Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1910-07-22
NICE YOUNG MEN,
SO THEY GOT BIG
OVERLOOK JOB
FreehOlder Gallagher Tells Prob
ers How Architects Were
Given $4,000, 600 Work.
MCGOWAN AND JOHNSON
SAID SO AND 'HT WENT"
Hurd & Sutton Got Contract
Without Opposition -Spon-
sOrs Both Dead.

According to Freeholder Hugh Gal
lagher, of Montclair. Hurd & Sutton
were given the position of architects
for the Insane because they "were nice
yonng men,"
That reason was given by Mr.. Gal
lagher before the Overlook Appraisal
Commission yesterday when he was
qui2zed as to why Hurd & Sutton
were awarded the architectural con-
tract without competition In April,
1905.
Thomas MCGOWAN, then director of
the Board of Freeholders, and David
H. Johnson, then county supervisor,
told us that Hurd & Sutton were nice
young men and could do the work, so
we awarded them the contract That's
all there is to it," said Mr.. Gallagher.
The awarding of the contract took
place at meeting of the building
committee of the Board of Freeholders
7 held behind closed doors on April Z,
1905. The members of the building
committee at that time were Hugh
Gallagher, chairman; Ira Budd, sec
Pierre Black. John f. Young and
Thomas McGowan, who as director of
the board, was an ex-officto member
Present also at the executive session,
but without the power to vote, were
David H. Johnson and County Counsel
Joseph L. Mum.
Sponsors Both Dead.
OF the men named only Gallagher
,f~ Al.
Board of Freeholders Amos B. Pierce
is now secretary OF the road and as
sessment committee, and Joseph L..
Mum is county counsel. Messrs Nc
Gowan and johnson, the two men
named by Gallagher as standing spon-
sors for Hurd and Sutton because they
were nice young men" are dead.
The story of what happened at the
meeting of April Z, 1905. as told to the
STAR today by Amos b. Pierce differs
slightly from that told by Mr.. Galla-
CHER to the Appraisal Commission yes
terday Mr.. Pierce insists that Thomas
MCGOWAN did not favor Hurd & SUIT
ton, but was against them.
Mr.. Pierce said: "At the time of the
meeting which was held in the au-
ditor's office of the old Court House
was in favor of awarding the contract
to Henry Kreitler. who had asked me
ito nominate him for the position. Mr..
MCGOWAN vas in favor of Edward A.
Wurth, who was the architect for the
original group of buildings at Over
brook, now known as the "Star" group.
Mr.. MCGOWAN said he felt that Wurth
was entitled to the position because he
had drawn preliminary plans locking to
an extension of the buildings then on
the plot, and which had been construct
ed under his direction.
ST did not agree with Mr.. MCGOWAN,
as I figured that Wurth had completed
his contract and received his money.
The other members of the board agreed
with this view. Conrad Hoerl then
named Hurd & Sutton and vote was
taken. voted for Kreitler. MCGOWAN
for Wurth and the other five members
for Hurd & Sutton
Unanimous Election.
Seeing / was beaten, [ moved to
make the selection of Hurd & Sutton
unanimous. Mr.. MCGOWAN protested
against this, but, as remember, finally
gave in and voted with the rest of the
committee. At the April, 1905, meeting
of the Board of Freeholders the build
ing committee introduced a resolution
LLdL I1ut0 q outtOii DC ciipAOycQ etS
architects on the Overlook buildings.
This resolution was adopted by the full
board without a dissenting vote
According to Mr. Pierce, the plans
that were later submitted by Hurd &
Sutton were almost perfect and but few
changes were suggested at any time,
either prior to the letting of the con-
tract to Richard 3. Heningham, who
erected the building, or at any time
during the construction period
g Fred S. Sutton was in laughing
mood when asked if he had any reply
to make to Gallagher's statement that
his firm was selected because they
were nice young men,
''None whatever" he said. why
should 1? Our firm obtained the con-
tract for the work at Overbrook be>
cause we impressed a majority of the
committee with the fact that we were
able to deliver the goods. Had the
bidding been competitive we would not
have tried for the job. We told the
committee of our work for the Newark
Board of Education and at the Morris
Plains Insane Asylum, and also that
we had been doing work in Newark for
more than twenty years.
''They inspected our work at Morris
Plains and in Newark and awarded us
the contract. We are willing to allow
our work at Overlook to speak for
itself