New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-12-28
MR. TBOUPSON7S REPLY.

| in the Department of Public works. III cahhoV
be denied that this document has been pre-
pared with a good deal of ingenuity and ability
and q careful reading of it will inspire feellng
of regret that this public official has not devoted
the energy, zeal and keenness which he mas
shown in finding excuses and speciOus justifica-
| tions for his course to the protection OF the
| nublic interests which have been put in his
charge. The whole answer, with its elaborate
array of figures and its parade OF precedentS
and authorities, is disingenuous and misleading.
Mr.. Thompson begins with a labOred attempt
to defend tbe unbalanced bid system in con-
nection with public contracts. But In the il8h'
of fine results which have been shown to follow
such bids, both on the canals and in the puDhc
works of this city, this argument Will nnu lew
TO accent if. And it is sadly out of joint with
the account given in another part OF TINS
answer of the efforts of public officials 10 ue-
feat such bids-efOrts, however, In when MI
| Thomson does not venture to claim thaI he
shared 1t is altogether too late 1or MI
| Thompson or anybody else successfully 10
| undertake the defence of unbalanced Dds
The fraudulent character of that contract sys-
tom was demonstrated cOncusively at the time
of the Canal Ring exposures in 1873. Ana as
has been fairly shown, and admitted III more
than one instance by Mr.. Thompson himself,
the unbalanced bid system is no more advan-
tageous to the city than it was to the State. The
fact that the State found no difficulty in getting
rid of the evils of this system makes it PLAIN
that there is no excuse for their continuance
under the city government.
Mr.. Thompson makes no better showing IN
his defence of the misleading estimates III his
I 10 hat IL
Gin knowledge of the character of the earth and
crock beneath the surface the experienced con-
TRACTORS of the city undoubtedly excel any
surveyors or engineers who can be Obtained
That is absurd. Mr.. Thompson employs as sur
yeyors q number of men who were similarly
emDioyed at the time Of the Tweed Ring.
These men have had many years experience III
this work. They are professional engineers,
and they are literally paid by the city to make
surveys and estimates They supervise an en-
| tire contract from beginning to end. To say
that such men, continuously employed at such
work. and paid because of their special knowl-
edge. are not as competent to make estimates as
the contractors even though they also have had
experience from the time of Tweed, is too
much of a tax on credulity. Mr.. Thompson cx-
plains in detail the methods of making esti-
mates, showing that, In cases of sewers at least
behring's are made at intervals not greater than
| fifty feet. This docs not agree at all with his
statement which he made on December 10;
To prevent in the future far possible
the injurious operation Of unbalanced bids | in'
cluded in the departmental estimate which submitted TO
the Board OF Estimate and Apportonment on tho lst OF
September the of 81 900, which has been allowed
In the provisional estimate, to enable the Department
TO make borngs TO ascertain accurately the relative
quantities OF rock excavation and earth excavation for
sewers and grading work Hitherto the Department
had no means to make such bOrings, and the rela-
tive quantities OF rock and earth had to be
estimated from surface appearances.
Mr.. Thompson's entire defence may be said to
rest practically upon the statement that out Of
a large number Of contracts made and COM
peted under him the actual cost exceeds the
| estimated cost by only a small percentage.
And to sustain this he gives the figures on
| 1868 contracts. The statement conveys a
wrong impression. He does not include
| all the contracts on which we have shown
overpayments, but only those in reference to
certain kinds of work. Moreover, if the "esti
maten on any contract was enormously excess
i've, as often happened, it would still figure in
Mr. Thompson's table as against the final cost.
! This proves nothing whatever. 1t is also a fact
that the estimates often include items not
| furnished. Hence contractors may be paid ex
cessive prices on other items, andyet not exceed
their total bids or estimates.
1t is work OF great magnitude to examine all
the items on contracts to show exactly
where the city loses. The results
on only a few have been given in
THE TRIBUNE. On twelve of these a loss of
1854, 765 was shown. Hence we can hardly be
expected to accept Dir. Thompsons statementOf
the loss on the three hundred and sixty three
contracts mentioned by him In number of
cases We have shown that contracts were let at
excessive rates. But Mr.. Thompson speciously
explains these contracts in characteristic way.
He says that when Mutt g. Kearns werepaid 81 80
a lineal foot for sewerit was fair prices and
when Vincent Clark was paid $12 so lineal
foot for the same kind of work it was "to the
advantage of the city," as was also the price
paid McKim e. Son, $19 500 for similar work.
The grave charges in regard to the scandalous
5000 order plan of evading the law, Mr.. Thomp-
son treats in the same contemptous way that he
has treated the statute itself. In referring
to the repairs on the West Flfty-sixth-st sewer,
he says that the orders were given cat various
times from 1880 to 1892" But the case re-
ferred tOin THE TRIBUNE was that in which four
orders, amounting to $3,302, were given in
nine weeks; and more was paid for repairing
q sewer than the cost of building q new one.
Under this system Mr. Thompson has paid
nearly 81 ton more for coal than the market
price, and scattered the public money In a SINH
larly lavish manner among personal associates.
Altogether this is far from being an answer
which should satisfy the head of the city gov
eminent, to whom it is addressed, or the tax
payers Of New-York, whose interests Mr..
Thompson Is sworn to protect. 1t is not an