The evening world., 1893-12-07

the same section and putting
the very opposite construction upon 1t?
Will he explain why IT Is that the law
department OF this city has one law for
the signal system to prevent a contract
from being awarded to a successful com
petitor. and another law for every other
patentee or contractor? VIII he say
why. under these very opinions. he
allows the city to drop behind every
other city In the country; that he insists
on policemen leaving their posts un.
covered while parading prisoners through
the streets; that he gives opportunities
for the commission OF murders and all
sorts Of crime? WIN he explain even.
where il the politics Of II?
II might be n difficult matter TO, get
at the many opinions which Mr.. Clark
has written in his time. but there Is one
can see for himself. 1t can be found in
the testimony taken before the FasSett
investigating Committee. and is num-
Oered Exhibit 80. pag 2,JJ2.
1t IL on the same question concern
Ing the purchase of patented supplies,
under the very section which in the
only be purchased after the Board OF
Estimate and A"pportionment has pre-
scribed the conditions. This purchase.
however, had been made by the Fire
and nc obnoxious HerzoR signal system
was at stake. Read this.
NEW YORK. March -. 1890.
Law Department. once OF the Counsel to the Cor
poration.
The Honorable Thee W. Myers. Comptroller.
sir have received your letter of the 9Th
inst. inClosing advertisements OF the Fire Depart
n.nt for proposal Tor furnishing rubber-llned hrs
hose. Maltese Cross brand: also Eureka nre-hosc
provisions OF section 6S OF the Consolidation act.
such articles can lawfully be purchased without
conditions having nrs, been prescribed by the
Board OF Estimate and Apportionment to secure
reasonable opportunity for competition. The sec
tion Of Consolidation act to which you refer pro-
,ides especially to patent paycments and the re-
palrA thereof Similar iDuuirles have been ad-
dressed to :he Law Department on prior occa.
sions, and It has uniformly been held by my
predecessors hat the conditions prescribed In the
section named apply only 10 the purchase and
repairing OF patented paNements. and do not in.
such as the hose In question. The following,
among others are the opinions TO which refer:
20. 1915 al, In relation to the purchase OF ~pItented
:. TO the Commissioner o, Public Works, Nov.
30, 1877, In relation to patented Yentilators.
3. To the Department OF Charities. Feb. 3. 1851.
In relation to patent valves and traps supplied
to the new insane asylum.
! To the Fire Department. Jan. 2e. 1878. in
relation to patent hose,
s. To the Board OF Education. July 81. 1881.
In relation TO patented furniture and cop! righted
articles.
1t vii! he observed that one o, the foregoing
opinions relates IN the purchase OF patent hose
by the Fire Department. and Is therefore II direct
precedent for the purchase now proposed.
am not disposed TO depart from the interpreta-
tion OF the section In which my predecessors
have uniformly concurred. | therefore advise
you that the lids Ia question may he received
and the contract awarded without Invoking the
action OF the Board Of Estimate and Apportiun.
ment. Yours respectfully,
WILLIAM II. LARK.
Counsel to the Corporation.
By comparison II the date OF the above
opinions 1t Will lie foun" that the last
one was written long before he Endorsed
Beekman's first view OF the signal sys.
TENS defeat. Mr.. Clark might say tina,
he was even W ong on the opinion last
quoted. but even that loophoIe, Is not
left for his escape. Since his opinion on
the signal-system question he has written
others, holding the same Interpretation
of the law as that set forth In the oDinion
regarding Fire Department supplies.
1t WAS when these two opinions were
shown to Commissioner McClave that the
latter held up his hands and said TO an
Evening World reporter:
II know ali abouf II 1 nave seen the
opinions. but what are Se 10 do? The
Corporation Council Is the legal adviser OF
the PoHce Board, and W. must take tbs
law from him
1t may be interesting to state here
that Mr.. Clark has positively refused tc
hear the Herzog side OF the story. He
has been written TO a dozen times In
vain. He has delayed explaining ever
what the Board of Police should dc under
the circumstances. He has practically
|. deadlocked everything. even refusing tC
answer letters addressed to him.
Here Is the concluding paragraph of
letter written by +. Benedict HerZog
Feb. 20. 1891, requesting Corporation
Counsel Clark to grant him a hearing:
'Thls opportunity becomes all the NOR