Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1910-10-22
mUAD|STURBED BY
CHARGES, RECORD
BRIEFLY EXPLAINS
Republican Nominee for Con-
gress Justifies Self for Part
in Water Deal.
NOTHING ILLEGAL OR WRONG
IN TRANSACTION, HE SAYS
Passes Lightly Over Process
servers Futile Hunt
for Him.
'There was nothing illegal or un-

Progressive Republican candidate for
Congress in the Ninth district, explains
his connection with the Jersey City
water deal. Suit is brought against
the Hudson county Progressive leader
for the recovery of 2 5000 and an in
terest in the profits of the water com
pany, as told IN the EVENING STAR
yesterday. Mr.. Record processes to
be undisturbed over the fact that he is
a defendant in this action, but makes
no explanation for lodging the proc
ess-servers for the past six weeks.
Publicity Is Unweicone.
Mr.. Record would no doubt have
preferred to eyade service n the at
tendant publielty until after election
day.
Whether Mr.. Record, who was cor
poration counse for Jersey City at
the time the big water deal was put
through, is entitled to the enormous
fee is a question for a jury of twelve
men to determine. The lawsuit IS
scheduled for trial in the supreme
Court of New York during the present
term. The issue ma be tried before
election day.
Mr.. Record, the court papers allege,
acted in the dual role of legal repre-
sentative of William Belden, of the
water company, and the counsel of
the city that entered into the big
water deal. Mr.. Record was paid the
fat fees when as corporation counsel
for the Mayor Pagan administration
he was in a position to help or hinde
the water company.
my position said Mr.. Record asst
night, was that of a lawyer to a
client. Long before l had idea of
being appointed to the position of cor
poration counsel of Jersey City / was
retained by William Belden. who had
stock in the Jersey City Water Com
pany sad who believed the stock was
worthless. l was authorized to see
what I could get for the stock and was
to receive a contingent fee--that is, a
certain per centage of the amount the
stock brought. Mr.. Belden, through
my efforts, disposed of his stock for
$100, 900, and | was paid a fee of $25, 900.
That is all there Is to the transaction
Legal proceedings were necessary be-
fore a statement was reached. / had
b. ought the case TO a practical finish
when / received my appointment as
corporation counsel. Then to protect
the city beyond any possible question
Jazles V. Vredenburgh was designated
as special counsel to look after the
city's interest in the water cases."
The suit, as told in the EVENING
STAR yesterday, was instituted by
George Belden, as administrator of the
estate of the late Henry Belden
against William Belden and others.
History OF the Case.
Henry Belden and William Belden
were brothers and George Belden is a
son of the late Henry Belden. 1t was
Henry Belden who was interested with
p. H.. Flynn and others in the $4,000,
600 water contract that was entered
into with Jersey City about a decade
ago. when Edward Hoos was Mayor
There were many legal difficulties to
overcome and when Mark M. Pagan
assumed the office of Mayor in 1892
one of his first official acts was to
make George L. Record corporation
! ounsel The water company was IN
difficulties and it was in Constant
trouble with the municipal authorities
over the provisions of the contract.
Mr.. Record knew this, for he had
| been interested for years in the propo~
sition to furnish Jersey City with a
new supply of water. He and William
Relden had been friends for % long
time. Because of the difficulties that
the water company had to overcome
Henry Belden, who was one of the
largest stockholders in the concern,
and who had done much to promote
the contract, did a lot of worrying.
He became broken down in health and
finally his mind became impaired and
he had to be removed to a sanatorium,
where he died.
1t was after the death of Henry Bel
den that Record appeared in he water
transaction. William Belden, through
an assignment and will, had come in
possession of the stock in the water
company that Henry had held. Will
lam Belden consulted Record. He
wanted to get rid of the stock. In doubt
about the success of the venture, due
to the many legal entanglements, Will
lam Beldenl felt he would be safe. If he
had the cash the stock represented. His
efforts to get the water company to
take this same view of the situation
were unsuccessful. They refused to tx
change cash for the stock. This was
a few months before Record became
corporation counsel. After that there
was d CnhUBe. AS Corporation couHStt
Record was in a position to further en-
barrass the company.
How Payments Were Made.
Record was only in office a snort
time when the water company decided
that it would be to its interest to ac-
cept William Belden's offer to take his
stock. Belden received 100000 and out
of his sum George l.. Record, then
corporation counsel of Jersey City, was
paid $25, 900. the payments being made
In sums of $12, 500 each. The first money
was handed over to Record on Feb
ruary rs, 1902. less than two months
after he had been appointed corpora
ton counsel. and the balance was re-
ceived by HIM June 80 of the same
year.
Charging hat William Belden had
unlawfully disposed of the stock and
had come in possessi n oft by unfair
means, the family of Henry BeIden, de-
ceased, after an unsuccessful effort to
induce William Belden to pay over to
them the money he realized by the sale,
instituted suit for its recovery. The
case was before a branch of the New
York Supreme Court last year and
went against the plaintiffs. An appeal
was taken inc the Appellate Division
held luminous that the bv