New-York tribune., 1896-03-31
REvIVING AN OLD CLAIM.
HEIRS OF JOHN o'coNNoR TRY TO FIND
HIS LAWYER
THEIR FATHER DID WORK. THEY SAY UNDER
TIE HAcKLEY CONTRACT AND NEVER

THEIR FATHER DID WORK. THEY eAY. UNDER
TIE HAcKLEY CONTRACT AND NEVER
WAS PAID FOR IT.
The following advertisement appeared in a news
naper yesterday morning:
Any one having information of wherea bouts Of
Isaac G. Boyce. lawyer or having possession Of his
Rn IL Pear-st communicate w''h r. H. oconnor'
The advertisement was inserted by p. H. O'Connor
ard John J. O'Connor. brothers The former lives
ST No. lS Pearl-st The brothers are the sons Of
John O'Connor. now dead, who was an old resident
OF the city. He engaged in the stree-ceanng busi-
ness, and the advertisement has reference to the
Hackley claim. which the city was compelled 10
pay recently This claim was for cleaning the
streets OF the First Ward in the years lSO 1861 and
1867 There was much scandal connected with the
contract. and the city refused to pay for the work
The matter got into the courts and at last reached
the Court OF Appeals, which decided in favor of
the claimants, who were the heirs of John L. Devlin
and assignees Of the firm of Hackley Devlin g.
De Voc. The elder OConnor held a sub-contract
from the firm. and the sons allege their fat ther
never was paid for his work Boyce for whom they
advertise. was OConnors attorney, and had pos
session or all the papers relating to O'Connor's $
claim: OConnor died in 1889 The fight over the
Hackley contract was still pending IN the courts
but with almost his last breath OConnor told his
wife and sons that the city would have 20 pay the
get what was due him. The members of the family
never thought much about II until six months ago.
when the city was compelled to pay the claimants
In The Hackley contract suit. The case had been
in litigation for quarter of "A century.
The settlement OF the case did not benefit the
O'Connors. because they were not directly repre-
sented in the proceedings before the Court Of
Appeals; and, in fact. they do not know what pro-
visions If any. had been made 10 fight their claim
in the lower courts. Boyce disappeared some years
aso taking al OF O'Connors papers with he
was last heard of in San Francisco.
i. II. Q Connor has been engineer in the Cen
eral Postofce for twentyone years and his brother
Is night watchman in the Pennsylvania stores. The
former said yesterday
Il called on Nathaniel Niles the attorney for the
assignees OF the Hackley contract. but he said
he bad never heard Of my fathers claim tried TO
get into the Controllers office TO get at the records
OF the case. but could not do so. Before Hackey
got the original contract he received anonymous
saying that If ne left $4,000 in a certain room
IN the City Hail he would the contract. He got
the contract, bu, 1t taken away from him after
ward. He then sued the city for payment for the
work that he had done. II we could find Boyce |
sure we could get our money ! have seen sew
eral lawyers, and they told me tina, must get the
original papers in the copied the city records
giving the fees paid 10 the lawyers in the Hackey
contract suit, and find they paid sl22.S77 &C.
There are men now living who worked for my father
when he had the contract for cleaning the streets
Of this ward"
Mr.. Niles and said that out of the $500 900
pad by the city the Devlins got only $4,000 He
had never heard OF the OConnors being among The
plain1aDts