New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-03-06
nooDY AND HIS CONTRACTS.
CONTROLLER coLER REVEALS SOME
PECULIAR TRANSACTIONS.
NEPTUNE AND NEw-UTREcHF
SMALL. xLoxprKEs. ACCORDING 10 THE
ABATEMENT - CORPORATION COUNSEL
ORDERED TO TRY TO RECOVER
SOME OF THE MONEY ALLEGED
10 HAVE BEEN PAIp
UNDER EvAsloNs

OF THE LAW.
Controller Coer yesterday MADE p"ohc .sa
..,n.ute. regarding the letting OF contracts by tne
CITY works Department. OF the former e'' Va
BROOKLYN His statement was az 'olo"s.
A. IN the case OF the Neptune-ave hiiins con-
.-..,s the Anne OF Daniel F. Doody contractor ~
sv,,n prominent. and the officials concerned are
those having charge Of water maintenance. IL az
poars tina, between September ~ ana Oe'o',, "
1ss; Mr. Doody received sl5,275 Al for repaV'ns
Iytrecht-axe from Fort Hamiton-aSe. 10 eiN..' ."
=, This amount was paid on eight separate YOUTH
-, less th,n 20 900 so as 10 evade the law which
,.op,r.s the advertising and public letting OF con-
tracts OF more than 500 each -.
The only apparent excuse for doing TINS WIN VI
repaying under the jurisdiction or the o''V'" no
,nr charge OF water maintenance is me iac' 'i,H "
ma. OF the expenditure is supposed 10 nave oeeh
- ,.o.ssarv hv the overflow Of pipe at Forty
n.n,h-s. and NewUtrecht-ave 80 ia' a. s os,' ~
.,cer,ained however only an expense OF szSs' can
be charged against this cause a,
M record of any authorization for this Work can
-. found on the books OF the Department, nor IL
there any contract on file relating thereto AL VI
the vouchers have been signed os oscar N""fp'
vs,sr P,irveyor without certihcatdn oy any W
49, ~ engineer that the work was properly
n.r,o-n.d The vouchers have been approved .,
p n Fielding. Deputy Commissioner. ana auu',e '
either by the Auditor. John X. sutton VI ia"
DEPUTY David s Qu.mby
Further Investigation then cisIioscu '
markaple, state Of affairs. s
7, snnesrs that New-Ctrecht-ave. was paNeu
-, s,g,,een months ago. and that the contract
r-,os for grading curbing and paving from lhr'E-
ninth TO Sixty-seventh-s,. was s2s'e' iHe AHer
,s NOW In wretched condition Inc person WIN 'a'N
-. Ter main was none other than this same con-
.r..,o, Daniel F. Doody. His contract called 1or
ra.,n,ing the avenue 10 It's original condition. IL
49, oausd for the retaining OF per cent o: the
a,,r.c, n,,ce as security for making sucn repairs
as might be necessary as eo"'eq1 -
plete or faulty work.
Y,u,ths,andnp these provisions OF the contrac.;;
,hs Wafer Purveyor certified Mr.. DOGGY pmis oi
ba75 for the work OF repAy!ds over IHe h or,c
vi aontraot Tor having the mains above reiefte
70 the contractor required TO perform a. ",s
own expense, and not under anothe. conu tbe eli
,he expense OF the city. And then 70 cap .ne e !.
rne he retained percentage on the waterman.
amounting to 1892 96 was. on the last DAY
Of the year 1897 paid over 10 rosriw perform 81
and The city had not already paid hil.i ~, ~ q
Of dollars on another contract lot repd''i Is ''e
bs Contract price for grading paving and curb
ing New Utrecht-ave. from Thirty-nntn 10 I II
SEVENTH ST. was ses 700 The distance hetween
,h,Ss ~ the distance between Thirty ninth ana
SYtvseyenth SITS. To rerave trench Oh suncit az
width to cover twenty-ihcn wa.e ar6 20 MAKE re-
~a,r. which might have been charged TO the con-
tractor for laying the mains cost slo,z2, ~,
against 1920 for sTadng payn oo anu curb 10 curb
Thia may not strange, however. VIII - -
i. stated that contract was Let subject 10 eo%,
petition. and the other was composed; as a"ea"'
Stated of orders OF less than 5000 eacn h.,
These and other facts in the case nave r veen
transmitted to the DISCREPANCIES ; ~ .Ieo he
requested to bring suit to recover as much Oh 'n'S
money as possible for the city