New-York tribune., 1922-01-31
Corruption, Proftecring,
$ll,OOO,OOO Waste i'm
City Docks Laid TO Tam
many Regime in Report
Rule
Urged as Remedy
Police Failure to Guard
Property and Lease
Favoritism Are Alleged

ALBANY. Jan. 30 The Assembly
voted tonight to continue the life of
the Meyer Investigating committee. The
resolution was adopted bv vote Of SO
to 80 after the report Of the committee
charging waste. Encouragement, prof
'teering and corruption in the Dock De-
rartmcnt Of New York City had been
submitted.
Under the terms Of the resolution the
Meyer committee is to function until
the New York City Charter Revision
Commission files its suggested charter
with the Legislature
EIon K. Brown, chief counsel to the
Meyer committee, drafted the report
which was submitted to-day. The re-
port recommends the abolition of the
office of Dock Commits sioner
Figures are given to show tina. the
city loses or wastes more than SILL
100000 annually on the specious pre-
text OF giving cheap accomm odations to
commerce. while in fact the CONNIE rec
of TIE port is burdened with excessive
charges. In other words the docks
are neither conducted for the benefit
OF the city nor for the benefit of COM
merce, according to the report 1t is
stated that the profits are absorbed by
middlemcn, go betwccns and favored
persons having a "puil" with the de-
partmcnt. while both the city treasury
and the commercial interests are
mulcted.
Commerce Taxed Heavily
The inevitable results of such hap
hazard adm ministration." says the re-
port nave been to tax commerce heav-
lily in most cases, and scarcely at all in
others, under the pretense OF furnish
ing a cheap rate to ALL to impoverish
the city treasury by wastefulness and
mprovidence. if not by corruption. and
to drive commerce to other ports, as
appears by the testimony of represent
ativcs of the French Line, the Luck
cnbacll line and others and by the off =
cial statement of General Black. of the
United States Shipping Boa rd"
The report charges:
That lessecs of the city's piers make
enormous profits by sublettng them.
On twenty -four piers the lessees paid
the city s1.494,7l7 and charged ships
for berthng privileges $4,000.
That the Maritime Shipping Com
pany, concern not maritime and own
ing no ships, leased Pier 72. + r., at
$4,000 a year and sublet it at S1O1 900
year.
That sabbatino e. Co., composed Of
an cX bartender and a clerk, both with
out capital. banked over $1,000 900
through profits Of from IS per cent to
400 nor cnrt Ovor what tho,, po;J |Io
city. for temporary permits for berth
ing of ships.
The report alleges that the new piers
at Staten Island, just built by the city
at a cost Of S25000,O0O, have been
leased at total net loss Of $500 600,
while adjoining privately owned piers
Of similar construction are leased at d
profit to their owners of 43 per cent.
Charges of Mismanagcmcnt
Charging wastetul mismanagcm of
the city's most valuable property. the
report continues:
mo lcgis lation has been passed to
which the city objected. The out-of-
date provisions Of the statute turning
the docks over to the city have re-
ma'ncd undisturbcd. and still furnish
cover for abuses in dock letting and
management which have converted a
handsome potential income into a
dcf>t, while spectators. pro6tccrs and
handy men accumulate fortunes from
its use. Not a subject Of popular in
lerest. its management has not been
disturbed by public inquiry, and the
unbusincsslke organization Of its
finances has hidden from public knowI-
edge the disastrous results which would
otherwise be obvious. The state has
not intervened to apply the rudiments
of public utility requirements, like
equal service for equal charges and
equal opportunity for service to all"
The report condemns the absence Of
any coming system, pointing out that
ships are frequently docked at piers
where ships Of greater draft could lie
with the result that ships frequently
lie in the harbor awaiting berths while
there is ample room for ALL Cargoes
are unloaded at nconvenient points
without regard to their destination
resulting in congestion and great in
crease in lightcrage and trucking
charges.
The report dweIs at length on the
excessive cost Of policing docks. Po-
lice protection is not furnished by the
regular police force. In 1920 $4,000
men were employed by the maritime
interests to protect the docks at cost
OF $35 100000 while in that year the