New-York tribune., 1908-05-19
SAYS METZ IS WRONG
OPINION OF WILCOX.
Subcay Construction Company IN
Debt to Contractors.

The RAND Transit Subway Construction COM
pany which financed John B. Mcdonald the con-
tractor for the original subway, stiii owes iaIs'
sums to the sub-contractors on that work Inc
Belmont interests have allowed the understanding
to become current that the payment of these COLI
tractors promptly depended in degree to the eN-
tent to which their claims against the CITY were
allowed by the board Of arbitration ~hich is ho"
sitting them. They also nave ieo certain PEI
sons to understand that the time they held up tne
contractors depended somewhat the time 1t TOOK
the board Of arbitration settle the claims against
the city.
The claims OF the contractor against the city ioi
extras amount to over sS.OU0o, whereas Mr.. Rice'
who was chief engineer of the old Rapid TRANSIT
Board allowed a claim for only $53S,"n lhere 10
no way of predicting in any way what the oeciSioi
OF the board Of arbitration will be, but IL Is sal"
to say that the claims of the contractor Will be cut
down materially. They include claims TOT du'i
tional ornamentaton to stations and also for eN.r
money paid to certain contractors VINO were loshs
money their contract price.
|. So far as the Interborough Rapid Transit Coih-
pany is concerned, the Belmont interests declare
thew are willing that the 100000 should be cut
down because that company. which pays interest
on the entire cost OF the subway. would nave 10
pay just so much additional interest IL the e''iie
claim allowed. -
A person who has been more or less familiar with
the entire subject from the start said YESTERDAY
he thought that most of the sub-contractors had
been paid and that the aggregate amount SUN uNe
them would be less than 10000.
AS for the contractors themselves they were ex-
ceedingly retcent about speaking OF their CLAIMS
against tho contractor One intimated, how
ever, that his claim alone would be more than tie
entire amount mentioned. With a most noeral es-
innate for possible claims of each contractor the
aggregate would not reach the $o"p'V cldlHi
against the city.
Among the sub-contractors were the Degnon con-
tracing Company. William Bradley, John C. Roo-
gers, Farrell, Hopper s. Co., the Naughton COM
pany, Holbrook, Cabot & Daily and McCabe Broth-
eTs
Chairman Wilcox of the Public Service Commits
sion yesterday made a statement in reply to the
criticism of the boards action in arranging Tor the
board OF arbitration, which criticism was mace py
| Controller Metz in a communication to the Board
| of Estimate last week. Chairman WILCOX SHOWS
that the appointment of the board of arbitration
| vas according the terms of the contract. lie
| sad
| The Controller in his letter to his colleagues on
arbitration proceeding between the city and @ Jonn
B. Mcdonald is clearly the victim c Of erroneous on as
Controller of this city should know HIS state state
mination Of the Chief engineer on the claims pre-
sented by the contractor is final and concnsiV9, @ h
ci,y and iS o Mcdonald Of February 81 800 under
the by M was ssf eq SHAH be final
ana conclusive unless either OF the parties appea, al
the board of arbitration. The contract itself con
eibsr h ctV or te conracor is dissatsed with
| the determination of the chief engineer.
| This was the situation November 80 lasI "nefl
Mr.. Rice rendered his determination Both parties
| appealed from such determination within tne tlhe
limited. in strict pursuance of the PROVISIONS OF
| the contract. After the notices of appeal had
| been served and two arbitrators appointed IL was
| spect few details of procedure, and that Is
| all that is done by the modifying agreement, when
was submitted to and approved by the CorPordtl,otl
| Counsel. These changes merely allowed the arpl-
| traitors more time for hearings and in which to
render their determination. and allowed the lHres
arbitrators to be appointed at the outset instead
| the third arbitrator. umpire. being called in
the end of the trial in case they disagreed, as
| was contemplated in the original contract ana
certain provisions in case any or the arpltIatoIs
| should during the arbitration die or De unaoie lo
| continue their duties ,.,
1t will therefore, be that there is absolutely
foundation for the statement that the conlin1s
| sion allowed the reopening of these claims The
| contractors had absolute contractual rlshI 70
an arbitration, and the commission is only carry =
! ing out the plain terms of the agreement entered
| sit Board acting for the city. The contract az
! that time subjected to the careful scrutiny or
| the city officials. and held under examination
| by the Corporation Counsel for period in excess
/ that it signed not only by the RAPID transit
Board but by both Mayor Van Wyck and con-
| troller Coler. ~, ....
to the Corporation Counsel. Far from being an IN
| terloper. as Mr. Metz suggests, any cooperation
which the Corporation Counsel would care TO give
| The Corporation Counsel and the Controller We're
both notified Of the pendency OF these proceedings
and COPY of the papers sent them with an invita-
! tion 10 cooperate, and the matter of Mr. Shep-
ards appointment as special counsel was taken up
! with the CORPORATION Counsel before MIR. shepard
was appointed. and the counsel TO the commission
| was advised by the Corporation Counsel that sucn
| appointment met with his approval