New-York tribune., 1906-07-11
WOULD GUST WOODBURY.
ALDERMEN TO1'E SO TO ~.
Ipins Report adopted Despite Fight
bv Little Tim SulliUan.

After a fight os rnors than three hours during
which sIAttls Tim Sullivan and the Tamnlany
Hall forces worked valiantly 90 stsve or the in
evitable. the BOARD OF Aldermen. by a vote Ot "a
% le adopted the WINS report on the Street Cean-
Ing Department investigation. which reeAnmends >
the removal OF Commissioner Woodbury., IN a eail=
before the meeting the Republican and Munich
pal Ownership men had pledged themselves 20 ae7
complish this. but for a long time u looked as
though the Sullivan work might nUllify the caucus
agreement. Whether the alaeTm>n's action VIII
have any effect the Mayor seams doubtful
"Thls Is all joker shouted 'Tittle Tim when
he saw the battle had gone against him. IF the
Mayor treats q as t deserves hen threw IL an into
the waste basket"
Vigorous attacks we're made on the business
methods OF Commissioners Woodbury. and The con-
dition OF his department By Aldermen Gritenhaserl
who signed the WINS report; Meyers. the RepuOt-
can leader and Henry Clay Peters, Of the NJ o,
forces They declared the department was rotten,
insufficient and filed with corruption. and that the
Commissioner was incapable OF improving cOndi-
tions. Equally vigorous defence OF Dr. woodbury.
and his methods was made by Aldermen powling
and Downing each or whom substituted report
recommending changes In the department but urg-
ing the retention Sf the Commissioner.
HOPED TO PREVENT ACTION
The resolution calling Tor the adoption Of a re-
port from the investigating committee had been
made a special order Immediately after eoFnmunt-
cations. but when the time came and Alderman
CSrifenhagen moved the adoption or MS
datiOns Little Tim Sullivan fought hard for de-
lay until Tammany men could come In The gen
eral expectation that he would be able TO
choke off action. thus letting the affair slumoer
until September when more vital affairs would ef-
feetiveIy shelve it. Acting President Goodman re-
fused to grant the delay desired. however so sui-
van began to talk against time He asserted that
AR Ivins was not fair in his treatment OF Wit
nasses and that after the public sessions had been
ended he obtained from some source testimony
which he introduced into his report
1T was only when members Of the committee
rabeIIsd AGAINST his gag rule said Little Ttm.
that witnesses got any latitude IN explaining
their answers"
When Sullivan had obtained delay, Alder
man Bowling moved that his report be adopted
instead Of Crifenhagen's and as substitute mo-
ton Alderman Downing suggested the adoption OF
his document. He said that undoubtedly there had
been much extravaganza in the Street Cleaning
Department but that there had not been enough
to warrant the stigma which would result nom the
adoption of the WINS report.
Commissioner Woodbury. may have made mis-
takes. said he but we're all likely to make mis-
takes Nothing in the testimony, in spite OF Ivins's
efforts. shows that the Commissioner was corrupt
or dishonest" Alderman Morris Joined in the
praise of Woodbury.. but on the vote the Downing
report was rejected by vote of 50 to Z.
Alderman Downing then took up the defence Of
his report. He said that Commissioner Woodbury.
had been found guilty OF corruption. and on the
the affairs of the department. even knowing the
location Of the departments stables The reference
in the WINS report to Doe Wallace the SupeFln-
tendent of stables, a common gambler and
confessed drunkard reused his ire He considered
this extremely harsh of Mr.. WINS. Many men
even many aldermen whom he knew. ne said liked
their beer and cards and surely they should not
be stigmatized thus! Alderman Mulligan. who
signed the report with him. declared that the evil
dence heard by the committee did not Justify tn,
Wins report which was 'eontemptibe and mean
ATTACKS ON MR. WOODBURY..
Alderman Brown however. declared that the de-
partment's bookkeeping could not we'll be worse
Commissioner Woodbury. had failed TO make his re-
ports. the law demanded, and had been lax in
every way His administration had been enormously
expensive. Alderman Reginald DoulI defended Mr.
Woodbury., saying the committee had made many
insnuations. but had not found any evidence to
warrant his removal
They tried to find crimiuality but failed" he
said. Nevertheless. the Dovling report was voted
down. So to 80
Then came debate the adoption OF the Grifen-
hagen Brown report. Alderman Grifenhagen said
he would not ask the removal of any man unless IL
was deserved He denounced the contract Com
Woodbury. made with the American Rail-
Meyers declared that it was better to have
crook" around than an easy mark.
but just who does appear il is the duty OF
the Mayor TO separate Commissioner Woodbury.
Alderman Peters said that Mr. Woodbury. deserved
no sympathy: as he had squandered $4,000. 900 or
sent Soer said that woodbury. was the most ex
pensve animal the city ever had.
Woodbury. should be removed, IL for other
reason than his brutality said Mr. Coler. 'He
curses every one in the department Chairman
EVDE dyNC con NTVnTI~