New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-12-19
Whitman to Examine Water
Commissioners on Alleged
Aqueduct Deal.
CHAIRMAN STRAUSS
TO AID PROSECUTOR
Says If Hassett Tried to Effort
Money He Did 1t Under
False PretenceS.


campaign fund and highway graft and
which is just now engaged In an attempt
the Niagara Falls contractor, was sand
bagged" for $4,000, listened yesterday to
Charles Strauss. chairman Of the Board
of Water Supply. He was the only wit
ness examined. Commissioner Charles n.
Chadwick and Jules Breuchard, a con-
tractor. were requested to attend but
were not called.
While the Commissioners OF the Board
OF Water Supply, which handles the ex-
tensive contract and construction business
embraced in the Catskill water supply
project. made it plain yesterday. as Com
missioners Calvin and Strauss had in in
toryiews in The Tribune yesterday morn
ing. that Thomas Hassett never repre-
scented or acted for them In any way, II
was said last night that the grand jury
was far from feeling satisfied that the
Douglass story should be discarded.
District Attorney Whitman Is planning
to put every incident of the activities
surrounding the Hudson siphon contract
before the grand jury, and to that end
he will have Commissioners Chadwick
and Calvin as witnesses to-day.
Douglass. who put in the lowest bid on
that contract. and who testified before
the grand jury on Wednesday, says that
he was approached for n contribution
of $4,000, refused to entertain the propo-
sition, and subsequently lost the contract
to the T. A. Gillespie Company, whose bid
was $4,000 higher than his.
"Hassett Persona Non Grata"
Chairman Charles Strauss OF the Board
OF Water Supply, said later that ne had
ever even met Hassett.
"Hassett is persona non grata TO the
board" said the chairman. and | know
Of no effort ever having been made to
influence the board by Hassett The
board is not political and Hassett was
looked upon as a politician.
eff Hassett endeavored TO extort money
he did it under false pretences. The whole
responsibility for the awarding OF all con-
tracts rested upon the board and We VIII
help the District Attorney to get al all the
facts I'm the case"
Asked 10 specify the boards chief rea-
son for declining the Douglass bid on the
Hudson siphon contract. Chairman
Strauss said that action was based on the
fact that Douglass had been out OF the
contracting business for five years and
the commissioners doubted his ability 10
perform the contract.
Douglass had no organization" he
said. land there were. II | recollect II
properly, protests from some labor or
carnations against him. We considered
his bid unbalanced"
He added that the boards engineers.
after careful investigation. decided
against Douglass and I'm favor OF the Gil
lespie bid in spite OF the fact that 1t was
more than $1,000 higher. He admitted.
however. that the engineers investiga-
tlons Of previous work done by Douglass
in power tunnel contracts around Niagara
Falls had shown that work TO be high
grade. but he insisted that the problem OF
tunnelling under the Hudson River ana
installing the huge siphon was work OF
different character.
II was pointed out TO Commissioner
Strauss that Douglass had been so sure OF
his ability to perform the contract that he
had offered TO put up 10000 cash guaran-
tee in addition TO his $500 bond. fur
rished by surety company, but the
chairman explained that the Corporation
Counsel had advised the board that 1t was
not legally empowered 10 accept such an
additional bond.
He was referred to another contract. Of
an earlier date. In which a Sp.pO bond
was accepted by the board as guaran-
tee, but he said that had been done with
out consulting the Corporation Counsel
and without any knowledge that 1t was
beyond the powers of the board.
Says Gaynor Approved.
Mr.. Strauss added that the commission
ers had considered the plan OF talking 1t
over with Gillespie with a view to Undue
ing him TO reduce his bid. but they were
advised by the Corporation Counsel on
that point also that they could not legally
take such a step.
I'VE went over the whole matter OF this
Hudson siphon contract with Mayor Gay
nor" he said, and the Mayor approved
our decision that the Gillespie company
was best fitted to do the work and should
be awarded the contract, in spite Of the
fact that there were two lower bids"
Commissioners Strauss and Chadwick
said that the three consulting engineers
of the board-Alfred Noble, Of the Penn
sylvania Railroad, and Professors Burr, or
Columbia, and Freeman, OF the Massachu-
sets Institute OF Technology-had decided
I'm favor Of the Gillespie bid and against
the Douglass bid. Professor Freeman,
they said, had subsequently modified his
opinion somewhat to the extent OF saying
that while he considered the Gillespie
bid the best one under all circumstances,
he believed the Douglass bid was safe
one" Professor Freeman came to this
decision. the commissioners said. after a
conference with a Boston contractor
named Smaller.
At the same time the engineers pointed
out to the commissioners that the leak
age" feature OF Douglass's bid might
eventually cost the city more than the
entire amount OF the Gillespie bid Doug
| lass proposed that II the siphon leaked he
would pump the water out at the rate
OF So cents a million foot gallons.
Both the commissioners mentioned the
fact that the State Highways Construc-
| ton Company, of which Hassett is a d.
rector. has the contract from the board
for the construction of the Ashokan Dam
highway, which is a roadway running
around that dam.