Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1910-01-03
SAY ENGINEER
HAD AUTHORITY
TO SUSPEND AIDE
Morris R. Sherrerd Is Upheld in
Action Ousting Assistant,
John Ashman.

That Morris r. Sherrerd, chief en-
gineer of the Board of Works. did not
exceed his authority when he sus-
pended Second Assistant Superintend-
ent of Public Works John Ashman, was
learned today by the EVENING STAR
from an authoritative source. The city
engineer, it was understood, has au-
thority to suspend any employee under
his jurisdiction at any time he sees fit.
Mr.. Sherrerd's action had been ques-
toned by Board of Works Commits
sioner Augustus f. Eggers and other
officials, who believed they should have
been consulted before Ashman was sus-
pended.
The charge that politics figured
among the causes for Ashman's sus-
pension Is laughed at by many who
were familiar with the circumstances
At the meeting of the Board of Works
Thursday the entire affair is to be
sifted to the bottom. At the present
time the situation is complicated by
h fact that Mr.. Ashman has been
advised to report for duty and to Fay
no attention to the report that he is
under suspension. The city engineer
believed that Ashman had knowingly
exceeded the appropriation for his de-
partment after he had been warned to
be careful not to.
In October Chairman Arthur r. Dem
man, of the Board of Works committee
on streets and highways. and Engineer
Sherrerd appeared before the Council
committee on finance and stated that
the appropriation for streets and high.
ways this year, the largest in the city's
history, was inadequate to meet the
needs. They said that to last until the
end of the year $10,0 900 would be needed.
There was protest from Chairman
Jerome L. Congleton and others of the
finance committee, but the &c., 600 was
voted n paid early in November.
MI. Sherrerd says that he and Com
missioner Denman figured upon using
about $4,000 per week for the remainder
of the year for street cleaning, and
that 1t was explained to Superintend-
ent Charles M. Shipman, of the depart
ment of public works. Mr.. Shipman
says that he in turn explained the
situation to Ashman, in charge of the
work.
At the end of November it was dis
covered" that the expenditures had
been close to 81. 900 some weeks, though
why the discovery was not made
until then is not part of the explana-
ton. 1t was then necessary, despite
the fact that the statement a been
made point flank at the November
Council meeting that an extra $40, 900
would be enough to last until the end
of h year. to go to the Council and
ask for an additional $15, 900.
No suggestion that the Board of
Works or it's departments might be to
blame for shortage was made at that
time and the charge of poor business
methods and gross carelessness thrown
down by aldermen was angrily refuted
Finally the Council granted $4,000, in
creasing it to 81. 500 when the snow
storm came on Christmas Day.
1t becomes public property for the
first time that Chief Engineer Sher-
rerd made himself heard throughout his
departments last month on the subject
of street cleaning expenditures, and
that there were some sharp warnings
of consequences If the appropriation
for the finish of the years work was
exceeded.
1t is claimed that the reason for ex-
penditures in excess of funds can be
found in the orders to clean the snow
from main t~horoughfares where trolley
tracks run These streets should have
been left for the Public Service Cor
poration gangs is the contention of
those who are criticising the depart
ment Of public works, In accordance
with terms of a contract between the
city n the trolley company.