Newark evening star and Newark advertiser., 1915-06-19
CITY OFFICIALS
ACTED IN GOOD
FAITH, SAYS Jury
Payment of $25, 900 on Centre
Market Contract Not
Illegal.
TIE GRAND INQUEST so
STATES IN PRESENTMENT
Chief Justice Gummere, Who
Directed the Investigation,
Agrees With Jurors.

In presentment handed to Chief
Justice William S. Gummere shortly
before noon today, the grand jury
stated that they refused to bring in
indictments in the Centre Market
case.
The grounds were that Mayor
Hagssling, the aldermen the city
counsel and other city officials acted
in perfect good faith in paying to the
Essex Construction Company the
$4,000 paid for excavatihg work done
for the proposed building.
AS matter of fact, the present
ment goes on to say, the mayor and
aldermen should act according to the
city counsel's opinion in this or SINH
lar matters.
If the city counsel was wrong in
law the grand jurors, the present.
ment adds. have no jurisdiction
1t was specifically stated that the
Jurors were of one mind in regard
to the conclusions.
The chief Justice had charged the
grand jury to investigate the pay
ment of the S25, 900.
the chief justice remarked that he
entertained views similar to those eX-
pressed in the grand jury present.
ment.
The Presentment In Full.
The presentment in full is as fol-
lows:
Because of the widespread interest
of the citizens of Newark in the So
! called Centre Market case the grand
jury, with the approval of the chief
| justice, takes the unusual course of
making a public presentment Of their
| findings in the same and their
reasons therefor.
| Tn conformity with the charge of
the chief justice, we gave this case
very full consideration. The exami-
nation of the witnesses was con-
Quoted by the prosecutor, Mr.. Guild,
and various members of the grand
| jury made such further examination
of them as they thought proper.
| "The question, in brief, was whether
| the city officials concerned in the pay
ment of certain moneys out of the
! city treasury to the Essex Construc-
| ton Company for work done at the
| Centre Market, under contract
| heretofore regularly made and en-
| tered into, we're guilty of criminal
| act in making this payment, the said
| contract having, at the time of the
payment, been set aside by the Su-
preme Court The question is not
, , merely whether their act was Illegal.
I 1t might be illegal and yet innocent
| TO make the act criminar-to quote
| from the charge of the chief Justice
1T must be done with an intention to
| disregard the law; done with knowl-
edge of the illegality of the action
| In this case, then, were the city ofti-'
cials concerned aware that they were
| breaking the law in doing what they
| did?
The Material Facts.
1.-THE material facts of the situa-
ton confronting the city, as we see
them, were as follows: The contract
had been set aside by the Supreme
| Court, but before that was done, the
| work and materials for which the
moneys were paid had been done and
furnished in good faith. 1t Is true
| that the contract had been early
challenged as to its validity, by
! taxpayers suit, but nevertheless 1t
| was presumptively valid and the
| company was justified in so assum-
ing, until the courts decided other
wise.
After the contract nau Deeh sel
aside, the Essex Construction still
had a moral claim on the city for
work done under the contract. The
city had no more right morally to get
work done and refuse to pay for 1t
than an Individual has. nor do we
believe that the citizens of Newark
| would be willing to see any creditor
with a Just claim on the city unpaid.
No Evidence of Wrong.
1.-THE sole remaining question, then,
| is whether the city officials concerned
| in the making of this payment did
so knowing that 1t was Illegal. No
evidence that we could get at indi-
Gates this. The procedure followed
| with this bill seems to have been
| quite regular, though unusually ex-
| pedited. The finance committee, the
common council and the various off,
| cials performed the functions regu-
larly assigned them in passing on
and paying bills passed by the
finance committee.
| '"The bill was referred to the city
| counsel for his opinion as to its legal
| ity. and he gave a written opinion,
| holding that the claim was legal. III
Continued on Page 2. Column ~