New-York tribune., 1907-12-06
W4TER BO1RD TO STICh
Commissioner Chad7cick Says No
Member Is Likely to Resign

Commissioner Chadwick of the Water Board
denied Yesterday before the opening OF the ASho-
kan inquiry that any member OF the board was
,I1,aI, to resign as the result OF disclosures Any
statement that we will is very wrong" said the
commissioner Why should we resign? What
have we 10 resign for? We are certainly in the
right As long as two years was told that
a situation like this might arise. and when it did
we investigated and acted as required in accord
ance with tudgTent-a Judgment whch We
have no reason to reverse We We're not 20 act II
accordance with other peoples opini"n apart rom
the competent authority which we consulted
Tho commissioner was asked If he would take
the question to court If the Mayor removed him
"1 have no reason to believe that he Will re-
move US" was the reply. What is there TO JustiIy
the renoval2 Can man be removed ior ColhS
what the law requires him 70 doz -
Mr. Chadwick then said TO Commissioner AiI'cheH
b.. ,rderstood that the Commissioners OF Accounts
would not submit 10 the Water Board the reports
f their engineers nor those of the advisory board
Of engineers. nor let theSe men SUNNI -
We viii not. Mr Mitchell replied The in
ou,rv Is 10 find out why the Water Board rejected
the lowest bid The Commissioners of Accounts
80 taLen tb, position that the persons TO ques-
ZION in this affair the members OF the water
Board and their engineers Our engineers were 10
give us an insight into conditions
NJ chadwick said that under the circumstances
the vater board had questions to ask r =
Moore. engineer or the feirce NO'i'i''
therefore excused.
Mr. Davis department engineer of the Water
BOARD tried to show that H. Z. Gillette consult
ing engineer of the Commissioners OF Accounts
had gone widely astray on some estimates tii'' M
had nreviousiv made. Il hold here III my haIo'
said Mr. Davis "a book. entitled 'tarthWOfk anu
Cost by II. T. Gillette. from when the "e""'
tion Is drawn that under certain cohdiuois at "
certain locality herein described. some soo cuolc
wards may be brought up with a liz yard steam
shovel at a cost OF 10 cents cubic yard
Mr. Davis went on To say that he was In charge
of the work of tho Cedar Grove reservoir "ueiS
tho conditions we're exactly the same as those
described except in amount of work TO be done
and that the cost had been 20 cents yard He
continued:
..tIe does not figure in the cost Of getting the
men there. OF carrying the plant over the winter
of insurance of foremen. of superintendents. OF
pumping of getting tools back and forth. of get
ting water there. Nothing is allowed for con
tingencies.
Merritt H. Smith, who has been resident en-
gineer for the city at various public works tesu-
fled that If an experienced contractor found he
was losing money would so slow that the
additional cost TO the city would be moro than
the first apparent saving. He said that almost
never had a city contract been completed ON time,
and he pointed to the Jerome Park reservoir,
which was to have cost $5OOO00O and although
now only half completed had cost the city more
than that amount
ut has been proven" he said, that the city
cannot take away a contract until after many
DELAYS until even the office boy is that the
contractor violating his contract. and then he
can turn around and the city and lick it"
lie said the contract for the municipal lodging
house at 25th street and East River had been let
out at less than cost. and that a result the
city had had to pay already $4,000 1t above
the original contract price OF $4,000. Commits
siouer Mitchell asked the witness to bring figures
to substantiate his testimony to-day. 1t was said
that the revelations that Mr.. Merritt had made
might lead 20 an investigation of all the big city
contracts.