New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-07-14
the work done on the tunnel No division en-
ginccr could give more than a partial explanation.
~ r,ypr>cryE pIrNDER

posed rubble work was unnecessary, subsequent
developments had shown that Commissioners
Ridgway and Barnes were right in recommending
the change Nh. Boardman referred 60 the con-
trovcrsy between Contractor Clark and Division
Engineer Watkins The witness gave a detailed
account of this trouble. which due to a mis-
understanding but he declared that it the
fault of the engineering department, and IN conse-
qucnce OF this alleged biunder the city hod 10 pay
out about $4,000. At least MIR. Boardman SAID
half that sum. Mr. Church said he made a care
ful examination OF this matter ana became con-
WINGED that 1t could not put any blame on the con-
tractors.
In answer to the witness here Mr. Boardman read
as evidence a letter from Division Engineer Wat
fins, declaring in the most emphatic
manner that the engineers wsrs not
The orders given were perfectly plain, and the
contractors lad no right TO any extra compensa-
ton
The witness said that full Investigation had
been made of the matter, and the report was in
favor of the contractors. The point was that two
by the contractors. Mr. Boardman wanted to
know if il would make any great difference
whether the mass was eXcavated at one time or
another. That is, If the mass had been taken
out as the engineers claimed TO have ordered, no
extra payment would have been made; then
why sbould thousands of dollars be paid
for doing this work at another time
Mr. Boardman showed that the actual cost OF rock
excavation on Section l was twice as much as the
ORIGINAL CSilmdicS HIS MI oHuICh o"iN N"'
due to the bad character OF the work
ALLOWANCES FOR EXTRA WORK.
The question of allowances for extra excavation
was taken up The contracts provided that the
masonry work should he done the tunnel work
was prosecuted. Mr. Church insisted that this
provision should be complied with strictly by the
contractors but the Commissioners took an oppo
site view They agreed with the contractors and
Engineer Craven that it was impracticable.
Commissioner Fish-Ths reflects your witness
Cr9ven9
Mr. Bcartman-I don't care a cent whether 1t affects
Craven one else I'm after the facts IN this cdsc
Nh. Craven can take care OF himself guess
o.-Now. Mr. Church, did it not strike you as very
strange that &C the beginning OF this work ue 0ohi
missioners placed themselves in opposition TO you ana
the pain Interpretation Of the contract? Did you not
feel called upon to resign? A-Oh, no. did not con-
sidcr it serious enough 10 do that
SERIOUS INJURY TO THE TUNNEL
The result of leaving the masonry work un-
finished had proved highly injurious to the tunnel
Water had come in softening the rock ana ne
ccssitating the use of heavier masonry.
Q.-Can you estimate Mr.. Church, how much the city
would have saved of the contract had been
complied with in regard to the immediate putting in Of
nasonFy7 A.-No. 1 cannot say. Tho contracts Tor
sections and define precisely the amount of eXavaon
be paid by the city, yet the contractors make extra
claims there also.
GLOW is that Mr. Lovett? How much do you claim
In these seetiOns AThat Is an indefinite question: MI
Eoardman (LauGhtcr)
The witness read from the contracts to show
that the contracts perfectly explicit on every
point, but it appeared that after all they were
much the same the rest. ms lea 10 a
general explanation of the contracts, in the course
of which il was shown that IN the execution OF
the contracts the chief engineer Is the chlei arpHsr
and the Corporation counsel had com1faIlVely
little TO do with IT.
o-As chief engineer. Mr. Church decided that
the contractor entitled to all the excavations they
made which not due to neslsence2 A-No Sir
! dia not
o-But in the end your Judgment IS absolutely final
as to what compensation shall be paid? Ayes but
can't give any decision not covered by the provisions OF
the contract
o-Then when once YOU have given decision it is as
final a. that OF a court? Ayes
SHOULD THE REMARK BE MODIF1EDl
Mr.. Beekman.-Mr. Chairman, l think that reply Is
subject to modification.
Mr. Nicoll.-whcther you have any right. Mr.. Church,
TO make such decision, rests with the Corporation
Counsel does it notl
Mr.. ChuIch.-Yes.
Mr. Lovott-Bu the engineer is the arbiter as to what
tho contractors shall be paid and not the Corporation
Counsel!
Mir Church.-Ycs.
Mr.. BceAman (sharplyI don't think it is for the in
tcrests Of the city the counsel Of the contractors
should cross cxamnc the witness on this question.
Senator Hendricks, who presided rs usual in the
absence of Chairman Fasscit, agreed with Mr.
Bcei.man. Here Mr.. Church proceeded to explain
that il was not true that the city had pald OUT
$500, 900 Tor extra excavation. rs teSuhed 10 pS
Mr. LYON of the Controllers office, and as admitted
by tbc Controller himself. The charge all arose
from misunderstanding OF charge he maze IN
Max. 1884 IL the way hc computed inc con-
tractors monthly estimates. Since then he allowed
for the thickness Of the masonry outside the Drck
work the width of the wceperS Bat TINS lnsno
instance went outside the me A. a, a, INC
boundary of the excavation by the city, wlnch
line bv The way, is variable and can only be fixed
BIZ the chief engineer himself when he hnalIy
Passes upon the work. Until he decides where II
hat nnh
extra work.
This change had been made because the CON
tractors complained that too much money was KEPT
back from them by the city. They felt oppressed
This was :hc foundation. Mr. Church SAID Tor the
statement. Mr. Church explained his relations
with Maurice d. Flynn. which simply consisted IN
FLYNN taking an option from him TO buy stock IN
a company formed TO push meter for detecting
waste in city water that Mr.. Church had patented
T1ynn did not buy. and that was all tnere was OF
H. This was all he ever had TO do with any con-
Mr.. Churchs examination will go on to-day.
The ruinors published yesterday that Governor
Hin would remove Commissioners Barnes ana
Baldwin were pronounced ridiculous by the friends
Of Mr. Hill and by the members of the Senate Com
mittee. n, ~,
Directors Of the Real Estate Exchange drawing
their attention to the disclosures or reckless
waste of public money and work on the new Aquc-
duct and REQUESTING them TO take action IN the
matter George :. Icsplnas>e George DcfOrcSt
barton and Constant A. Andrews have been APP
pointed special committee to attend the meet
irgs Of the Fassett Investigating Committee and TO
report to the EXCHANGE what measures can he
taken TO prevent useless expenditure OF the CITY
monty.
GETTING MORE TINE TO ANSWER KEENAN,.
The time for nterposing answer TO the suit of
Jobn Keenan, against O'Brien & Clark, the Aqueduct
Commissioners, was extended for twenty days by JUS
tice Ingraham. in the Supreme Court. Chambers yes
fcrday. Cbauncey s. Truax asked for the extension
saving that his associate. f. T. LOvat had been so
busy in connection with the Investigation before the
Senate Committee that the time for answering had
slipped by without his noticing Il. II was a mere
oversight lie had called on Colonel Bliss kcenan's
counsel and offered the costs of a motion for the eX-