The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1896-03-20

VERMEULE'S K RAYS
Disgusting Inside Of the
Water CertioraTi Ex-
posed to Finan-
ciers.
Mr.. BRINKERnoFF ANSWERED
The Crew of East Jersey experts
and the Deadly Harm They
Have Done the City.
dR. BRINKERnoFF ANSWERED

days ago. sent letter to President John
M. Jones of the Board of Finance, pro-
testing on behalf of the Citizens Water
Committee, against the payment of a
claim Of S2,400 to G. c, Vermeule for ex-
pert services during the recent certiorari
proceedings of the contract awarded to
the Jersey City Water Company. The
objections were that Mr.. Vermeule had
charged for thirty-two days services at
the rate of SIS day. The writer says
the claim was exorbitant and based his
statement on the alleged fact that an
alleged expert named Croes had rendered
greater amount of alleged services for
a smaller sum. There We're also in the
letter several caustic remarks pertaining
to the water question and some personal
ones referring to Mr. Vermeule. Presi-
dent Jones, with some assistance, tried
to have the letter made a part of the
records of the Board, but to no avail.
Last night the Board of Finance met
and received letter of reply from Mr.
Vermeule. 1t is interesting. Not only
is Mr. Brinkerhof criticised, but some
astonishing facts concerning the OBJ
struction of every move to get new
water supply are given.
The following is the letter.
New York, March 9, 1896
4
of Jersey City, New Jersey:
Gentlemen-At your last meeting you
We're favored with a communication criti-
dered the. city. This communication is
so full of misrepres sentations and vim
dictiveness that feel mat it calls more
for an apology to your Honorable Board
from the writer than for an answer from
me, but it has been received and pub
llShed, and have no doubt you will
recognize my right to reply TO it.
Since Mr.. Brinkerhoff is not acquainted
With. with me and did not attend the hearings
do not feel that he is qualified to write
such letter as this, or that the senti-
ments expressed are likely to be his own.
Nevertheless, he has made himself re-
sponsible for them by his signature, and
beyond that I have no positive knowl-
me may relieve the danger of deception
which .el, comes comes from certain insinuations
First. an attempt is twice made to con-
vey the impression that the recent pro-
ceedings We're brought entirely by a So
called Citizens Committee in the inter
est of the people of Jersey City, and that
IN my capacity as expert l was opposed
to the interests OF your citizens; Let
the writ of the so-called Citizens Com
mittee was only one out Of five brought
naming four prosecutors were entirely
II the interest Of the. greatest water s.,el
after the first hearing the only counsel
who appeared at all were Mr.. Charles
Corbin and Mr.. Thompson representing
allied Corporations and and Jf Judge Stevens ln of Of
zens' cornrnittee. Judge Stevens Stevens was was
the corporations never lost a hearing.
Next ] submit a complete list of the
prosecutors Witnesses
Andrew Bardner, Assistant Engineer
East Jersey Water Company.
William H. Corbin, counsel, East Jer-
Sey water Company.
Fred j. Gube1man. Assistant Engineer,
East Jersey Water Company.
Lebbeus B. Ward, formerly Engineer
J. James r. Croes, formely engineer
Morris Canal and Lehigh Valley R. R.
Whiting G. Snow, President Montclair
Water Company and Treasurer N ].
General Security Company, the company
organized to control all the waters of
Northern New Jersey and many water
companies, including the East Jersey
Water Company.
Lehigh Valley R. r.. Co. and Morris
William j. Powers, Superintendent of
John G. Payne, Civil Engineer.
= William Roome, Civil Engineer and
Company.
Henry Belden. Contractor
The Mavor and five other city officials
You will observe here that eight of the
eleven witnesses called exclusive of the
city officials, who were apparently called
ben enanleves and officera of tbe " Eaat ,ss1
Jersey Wafer Company and ifs allied
corTora tions The facf That al1 4besa cnr
nors.siof1s i were nr-acticaIIv identifsed win
i,e br9Ilgbt ont in fhe testimony If Mr.
snow What becomes. then of Mr. Rrin
jeerhoff,s insin5latjon In the Jiphf of these
facts. You will notice f,lrtfer that he
speaks Of Mr. Croes'S "Isabor ana time
bestowed In behalf of his empiovrnent
and Of my own Time and labor bestowed
IN behalf Of the CITY and the Jersey civ
Water Company. The above IS a slIffi-
cient answer ia this jnsinuation h.rf IL
more is needed allow me 10 call yo11r
attention 10 the testirnonv Of Mr. Croes
pages / 2eO "a j 2e5 Isl the printed case
You viii observe that this testimony is
solely for the purpose Of establishing
the monopoly of the Morris Canal and
Nortfiern New Jersey water sheds ~ u
xr Br:SJlerhcT if this fesfinoonv was
psisl for by his alleged citizens, eommits If
tee, or by its benenciar1es, the East Jer-
lsss TladA no 1aiditinn ia Nr C,Toas' com ,,e
per,saf:on on account If sie "a vr,,ssnt
apd the natural inference Is ti,at he
rgnmfffeo naid for festiYnnnv IA he ,saI sta3
IN procuring a deeision sof tbe En,,rt
yhsch threatens to become eyceeflingiv
burdensorla to the taxpavers of Jerseyv
civ. ard extrernelv yalllaila I'd fhe F,ast
Jersey Water Company
wish ii fefi1itely understood that there
is M. differenca in this matter between
myself and Mr.. Croes. Mr.. Brinckerhoff
s11fferly fails 70 even insinuate f5af Mr.
Grees would regard my charges as ex-