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

cloaching ana suggesting. Against this
combination of talent I mad 20 contend
practically single-hanaed, and anyone
who refers 20 the above list Of witnesses
can form his own Judgment as to which
$ de was really representing the interests
OF the citizens of Jersey City. If my evil
dence aided the contractor In the case
also II was simply in the line of my duty
Naturally the case of the city and that
OF the contractor were one in these pro-
eeed.ngs. and if the. contractor had been
the East Jersey Company that would
have made no difference 10 me, of course
50 long as the. question as to whom the
minde by my employers, the CITY officials
In line with the above facts, which
snow who the real prosecutors were in
the recent proceedings. and the still more
eloquent facts of the decision which
must be regarded as solely valuable 10
the East Jersey Water Company. arc
been made the victim Of the Combined
attacks of this great corporation, and
OF certain activet members of Mr.. Brink
erhoH S faction. have no complaint to
make of this, as expected it. and my
to the facts. They. are Suggestive, be-
done any harm in looking after the in
terests of the city is the aforesaid cor
poration; While the officials of the East
Jersey Water. Company have made in
situations and reflections in the form of
interviews to which they did not sign
their names, and, 50 far, have, not been
decidedly the advantage of my other
opponents in that their purposes and in
tarests are clearly avowed, consequently
would suggest. however that Mr.. Brink
erhoh and several other gentlemen of his
faction to whom, for the present. / at
tribute disinterested motives, had better
inquire more carefully into the purpose
and motives of the two or three indi-
viduals who are the handspring of their
of this kind is brought before the proper
tribunal, believe evidence will be found
suf1icient to convince these gentlemen
that they have been misled.
Finally, / would ask Mr.. Brinkerhoff
if it is his custom to regulate his charges
for special work according to the charges
Of some other man for some other work
If so, | cannot admire his business
methods, I will. however. assure ,our
Honorable Board tha. my charges Were
paid by private parties for similar SER
vices. and that l should absolutely re-
fuse any similarly exacting work for
less compensation.
Respectfully yours,
AS soon as Clerk Finck had finished
reading the letter, Mr.. Hardenbergh
showed his dislike for it by offering the
following resolution
Whereas, The communication of c.
c. Vermeule consists of personal ex-
plantations upon points as to which this
Board has taken final action by the al
lowance of his claim at reduced rate of
compensation, which reduction he has ac-
cepted; and
Whereas. Matters personal to Mr.
Vermeule. and which are in controversy
between him and private citizens of Jer-
sey City, should be settled elsewhere and
should not be brought before this Board
for discussion: therefore be it
Resolved, That the Clerk of this Board
be directed to return said communication
to Mr.. Vermeule. by mailing it to him
at his address. in the city Of New York,
with a copy of this resolution.
Commissioner Detwiiler objected to the
resolution and moved that the letter be
fled A vote to pass the resolution was
taken and lost by vote of to 2, Presi-
dent Jones and Mr.. Hardenbergh vot-
ing aye. The amendment to file the let
ter was put and carried by the votes of
Commissioners Detwiller, Simpson and
Bailey. The members would not discuss
the contents of the letter