The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1916-03-04
PETERBOROUGH LAWYER KNEW CITY,
WAS TO PAY $4,000 BONUS VOTED HIM

that We were 10 get all Of II. 1t was
to lie used as a basis for computing
an allowance according to the time
which the officers whose salaries were
there represented had given 10 this
work.
"liow did you arrive at $4,000 as a
reasonable amount to he allowed for ad-
ministrationT"
'The amount is $4,000. We arrived
mt II by general consideration of think
| have already stated how II was"
"What evidence was there before the
commission constituting this a legal OBJ
ligation?"
'if you are looking for vouchers you
will not M them. TIE question Of fact
for our consideration was the portion Of
the time Of these officers that was given
TO the contracts"
WAS that $4,000 the item that was
allowed to Mr.. ShontsT'
ut was not"
Considerable attention was given to
the tpnus OF $50. 900 which Mr.. Rogers
himself received. lie said he believed
be had earned II and that the company
was obligated to IA him that or a sim
liar sur for the extra work he had done.
lie never made any agreement that he
was 10 receive extra compensation. he
said. but he thought he had a good claim
for II. lie knew. he said. that his bonus
was to be charged against the company's
contribution to the subway system and
that II eventually would come out OF the
city. but he declared his belief that ne
would have got IL just the same X the
1nterborouGh had had to pay II. He said
the payment to him was In line with the
contract provision covering p~re-contract
expenditures.
"Did any city representative know that
| you. Mr.. Shon.s and Mr.. Gaynor. the
auditor Of the company. were to receive
| special compensation"
at was never discussed"
Talked with Freedman.
Then how could they have had II In
mind when the contracts were
They had Il in mind that a great deal
OF the time OF the officers OF the COM
pany would he a roper charge against
the city"
"Did any public officer receive any
extra compensation
mo: but I am trying TO point out"
Then the charges allocated by the
city for its expenditures previous to the
contracts were simply prop, tionate
shares of their regular salaries
Yes"
That is not true with respect to YOU.
Mr.. Shon,s and Mr.. Gaynor""
1T is certainly true with regard 10
general supe~rintendence."
Then all allowances for special pay
men,s to the marlborough employees
were matters Rrs, brought to the atten-
ton OF the city officials in July. three
months after the contracts were signedy'
THAT ia true so far rs specific mounts
go"
During the negotiations was any
statement made that the ~1nterborough
was to be allowed as part OF It's cost
these payments for extra services
'It was not so stated.
Did you know you were 20 be allowed
extra compensation
Yes
How long before did you know itT'
Some time before the meeting OF the
directors I a talked with Mr.. Shonts.
MIR. Hediey and one Of the directors
Who was that director" asked Mr..
Moss.
MIR. Freedman"
DO you know II Nj Freedman got
any part OF the bonuses
IL am satisfied that he did not"
AT that time were any sums passed
To Mr.. Freedman from or on behalf OF
those who received bonuses"
81 can make IN unqualified denial no
far az I am concerned I am satisfied
he received none from Mr.. Shonts"
Have you ANY knowledge ON the sub
ject?'
NO positive knowledge except As "a
! myself. ! have Information that pre-.
! cludes the idea that any part OF the
bonus to Mr.. Shonts passed to Mr.. Freed.
man or To any one else
Suggeated Own COmprnsNttoa.
who suggested ext<a compensation o'
sJ0,00O to you"
II did"
"To whom"
ITO MIR. Shonts."
Any one else"
II had a talk with Mr.. Freedman. 4,
said il was a very reasonable amour,
because II outside counsel had been EN-.
ployed To give such services as I rem.
dcred II would have cost from 100000
TO 5000. 900"
"Did YOU know that the extra com
psnsation 10 you would he charged
against the city"