New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-06-19
CHURCH'S REPLYTO CRAVEN.
REVIEWING THE CHARGES AGAINST HIM.
A LETTER TO THE EXAMINING ENGINEERS ON THE
AOUEDUCT WORK


Chief Engineer Church, of tho Aqueduct Com
mission has sent to the Committee of Examinint
Engineers, consisting of Generals Greene. Newton
and Gilmore, his reply TO the charges made agains
him by er- Engineer of Construction Henry S
Craven. Mr. Church says:
Mr. Cravens duties simply those Of an inspecttna
engineer % he Ms a%s ae for 70 and
out the plans furnished to him by the Chief Engneer 70
De- IN to the .tSfn eIecaiio" Of ali work
fly with the contracts This was the position 'ns' ee
Well what did he dol Instead OF faithfully Inspecting
the work on line and ia the tunnels lie Establishes
bureau" at the Field Headquarters at Iarrytown. He
took command and issued eircuiar-leteIs. MESSAGES
renorts elegrs and dispatches upon every possible
preteuce and OCCASION and for every possible OBJECT.
ard then summoned the subordinate engineers from
ton which WAS his duty to obtain personally on the
line HIS character his objects MS methods; were al
other wa" s0, left S o se% for I n
seasrs% S,' which wa. virtually dismissal
With respect TO the masonry al the saw MIL River
VINO he said condemned that masonry. bears out his
sertious no one As to the third charge OF no, with
the Tunnel AT or near Shaft No H. b. Mr. Craven sup
ports his professional opinions by the expert opn.
ions Of Renshaw, and Chaplin leveer and assistant
engineer, coDfesses on crossexamlnatiop that
neither had any experience whatever by which they
unfortunate IN also being opposed 10 the inquest author
contradcied TO the facts by the inspector mccarthy
Assistant Eng neer Bowley aud DIVISION Engineer VOL
psnsd Of and who gave their testimony straighfor-
ward, honest directuess, IN marked contrast TO Mr.
A. TO the fourth charge Mr. Craven seeks to sustain
this charge by testimony but by reading the spec
rraven s conrsdicted by Division Engineer Gould and
Assstant Yates He did not pretend to testify or In
any measurements OF timber, but argued upon
construction OF the contract
The fifth charge is refuted by tho documentary evil.
denoe and OF the office and his own letters and
reports aud Mr.. Craven does not testify to single
defined Instance OF being prevented Dy me or my order
t.,tn rio ~ nl
The sixth charge has better foundation than
the h RIHred true B
Information communicated IN an unproiessional ana
und-rhsnd OF Chaplin through Fitch to Craven
that the measurements were made by the inspector Mr.
Craven sent after the crossections before they were
entirely checked and had Mr.. WOlbrecbt before him
charging that the inspectors measurements were not
true Mr. wolbrech laid the scale on the crosssectons
In Mr. Cravens presence ana indicated the error to he
In the plotting. Mr.. Lamb the draughsmsn, tells how
he made his error
As to the additional charges about unauthorized
ments for slopes in open trench. the contract and
specincaionsu my fundamentally authorized my action
II the parcul ar excavation shall be paid for according
TO Mr. Cravens Interpretation OF the contract the pay
Crayen's views of sub-contractors seems TO be OF
He draws conclusions and swesrs to them as facts With
respect the four contracts for cuver the evidence
apon the advice OF the Corporation Counsel and my re-
the work being conceded 10 be proper and
charged by Mr. Craven as unnecessary criticised by
him alone He produces no other witness. They were
ordered by the COMMISSIONER Oh my recommendation
under OF the contract and the organic statute
They and proper 10 expedite the work
Considering the magnitude OF the work II may well
be a matter OF wOnderment that Mr.. Craven has been
unable to discover any real defect In IT, but has had the
erronteiy charge with ineficency the Chief Engineer
who had he must have known first conceived the
general scheme OF the entire work, who had with the
ape assist OF his deputy. Mr. Fely and the Con-
sulting Engineer Mr.. Davis. developed the complete
mans and performed OF Mr. Cravens proper duties
Of Construction Engineer than ne himself had
done; W no had moreover, in addition TO his regular
duties hled desk of hs Deputy Ftey during his
tracled Illness since last November