New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1885-10-10
HILLS sCANDALOUS CANAL CLAIMS

UJJDS SCANDALOUS CANAL CLAIMS
Mr.. Hill makes a weak and flimsy defence OF
his part in the job which took from the State
Treasury $4,000 in payment OF some ancient
and fabulous canal claims. This defence is
given in his own newspaper and is to the effect
that he had Just been admitted to the bar when
these claims were first brought to his atteD-
ton and that he simply acted the part OF AN
attorney, getting whatever he could for his eli
ents. If the State paid too much, he argues,
that was the fault of those whD should have
guarded its interests; and it he made large
sum of money for himself that. he says, was IA
matter which alone concerned him and his
clients AS to the morality of this defence
coming from II man who asks TO be maze
guardian of the public interests-it is not now
necessary to discuss. 1t is precisely what would
be expected from the man who aided Tweed III
stealing 500, 900, 900 from the people of this
eity, and then defended his cOurse by stating
that il added no hing 10 the taxes of his constit
uents in Chemnng County. But the facts are
quite different FROM what Mr.. Hill would have
them appear.
These claims had no standing before the
Canal Appraisers or before any court In fact,
the evidence taken before the joint Legislative
fairly demonst rated that these claims had no
foundation in fact; as the damage was caused
by "A freshet in Catharine Creek in 1857 and
not by the canal. The persons whose property
was damaged, and who shared in this $4,000
award made no claim at that time against the
State. J. ). Locke and others Of these persons
testified that teere gears after the Jrcshet Mr.
Hill and his partner suggested 20 them tnat the
/ q 1,..t
State was liable and these lawyers offered to
collect the claim for One-half the amount
allowed. Under this arrangement, and by aid
If the notorious Patrick-aftcrward sent to
the penitcnliary-Nr. Hill secured the passage
of bill legdliLing these claims. IL was then
easy work. The claims were slipped through
WI hout any contest on the part OF the State
Not witness was examined on its behalf and no
attorney was employed to defend it.
That was Mt u time when tine State was being
ileeced right and left by all sorts of fraudulent
canal claims, and when the Canal Ring was in
the height its power. Patrick was an Assem-
blymen, and in the same year he induced
Tweed to invest $4,000 in llllPs newspaper.
Hill himself was elected to the Assembly in
that year. 1t was not when Hill W ts first adj
mltted to the bur, bug five years later. The
investigating committee WIS unable To find any
evidence that the claims had ever be fore been
presented to the Legislature; but If 80 they
must have been summarly rejected. The
claims were enormously swollen. Witnesses
testiiied that they wora asked by Hill anI his
PARTNER 10 make the claims large, rs the larger
they were tine bigger the share that went To
Hill. \ man who said that HIS damage was
only 800 was induced 10 increas" his claim
ten fold, and he was allowed Sl,'i5, with
interes,, though hiS entire place was afterwhrd
sold for SOD Witness - testified that the
amount of the award was more than the full
value of ali the property IN the gorge or valley
where the frcshct occurred.
Mr. Hill more than any other man knew all ot
these facts. In his defence he sets up that II
the claims were wrong or excessive 1t was not
his fault. Let us see. When no went 10 the
Legislature not dollar Of these claims had
been paid. He took au oath to care for the in
terests of the State. He then went 10 work and
not only secured an appropriation for these
claims but he obtained an allowance of over
so. 900 in Understanding not only unj uSt
hit unprcccdcntcd-Ind nearly one-half of this
interest none went into his own pocket. After
this it would be the pIrt Of wisdom for David
B. Hill to make no further attempt to defend
this scandalous matter. And let us add that it
WAS not THE TRIBUNE which brought these
charges against Mr. Hill. The investigation
was started by "A message from Samuel j. Til
den To the Legislature in 1878. TIE TRIBUNE
has merely reprinted the facts and testimony.
|