New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-06-01
~ ILDERMIN on IRIIL.

One of the big fish is now in the District
Attorneys net in Brooklyn, but it is not i'm
probable that he will slip through the meshes
Alderman Mckee is on trial for completely II
the Columbian celebration frauds, and his con
viction will depend upon the seriousness with
which the jury consider the evidence of a very
plain case. The facts as presented in the open
| inc address OF Assistant District Attorney
Clarke are reproduced from the trial of Pisott
The stands were erected without valid author
ity of law and in violation of the city charter
The work cost less than $4,000, and over
ST. 900 was paid for it ont of the city treas
urv. There was no advertisement calling f0i
competitive bids aS provided explicitly by law.
Pigott had the job under his control, paid for
the material and labor and sold the lumber
after the celebration. Since he was a city
official he wa, forced to employ Ross dummy
contractor. 4 poor old man living Oh the top
floor of a tenement About Ss, 900 was made
ont of this job. Mckee, as chairman OF the
Aldcrmanic committee. certified to the correct
ness OF Ross fraudulent claim and. "a the
prosecution has agreed to prove, aided and
allotted the swindlc.
As Alderman Mckee has the sympathy and
support not only of his indicted colleagues, but
also Of the maihin organization of the DEM
ocI-ltic party in Kings County. strenuous ell oits
will be made 10 secure either his acqnlttal or
"A disagreement; Of the jury. 1t Is test case,
since the evidence against him is a. strong as
against any of the other Aldermen and super
visor, who assumed the responsibility OF sane
tioning expenditures that were flaudulcn. on
their face and were contracted without legal
warrant His acquitta would undoubtedly be
the prctext for the abandonment OF all the
,riminal prosecutions ordered by the Grand
Jurv. We trust tina; there will he no mis-
carriage Of justice but are not treasured by
the carclcs>ne>s with which the jury has been
made up. The District attorney, Office, while
if j. presenting the evidence in these cases with
lucidiiy and carnc>nc>>, is not rs keen in It's
scrutiny of juiymcn as il ought to be.
One thing can be assumed with confidence.
II the jobbcr, and suindlers who defrauded
the city and the county with the connrancc
Of officials. and in utter disregard Of the safe
guards provided by law for the protection OF
taxpayers. escape conviction, little public IN
tcr,-t will hereafter be taken in the inyeStiga
ton Of municipal abuse, by grand juric>. The
farce II indicting knlycS and boodlerS has
been enacted frequently in Brooklyn during
recent years. Convictions never follow pre-
sentiments If the indictments in the Column
ban celebration eases fail 10 land the officials
and contractors in the prnitentiary. il will he
a sign that iurc> are under political inlm
cncc and that corrupt officials with direct
pulls upon ring and gang can dciraud the
town with impunity. No taxpayer who has
read attcntivcy the evidence in the pigoit case
can be in any doubt respecting the llegaliiy
of the expenditures and the auditing OF the
bills. or hesitate T. declare that the city and
county have been robbed by "a political com
binc" What j. evident 10 every di>intere>ted
citizen the District Attorneys Office ought to
be able to make plain TO an honest, intelligent
inn