The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1899-07-20


or given by any engineer. inspector,
Stat RsEne or By he Uy 9PpcsS q ps The
lie Works. from at any time showing the true
and correc, quantity and character Of the work
done and the materials furnished by the con-
tractor. or from contrasting the amount due:
The form o. the contract IN use should; ,n o!
will bear careful revision in many respects.
such statute will, not prevent abuse Il thse
GGcHs in charge Of the work are nn6HthtRS
statute will stand ny the state and. il apt pen
nltics are provided for disobediencc. responSi-
bility can be liked an punishment inflicted A
conspicuous illnstrHti ion OF the value ~ such
statute is found in, tn" result Of the litigation
which arose over the construction of the new
Croton Aqueduct in the city Of New York un-
der CHAPTER 1910 Of the Laws OF 1898. Probably
1 a s IN cSs G CONS
tracts made in accordance herewith. sayet
the city TcLy arge hamouhht o, money! %nlG IN
pay without having received any adequate re-
turn"
MIR Shove in his report says;
1T seemed to me impossible to determine
from this testimony what specific crime or
crimes had been committed. or what proof
there was Of the same. until such testi mony
had been carefully analyzed and collected. con,
tract by contract. substantially COMPLETED
ihis icstimony about the middle q March,
1899. and furnished the Governors special
dint"ly upon tn" appointment OF the specihl
counsel by the Governor ! was directed ny tho
Attorney General to meet them in conference.
aud to render them every assistance in my
power IN their Investigations | have followed
those directions. meeting the sn"cial counsel
frequently and assisting them, az far AS was
able down to the Hing of their, report
with the Governor. As appears by that
cided not to recommend the institution
Of criminal proceedings, and give their
that tho decision should be anal in this matter
So far as the report Of the special counsel re-
lates to the "termlation that there should be
tr, .Aailtl in n
deem necessary to add thereto ! discovered
no. cxtrtnsic evidence Of fraud. d shonesty or
mean evidence outsid" of the infcrencrs that,
perhaps, could be drawn from q he riticiSed act
fraud reported to me, which were investigat cd
by the special counsel and myself care uIly and
as fully as possible. In none Of these cases did
/ find any evidence whatever Of fraudulent
deal ings and dishonesty.
=, " In the contracts specially investigated by
Of fraud or dishonesty on the part Of the engi-
neers j. charge Of the cnnstruction in their re-
In eases o. dispute bctweon tho contractors
and such engineers as to such quantities the
mater was referred to the state LngInesr. who
nnh directed that the returns be made accord: .
ing y. This does not include the returns OF
orally bv he resident engineer. whose duty 1t
was to make such Justification. Thore were
Investigating Commission, wher" work was
performed by contractors ~ a nature and kind
not stated in the items Of work in the bidding
sheets. as for instance. rammlng and repairing
slope walls, and where the value Of such work.
determined by force account. was returned in
the monthly estimates az II the work SO returned
had rot actually been performed. On III" con-
trary. in the contracts especially invcsti gated
by us the testimony OF the engineers was that
tie work had actually been done. and that the
State had in no way been defraudrd. This prac-
tice Of returning work done by force account
not TO be commended. 1t defeats the object OF
return by items. VIZ: rromrt and easy
fraudulent or not. III fact this method Of max
ing returns has thrown an atmosphere Of fraud
as we can discover. no fraud actually existed.
I'm the matter Of the rock excavation the
resident engineers making the classification
| arc protected from criminal prosecution by the
specifications which substantially leave rock
to he determined by their opinion. We found
could successfully prove, that there was no
lasie wi1at"ver Tor such Classification. nor did
We mud auy evidence OF fraud or collision out
side ~ the mere discretionary act OF the CLASH
n'ation itself. We found no evidence Of GRIM
innl cnn piracy t" defrnnd the state. which. IN
would Justify u in institnting y criminal pros
c"ut.on therefor. discovered no evidence
The contracts were let that the quantities in
any bidding sheet had not been stated therein
M Tne Of az law to me- that holds nsr pnep%
criminaly responsible for the acts or ON ission )
Of his subordinates, without any further evil
!Tndnr SECTIONS S''i -. 50 and 80 Of the Penal
Code. which define who are rarttes to crime.
I discovered no evidence that Mr.. Aldridgs
had made himself party to any crinina act
or omission IN reference 10 the eSpenditurc Of
thu : OOu.OOOapprOpriated by the acts Of 1850
and S'i for the deepening of III" canals.
=" My APPOINTMENT. as well as that Of m" spe-
cial rOuns"i. related solely and eXclusiyclv to
the charges of fraud or criminal misconduct
arising cut Of the expenditure Of moneys an
% the canals. Therefore made no investga-
ton whatever Of any charges of fraud or Grim
innl misconduct arising out OF moneys other
wis" Appropriated. az such Investigation was
entirely outside Of my jurisdiction and powers.
conclude. therefore. that criminal prOSecu-
ton based upon the evidence passed upon hy
the special counsel is inadvisahIe, aud should
not b" Instituted by the Attorney General
against any official or person for any act or
omission arising ont Of the expenditure OF the
So.OOOOOO appropriated for the deepening and
improvement Of the canals
In making public the canal reports Gov.
Roosevelt announced that he would not have
any COmInent 10 make.