New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-12-01

As an Introductory to the report proper. Judge
Countryman says in part:
l may remark at the outset that the report or
the Commission is fair and temperate state
| ment. so far rs 1t goes. OF the general pur )ort
! Of the evidence. but does not contain, evld"tlY
I from want of time all the results or the inNesu-
CATION and. for the same reason, shall be I'M
able to refer in detail to all the conclusions that
| may he drawn from the facts found in the
| dispositions taken and returned by the N'i"-
mission.
As TO contractors-I do not understand that
the Commission charges even suggests. that
| there was any collision amounting TO fraud III
! legal sense, on the part or the contractors
either in procuring their several contracts or IN
| falling to perform such contracts after they
| were obtained. In any event, | nave not ais
| covered the evidence on which to base such
| charge with any prospect of sustaining II i'll
court OF Justice Nor IS there any evidence re-
turned by the Commission, except Terhaps' IN
! two or three instances. which wouId. III u
opinion warrant resort to legal rened'fs
| against contractors fer any breach Of terms ana
| conditions OF their contracts. The c"ntIactvfH
We're acting in their own interest ana deahhS
at arms length with the state, and so long as
they were guiltless Of fraud or of collision win
the state officers they ought not to be held ac-
countabe for the loss or damage sustained by
the State through the negligence OF derehct'""
| OF It's own agents.
| As TO state oficers-Publc officers however,
occupy n different position. They are the repre-
seniatives of the state. charged with a public
trust and their action must conform to the
authority conferred and the duties imposed upon
| them by law
INCAPABLE ENGINEERING WORK.
The report then takes up the State Engineers
connection with the work and his duties thereto
and gives much space to Il detailed description
Of how the state Engineer performed his duties,
and also the system on which his subordinates
worked from which the following extracts are
taken:
The state Engineer did not. before the con-
tracts were made. ascertain with practlcable ac-
curacv the quantity Of embankment, eXcaNa-
ton masonry or other items Of work or ma
terials TO be included in the contracts. or II
such quantities We're 2scertaned he GA n"t ac-
curatelv state or include them in the quantity
sheets so that they could be exhibited To the
persons desiring TO make proposals for such
work. and enable them to make proper. sate
and intelligent proposals. nor were the Iuanti-
ties or items thereof embodied. as contemplated
by the statute in the contracts with proper
care or sufficient accuracy to protect the public
interests against the subsequent claims Of tn"
contractors for additional or extra work.
1t is a singular fact that. as rule. in all the
contracts the proposal prices OF all classes or
work and materials We're lower than the preiiin-
mary estimates, 50 that If the estimates Of guam
titles and the specifications had been made with
reasonable accuracy the entire cost of the i'm
provemcnt would have been considerably less
than the Engineers estimates. This is falrly
Illustrated by the results obtained in the ten
contracts last mentioned in which the gross
amount of the preliminary estimates was S@'A-
SOL 1SS while the final accounts aggregated
$231 746 about S2Gl2 less than the estimates.
but S2O,.,N> more than the amount of tie pro-
posals The grand total Of the preliminary esti-
mates in all the completed contracts was 81
N3614 while the contract proposals and prices
amounted 10 Sl.12O.S2i. a difference OF NIL
so The total amount of the preliminary esti-
mates in the uncOmpleed contracts was S'.I.'9.-
SIG and % the proposals 1921 1OS. leaving a
balance Of $i35.406 in favor Of the proposals.
If such estimates as were made and included
to ha y Ing hoe 1a lD( a a
sonable and proper exercise Of engineering Skill
the only safe and judicious course for the State
in the prosecution If public Improvement is 20
return TO the old method of the direct employ
ment OF day labor. dilatory and expensive -
that has been found in recent experience
with the new C2pitol.
no PROPER SUPERVISION.
There no proper system or method Of
supervision Of the preliminary estimates Of
quantities. but the force of each division and
subdivision or contract section was largely left
to pursue its own course in the asceriainment
Of quantities and prices Of the different kinds Of
work and materials. 50 long as the aggregates
did not call for sum in excess Of the amount
designed set apart to be appropriated or dis
trbuted TO such portion Of the canal
There special effort made or care
taken to anticipate and provide for the difficult
ties known to exist on the Jordan level" but
the same carelessness and indifference are ap-
bidding sheets in that region or elsewhere along
the canal
Whenever a contractor came across a sub
stance. rs he likely to do in the perform
ance OF nearly every contract that was unusu-
ally hard as compared with ordinary earth. he
quite sure to raise the question Of ciassi:.-
cation and claim that 1t was too hard to plough
and therefore should he allowed and certified as
rock If the assistant engineer in immediate
charge Of the particular work hesitatcd or re-
jected the claim there was an appeal. Of course
n rlCi 1lfgf OF, n1.A l4 to tad
the division or even 10 the state Engineer. and
at some stage Of its progress the appeal was
usually If not invariably. successful.
This course Of procedure would probably ha e
worked successful? without Earring clash
ing between the various grades Of the engineer
ing service but for the fact that 1t was neces-
sarN for each If the engineers including the
assistant. resident and division engineers. and
finally the State Engineer. 10 certify and APP
prove every partial and final account OF the con-
tractor before he could draw the money Claimed
to be due from the Controller The assistant
engineer, however much he doubted the pro-
priety Of the classification. would gracefully
yield to the decision OF his supcrors and con
form 10 their directions so long he was not
required 10 make an oath on his own RESPONSE
bility 10 the correctness Of the account. Bat
when h" WIS required to make an affidavit that
material which he knew from personal nspec-
ton TO be earth rock. uDOn which the price
would ordinarily De from four to five times as
much as earth. or that the quantity Of given
material was far in excess Of the actual amount
measured 10y him. a conscientious man would
hesitate ard ask TO be excuecd This occurred
n some instances. but as the request was al
Wost Invariably as well as sharply. refused, the
inferior officer had no choice but to comply and
MAKE the requisite affidavit leave the SER
vice. or. II be did not voluntarily leave was per-
emptorily removed.
PUNISHED FOR HIS HONESTY
In enc case an assistant engineer having
charge Of one OF the contracts in the middle
division orally instructed in advance by the
resident q al
the contractor at fixed and arbitrary amount
In the next monthly report. however, the as
sst&nt engineer returned the actual amount