New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-05-10
THE CEILING REPORT IN.
sUPT ANDREWS AND CONTRACTORS ssAITE
AND SULLIVAN SCORED.
THE DIsTRIcT.ATToRNEY ASKED TO CONSIDER
THE EvIpENcE-THE COMMITTEE DIS.
CHARGED BIZ THE ASSEMBLY, AND
THE REPORT MADE SPECIAL
oRDER-Two PROPOSED
lBr TELEGRAPH TO THE TnIBuxE.1


Committee acting in with their counsel, Clark
ence A. Seward did thorough work when they were
aKng evidence respecting tho Assembly ceiling scan
daL That Is evident when reads the able report
which the committee presented this morning upon the
result OF their labor II is secret that report
was somewhat softened IN tone from fits first draft In
tho comments which made upon Controller wen,-
ples ovepsyment Of s14 900 to the contractor spaft
The Democratic members OF the committee demanded
this modification, and Mr. Fish, knowing tho value Of
united report, granted the request
But the report Is unstinted enough In its comments
upon the conduct Of c. B. Andrews the Supertntend.
ent OF Public Buildings, and OF John suaith and Tim
othy d. Sullivan, the contractors. The COMMITTEES
say that the facts thus far reported are by no means
the only ones Iustying the finding that Andrews Sui
Ivan and snath combined TO defrand tho people OF
the State" The sum Of $4,000, the committee Dc.
clare, was made by the contractors.
When Mr.. Fish presented his report TO the Assem-.
bly,, an odd thing happened First It should be stated
that hslthour before the Assembly met William
Mcguire the agent OF John snah the contractor who
has fed from the State, said to a friend in statest
wait until the committee reports In other words
Mr. Mcguire hoped that az the Fish COMMITTEES
should report It would be discharged from the further
consideration of the matter and that Mr. snath would
then be permitted to return 10 NewYork stats with
out fear Of being seized upon by the Investigation Com
mittee and compelled to tell all he knew about tho
Assembly ceiling scandal
When Mr.. Fish had presented his report, Mr.. Gibba
moved that the report be tabled and printed and made
a special order for next Tuesday at noon; ausi
that when the report was considered the COMMITTEES
should be discharged.
Mr.. Ainsworth moved TO amend that the COMMITTEES
be discharged at Mr. Crosby objected. az
Think said he. :" this committee should not be dis.
charged untl the House knows something about whas
the report contains" Mr.. Ainswortb insisted @I
don't what's in this report. Here we have waited
day after day, day after day, for the report Of the
committee and 1t has only just come In But it Is
In, and we don't want to have this committee IN
session any longer. / move that the committee be
discharged now"
The affirmative spirited and enthusiastic, the
negative uncertain and scattering, and the committee
was discharged. Willingly unwittingly, there-
fore, Mr.. AinswOrth has authorized John snaIh TO
return this State, and the Fish Investigating Com
mee is powegess TO touch snath, much less put him
on the wIrnesS-stand. Why Mr. Answorth should be
In such haste TO extract the teeth Of the Fish Com
mittee passes comprehension.
The report OF the Ceiling Investigating Committee
begins by referring to the hlght from the State OF
Contractor Snah, and TO the fact that the inquiry
was thereby greatly hampcred. The committee is
satisfied, from all the evidence, that the year 1858
John Snsith aud I. J. Sullivan contractors, aud
Charles h. Andrews, Superintendent Of Public Buila
ins combined and cOnspled together to procure from
tho state the contract for ceiling and staircase 10
pairs, at price greatly in excess Of the real value
Of the work. In which combination they succeeded aud
by means Of which they have already received $751;
063, and claim due to snaith the further sum OF
$500 81 for work which making liberal allowance
for the contractors profit, not worth moro than
$1eo,0OO. The report goes into minute details to
tho manner In which this conspiracy was carried into
effect The result OF the combination referred to
TO make competitive bidding farce, and TO Lead to
the acceptance of snslthS bid The report says that
Andrews falsely stated to the committee that he hsd
consulted with the Attorney General as TO his
right to extra compensation This led TO the passage
of resolution allowing Linn $500 for his own SER
vices.
The limit Of the appropriation made BY the act
was S27og SnalthS bid was Sg7o, i50; a, 500
was appropriated for the architect and S., 500 for
Andrews, which left T., ,542 for tho incidental ex-
penSes Of the commItee etc. showing conclusively
that snaitPs bid was arranged at a which would
leave room for the other exctions made by Andrews.
and just get within the limit of the appropriation
The report severely the socaled architect
Rowe as totally unit for the work, and one Of tho
conSpirators aiding in preventing honest bidders
from obtaining Information ON which they could mako
their bids, and altering the plans in the interest OF
Snalth and sullivan. While tho contract prohibited
the assignment of any part of the contract without
the consent of the committee the staircase portion,
amounting to $4,000. assigned 10 sullivan.
The committee say that there is strong reason for
the belief that sullivan and Snaih did this whole
job together under some pre-aTansed Agreements
US TO the division Of the spoils. OF the total moneys
paid Snaith SO5,746 Il was paid sullivan or bis hrm-
There was profit ON the work of sl2o,O0o of which
$50 os6 81 sn remains in the Treasury. This leaves
10000 in the hands of snaitl aud Sullivan. lnyese-
ments aggregating $4,000 being admitted by sulh-
van and 20 by snaith leaves to be accounted
for only $4,000, which the committee fail to trace
but they aro satisfied thar was not dtsbursed On
lccouut of legitimate expenditures on the CapitoI
Building.
The committee regard II plain that II the Ceiling
Commission had given the attention % the duties
imposed upon them which the nature OF such duties
,a,uircd a large part Of the fraud might have been
prevented The report closes as follows;
In closing, It Is our duty to suggest remedS hgis-
alton We have aSceitained that protection Is
foriod against the class of frauds perpetraaed here
imple system, which should hereafter be adopien oy
he state in ali IFS work When bid Is accepted. the
rames his bid. competent architect can readily
us Value Of the same These "details are
hen entered n books hep, for such pnrpose' eaiisd
Az The work rom time to time Is claimed to have
cen done the Items required from the contractor,
o enable the architect 10 make his approximate esti-
nate These items are compared with the value
fyen against them In the details of the original bid
his preycnts the contractor from getting In other
ems or nom putting value on his work after t s
one that he did not put upon Il when engaged In bid.
Ing. Then the architect, from time % time, In
orance with the provisions Of the contract signs an
estimate Of the work done, as shown ON
ie application OF the bidder and this he cortes 10
le owner other party Interested loss, OF course
lch deductions may have been directed by the con
act The amounts carefully kept IN this book
nd successive applications for payments are made
10 Same course IS pursued.
As to the comparison of the work done with tho
rfginal estimates, and when the second or further
srtGcate Is issued, II specifies the amounts OF an
srttdcaies that have been previously Issued. Thus
secs, he receives each certificate the total
mount Of the previous certificates and discover
once how nearly the limit OF the contract Is ap.
reached Had this been done In this Instances
ndrows would have been obliged % certify, when
certified the last bill, 10 wit, the thrtieth day
November 1888 that the certificates Issued
mounted to soss sas IS, less 20 per cent, and tho
ontroller, or his clerk no matter how blind, must
S1s,6TS s5.
We submit herewith the form OF bin that pay
'pg 10 future work upon the Capitol building, whics