The New York herald., 1921-07-13
HARBOR COPS USED
IN REFUSE DISPUTE
Chased Fradus Men Off
Rikers Island, His Law
yer Says.
WERE BUILDING PLANT
Work Then Given to Firm
Which Lost Contract,
1t Is Charged.
LEO ENTERS DENIAL
Forced to Pay Per Diem to
Rodgers & Haggerty; City
Lost Nothing.


John p Leo, Commissioner Of Street
Cleaning. denied yesterday the charges
of F. H. LaGuarcia, President Of the
Board of Aldermen, that he was cost
ing tEe city at rate Of $7o0.000
year through favoritism to Rodgers &
IIsgserty. veteran Tammany contract
holders, but who were defeated bidders
for new contract to unload ash ard
refuse scows at Rikers Island.
On the heels of the Commissioners
denial came the disclosure by E. NJ.
Grout, attorney for tho Fradus Con-
tracing Company, successful bidder.
of letter he had written to Coulmis-
sioner Leo charging him with such
favoritism toward the unsuccessful
bidder that the harbor police had been
called to Rikers Island to run the
Fradus company's workmen off the
island and prevent them from building
tract. Grout and LaGuardia both
charged that while the Fradus COM
pany is being prevented from building
plant. Rodgers & Haggerty are doing
the work at per diem rate at the in
struction Of Commissioner Leo.
Accuses La Guardia.
Leo's reply charged that La Guardia
had held up solution Of the Unloading
problem for three months by obstruc-
tive tactics in the Board Of Estimate
and regarded it as unfortunate" that
La Guardia should have rushed into
print with the Fradus matter without a
conference with him. especially since
the Aldermanic President is frequently
anxious. according to Leo, to confer In
behalf of any OF his constituents in the
Street Cleaning Department who may
be called to account for delnquencies.
The Commissioner disposed of the
foregoing personal appraisal of La
Guarda in report to Mayor Hylan. and
then outlined the status of the Fradus
Contracting Company in substance as
follows:
The Commissioner insisted upon an ex-
ceptionally high bond, because he
doubted the bidders financial condition
am dppI,ONtl luC Otiiy OIi tOiiN.i-
ticn that the company would DE ready TO
unload scows by July /. On June 80 II
was apparent that the new contractor
would not be ready, and the Commits
stoned appealed to Rodgers & Haggerty,
whose contract expired, to continue
per diem rate from a sense of civic obll-
CATION" and the old contractors did so
at the rate prescribed In the new but
| unfulflled contract, so the city lost no
money. The Commissioner said he had
received numerous letters from the attor-
ney for the Fradus people. some OF
which threatened to report him to the
Mayor, to La Guardia and to various
other officials.
E. NJ. Grout's Vision.
f. NJ. Grout. attorney for the Fradus
Company, and Booth x Flynn. that
company's financial hackers. however.
told his side OF the story as follows
After his client put up the unusual
bond demanded by Leo the contract was
held up so long by reference to the Cor
poration Counsel that the contractor
ould have had utmost difficulty In get
ting its unloading plant ready on time.
but could have done so II Commissioner
Leo had permitted It. The new con-
tractor selected a site near the Rodgers
& Haggerty plant and got ready to set
up its own plant, only to be ordered to
hunt another site because the one se-
lected would interfere with Rodgers &
Haggerty. Accordingly Fradus went to
the other end of the island and got busy.
but received orders to move again be-
cause the plant there interfered with
the Rodgers & Haggerty tracks. Thus
they were chased from site to site until
upon one occasion the harbor police
we're called In to chase the Fradus work
men from the island. The constant
claim of the Commissioner. according
to Grout, has been that the Fradus
people cannot cross the Rodgers & Hag-
gerty tracks. Finally Grout asked Com
missioner Leo on July to allow him
TO assign the Fradus contract to Booth
& Flynn. but that also was refused.
In a letter to Commissioner Leo dated
July II Grout sized up the situation as
follows:
"All the plant necessary to perform
the work Is available and has been so
since July 5. II we can work at No.
(referring TO a site) and Rodgers &
Haggerty can be removed therefrom,
which will not prevent them from work
ing elsewhere, we can be ready to un-
load scows within four hours. The
difficulty. and the sole difficulty. is that
your department and Rodgers & Hag-
-erty. apparently acting In unison. re-
fused to permit us to install the plant
In any adequate place. The place which
YOU designed and which we were COM
PEELED to accept because everything else
was denied will require two weeks OF
dredging and pile driving to begin to
make II available. and will then be use
less. because you will not permit us to
cross Rodgers a. Haggerty's tracks