New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-05-12
THE AOUEDUCT CLAIMS BILL STILL
TNSATORY.

The Aouoduct Claims bill, in the form IN
which il finally went to the Governor though
strinncd of its most vicious and outrageous
features. has stiH an unclean look. il 1t is as
innocent and harmless as its advocates claim,
then it was worse than useless because all the
preference the contractors say they were seek
ing in having their claims promptly adludi-
Gated could be had under existing statutes
Assuming. therefore, that there was no uteror
evil purpose behind the bill, its friends can
only defend its passage on the ground that
they did not want to leave Albany utterly
defeated. But this will hardly Ire sufficient
reason for the Governor to sign the BILL
In any view it is absolutely without merit
Its chief ostensible purpose is to give prefer
cncc 10 the suits of AQueduct contractors upon
the court calendar above all other actions That
doesn't at first sight look like any very unjust
advantage except that no reason has yet been
advanced why other prior causes should walt
mill after these later ones are tried But 1t
is perrcctly clear that even this little weak
relief which the contractors were ultimately
driven to seek at Albany by the force of out
ragged public sentiment Is not asked IN good
faith. John O'Brien is the chief contractor
His principal claim against the city is two ana
half years old but not only has he not sought
a preference for his suit upon the calendar
under the present statute, but he has not YET
begun his suit. More than that, he has not
even filed with the Controller his claim pre-
liminary TO the beginning OF such suit. Inc
action of Corporation Counsel Clark ana
the letter of his assistant, Mr. Blandy, show
that if Mr.. O'Brien had honestly desired such
preference upon the calendars he could nave
had it without the assistance OF the Legs
lature If the bill means no more, therefore,
il is pure impudencc to ask that the law should
single out these s,HtorS the recipients OF
favors which they have disdained to accept
in the usual and regular way.
But there appears 70 be something moro be-
hind the bill than a hasty reading might indi-
cate The first part simply provides that any
contractor having claim against the city
growing out of the binding Of the Aqueduct
can sue for it's recovery. OF course, he can;
he didn't need any new statute TO glVe him
that right. But the poTft seems 70 lie in what
follows. II is we'll known that ire contractors
have been trying 80 TO fix matters that they
could select their tribunal outside OF the eN-
sting courts Of New-YOrk City. 50 when the
CORPORATION Counsel objected 10 the bill IN It's
amended form as having that effect, the clause
was inserted providing that the Supreme
Court Of the First Judicial District, State of
New-York. shall have jurisdiction in any action
or special proceeding commenced for the en-
forcement of the payment OF the same" etc.
Then The promoters of the bill cried aloud that
that objection had been completely obvated
and so hastily forced it through both houses
during the last hours.
Bu, if that claim is well founded, what Is
the meaning of the words :" in all the courts
Of the State" in the concluding part OF the
| bill; "hc shall be entitled 10 have first
preference in the trial hearing thereof over
all other civil actions and special proceedings
in all the courts of this State in which any
such action or special proceeding may be pend
ingD? Taken altogether, it is the most UNI
sayory bill which the Legislature has left for
| the Governor to pass upon. II It's passage
did no other harm, it would open the door for
other attempts in the future by these or other
persons 10 Obtain from the Legislature special
advantages and privileges in the courts denied
10 less influential individuals.