New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-03-05
JoHs orIIrss PRESENTS A slo BILL
WANTS OVER 100000 MORE FOR WORK OF I'm
BROOKLYN DRYDocK-THE NAVY DEPART

WANTS OVER 100000 MORE FOR WORK on TN
BROOKLYN DRYDocK-THE NAVY DEPART
MENr WILL FIGHT THE CLAIM.
Washington. March (speciaD.-Drydock No .
at the Brooklyn Navy Yard, which has become -
notorious through its troubles. has developed Q
new feature to embarrass the naval ADMINISTERS
ton In bill Just presented to Secretary Lon9 ~
John Gillies Of New-York. the first contractor Tor
the structure, who now asks various amounts az
gregatIng than 100000 for extra work. losses
through delays on the part OF the Government and
for profits which he alleges would have accrued to
him had not the work been taken out OF his hands.
The obvious purpose of the bill In considered by the
Navy Department as a preliminary to the begin
ming OF suit In the Court Of Claims for damages
and deferred payments.
Secretary Long promptly referred the matter to
the Bureau Of Yards and Docks. where the claims
Of Mr. Gillles are being investigated. The first con-
tractor for a long time been threatening to Sc
cure accounting with the Navy Department. for
his treatment when he was elected from the works
three years ago. and some disappointment has been
expressed that he delayed his attack for so long
period. He got the contract In November. 1892.
being much the lowest bidder among nine Compel
ltors, some Of whom had previous experience IN
dock building. His figure $4,000 which was
later increased 1855 by agreement to engthen the
structure 70 feet and sS3 IS for changing the loca-
ton GA feet In shore The total time limit was thirty.
two months for completion.
Gillies after taking possession had made 20 little
progress In the following years that no expert
believed ne would finish the contract. and its
annulment was threatened. Again In August 1894.
the inspectors and all naval officials agreed that he
would be able to build the dock but Secre-
tary Herbert gave him n. extension after citing
him to appear TO show why the contract should not
be forfeited This repeated again In Novem-
Der. 1894 and finally in April, 1895 when the dock
site in pitinbe state OF Generalization 6scre-
tary Herbert turned Gillies out after paying him
sl65. o33 "a. and the Walsh Brothers undertook 70
complete the work in nineteen months for $4,000.
experienced dock asking nearly 500 900 moro Tor
the work The bad work which marked the Walsh
contract has already become familiar to Tribune
readers. and Is to be fully exposed In short time 81
trial OF Mr. Menocai set for next Monday az the
New-York Navy Yard. but he will not reach New.
York from Nicaragua until Tuesday. and the hrst
hearing has been practically postponed unui
The bill OF Mr. Gilies excites derision at the Navy
Department. where its items are declared 70 o.
preposterous II IL distinctly stated. however tnat
no such imputation Of fraud can be made agalnst
Ges has been charged to tho contractors, VINO
succeeded him. On the contrary. what WORK ~
did was honest. but Il was useless. he knew noun
ing about dock building and after he had started
what to do next and while he puzzled warshps haa
TO 20 with no prospect OF docking
The Department will resist paying him cent
and attempt to show how cheaply his oondsmen
got of by not being sued for serious damages 70
the Government.