New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1903-07-03
TWO ARRESTS ORDERED.
MEN CLOSE TO MURPHY.
ACtion IN Dock Board Scandal Fol
IoWs Ne10 Testimony.

Justice Mayer yesterday issued warrants for
the arrest Of two men in connection with the
old Dock Board scandal, the first exposure of
which was made by The Tribune. The men
wanted pretty close to Charles F. Murphy
leader of Tammany Hall District. Attorney
| Jerome and Assistant District Attorney Clarke
would not discuss the warrants yesterday.
IT is known that John J. Murphy, Council
man in the Van Wyck administration, and AL
derman James F. Gaffney, both of whom hold
confidential relations with Charles F. Murphy
will be called upon at once to tell about how
| they came to get Lease of the Seventy ninth
st. pier while they city officials. Charles
f. Murphy, Dock Commissioner. on July
10, 1901, with his colleagues. Messrs. J. Ser
geant Cram and Peter F. Meyer, leased to James
E. Gaffney and Mr.. Murphy's brother, John ].
Murphy, the West Seventy -ninth-st. pier for
thirty years at 81 200 a year. The application
for the pier was typewriter on the printed sta
tionery Of the firm, and read as follows:
New-York Contracting and Trucking Company,
P2ny James r.. Came presiaenr; M & g8hR 6s a. g. g.
teenth-st. Dump at West Seventy -ninth,st go,
Gentlemen: Our company is desrous of making
number Of repairs on our dump at seYenty,ai4th-
doing such, not having lease of the pier We
your .honoTa2le Die board to grant us lease OF : =
fiiy f5fE yo1rs 81 eT JAnEs 3 GRFFNEY PTesdent
James E. Gaffney a; that time was an alder
man from the XVIIIth District-Mr. Murphy's
John ]. Murphy at that time a council
man from the district which included the
XVIIIth Assembly District.
THE LAW IN THE CHARTER.
The city charter provides as follows under
"Of1cers-Not to be interested in contracts:
Section 1888 No member of the Board of Alder
men, head of department. chief of bureau. deputy
poration, shall be or become interested directly
indirectly, as contracting party. partner, stock
any contract work or business, or the sale of any
is payable from the city treasury, or by any as
sessment levied by any act or ordinance OF the
any real estate or other properly belonging to or
taken by the corporation or when s9dI I be SOLO s0lu
at the suit of said corporation. If any person
for which he elected or appointed. knowingly
acquire an interest as ao2ve aescTlnel IN any con IL
officer thereof unless the same shall be devolved
forfeit his ofice. and be punished for "A mis-
demennor. Al such c4ntracJ5 IN WhiGn b be any s6e5
shall at the option of the Controller, be forfeited
and void.
The records of the Dock Department show
that the New-York Contracting and Trucking
Company, at the time Mr.. Gaffney wrote of
'our dump" on the Seventy ninth-st. pier did
not have any dump there. 1t held by
certain William l. Kidney, an individual that
the District Attorney is trying to find. On the
same day that Mr.. Gaffney wrote his applica-
tion for the Seventy -ninth-s St pier, Kidneys
permit was revoked. and then a resolution was
passed, giving TO the company a thirty-year
| lease of the pier but no mention made Of
any dumping board privilege. The company,
without authority, took possession of the dump
| ing board. and still holds it, although an eject
ment action is pending.
|
William H Burke. former secretary of the old
| Dock Board was before Justice Mayer and AS
| sistant District Attorney Clarke yesterday for
two hours. He told Mr.. Clarke who the favored
contractors under the old board, and what
were their relations with various Tammany
leaders In fact Mr.. Burke quite charmed Mr.
| Clarke with his frankness. The witness admit
ted, after good deal of questioning, that Joseph
! Egan, lessee of the Twenty -ninth-st bulkhead.
| the lease of which obtained. the Corpora
ton Counsel alleges, by conspiracy and fraud.
was in the employ of the witnesses wife. Mrs
Florinda Burke, for two years clerk at the
coal office of the Burkes in East One-hundred-
and -sxth-st. Mr.. Burke failed in business in
! 1897, and the business thereafter was conducted
! by Mrs. Burke.
! Mr. Burke was asked about the dissimilarity OF
the signatures of Joseph Egan on the bulkhead
| lease and filing in contract He said that
Egan had signed both papers. They do not look
! as if signed by the same man. He could not
! explain the erasures in the Twenty -ninth-st-
| buIkhead lease nor could he shed any light on
the reduction of the price from $l,25O year to
$3.50 year or the lengthening of the lease term
! from three years thirty years.
RECORDS ARE GOOD EVIDENCE
When Mr.. Burke came out of Justice Mayors
chambers he said in answer to various ques-
! tions
They asked me about piers ana leases anu
the records of the board. They asked me II
e,,r1ovad Joseph Egan and l told them did
not. They asked me about the signatures OF
E.yan. and l gave them all the Information had.
They asked me If I knew about the treasulel
orders and l said l did not Tney are 'i''uei
Continued second page
Krementz one Piece Collar Buttons hieerrss-Advf hersi
frOn