the SIS EN- that perhaps II was best to distribute
the expenses of the church equally over all.
The plan adopted is TO sell all The pcwS on the
| lower floor except the last two rows and also the
a. IA. ,llart ,,ali IA all Ia.