The New York Herald Newspaper, February 24, 1875, Page 5

GREEN. ARRAIGNED, Another Session of the Aldermanic Investigating Committee. GREEN'S INSOLENCE TO VAN NORT His Ideas of Official Courtesy Illustrated. CONCEALING PUBLIC DOCUMENTS. | The Commissioner of Accounts Thwarted by Him at Every Step. The Committce on Law ot the Bosra of Aldermen | resumed yesterday afternoon its investigation into | the oficial misconduct of Comptroiler Green, The | piincipal witnesses were Commissioner Van Nort and Mr. Rowe, Commissioner of Accounts, whose | testimony on the obstructive policy of Mr. Green | was o! great importance, Mr. Van Nort, who seemed loth to expose the enmity between two bigh officials to public gossip, was yet driven to | the admission that Mr. Green’s manner toward | bim was frequently “brusque and unfriendly,’’ snd Mr. Rowe’s testimony went to show thatthe | Comptroller hampered the Commissioners of Ac- | counts in their investigation of the Finance De- | partment in every possible manner, and had even gone so far as to tinsuls them grossly | by imiorming them that ne ‘would not | waste his valuaple time on them’ when they | applied for certain important papers. Mr. Van | No.t’s marked reticence and unwillingness to testily indicated that what ne told fell far short of what he knew, and, in tact, he spared Mr. Green (Woo, according to Mr, Van Nort’s own admis- | non, had irequently tusulted him) in a manner | that was certainly magnanimous, i ABSENT WITNESSES, The examination was conducted principally by the chairman of the committee, Alderman Purroy, Belore any witnesses were culled a communica- hon Was read ‘rom Dock Commissioner Wales, | usking to be excused from attendance as he had to be present at tne meeting of the Dock Commis. | noners. The communication stated at the same time that he had not yet reduced his testimony to writing, and would be sure to attend the next session of the committee, Mr. Jonn Wheeler, President of the Department of Taxes, who had been subpoenaed as a witness, Was excused on the ground of illness. Tne Chair said Mr. John B, Haskin had also sent word down that he was til, but that he would | Bttend at the next session. Subsequently the following letter irom Mr. Haskin was read by the Cnatr— Hexny D, Purroy, Esq., Chairman of the Committee on Drat srr—Severe indisposition and a mu tiplicity of business engagements have prevented me trom com- | Dicune wy charges @nd speciiications of Comptroller | And ew «i. Green's omeial misconduct. I hope to be | Abie to hive them finished and ready for presentation | fo Vour commiitee ut its next session about one weer ence, In the meantime 1 beg the Induigence of your committee, Yours truly, JOHN B, HASKLN, A discussion ensued on the advisability of ap- | plying tor attacaments against a number of other | wituesses chat Dad not put in an eppearance, but RO conciusion was come to, JUDGMENTS AGAINST THE CITY. The first witness called was Mr. Gambleton, Deputy County Clerk. Ho presented a list of judg- ments filed in the County Clerk's office aguinst the city irom Uctover 1, 1871, to February 15, 1875, | obtained in the Supreme Court, Superior Court, | Court of Common Pleas and Marine Court; these judgments were 493 in number, and the total mount $2,739,407 94; of these 493 judgments only about 200 are satisfied; the legal costs of the judgments obtained in the Supreme Court were $5u,755 87, apd tone interest on the amounts | claimed $103,758 94; he could not give the costs and interests in the judgments obtained in tne | other couris, as the gross amounts of the judg- | ments only were flied in his office. MR. VAN NORT’S TESTIMO! George M. Van Nort, Commissioner of Public Works, was examined by Mr. Purroy. Witness was asked if he had read the resolu- tons oi the board of Aidermen appointing the committee of investigation, A. No, sir. ‘The resolutton was then read to the witness, Q. We desire to know, if, within your knowledge, the Comptroller bas in any way obstructed the | public service? A. Tne Comptroller has, on inter- preting (he law, differed with the other depart- | ments, and in that way payments were delayed. Q. Vo you know apy cases of that kind? A, I re- member the case of the payments of some of the | laborers on the voulevards in planting trees, the Comptroiler differed with the department and de- | \ayed the work and payment of the men, Q. Uo you kKuow whether the Comptroller con- yulted the Corporation Counsel with regard to his | action? A. No. sir. thre | ; toward you? A. That would ve very aitticult, wouid look on as turmig his back on @ private | my own vitice. NEW YORK HERALD, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 1875.—TRIPLE temporarily depriving them of their just dues and tnficting upon them great loss and damage’”—now stave Wether tne Colmptroller, during his admin- istration, to your knowleage, hav detuyed the pay- Ments of any of the OMicials of your epartment? | a. 1 believe he has. INSTANCES OF DELAY. Q. State an instance. A. | can’t e in fatal: I know of one ca: hat of Gilmore; ne refuse to oy him his salary. . Did he finally obtain it? A. I believe he dia. » How did he obtain it? A. By process of law ‘h the courts. Q. Had the Comptroller. previous to that re- fusal, paid Glimore? A, | believe he nad. Q Tien, aiier paying him for a time he refused | topay? A. Yes. | . Has h» paid him since? A. I think he has. . Do you recollect aby other instance of that kind connected with vour department? A. 1 recol- lect an instance of one of tue officers of the de- Partmen', Who Was not paid on account ot some Mistake in Aesignating the title under which he acted; his name was Tui @ term clerk; Was alterward paid, Q. Did he periorm servic A. He aid. Q And he applied for ms saiary and was re- fused? A. Yes; | velieve the tite under which he held was wrongly vesignated as disbursing cierk. Q. Had he been previous to that paid his salary regularly’ A. J velieve he had, . By the Comptroller? A. Yes. So that alter paying nim some time he re- fused 'o pay and kept lim out of bis money jor a time and is now again paying lim? A, Yes; the payro.l Was corrected by mysell; | changed the designation and tite of the uiticer. PETTY TECHNICALITE Q. Do you recollect any other instance in your department—oi his refuss) to pay the women Work- ing under you? A. Yes, | . Cun you state anything to the committee con- | cerning them? A. Weli, sometimes tne names would be wrongly spelied, initials left out, and whenever this happened the Finance Department declined to pay under suca circuuistauces until It Was properly specified who did the work and the names set right. Q Do you recollect apy of our scrub women | being reiused their wages by the Comptroller? A. Idon’t kuow that any were actually reiused; I Know there were some delays. Q. in What case? A. I cunnot partioularize; I Know tuere were delays: don’t kuow the reasons Ol delay: the Comptro.ler never gave a cause tor it; tne delays would be sometimes short, some- umes long. Q Do you recollect any other Instance of oMcials or employés, scruvvers or others in your department having been deprived of their wages or kept out Of their wages for any length of time ? A. [can’t speciy any; 1 believe there was the case o! Shatfer, the inspector of Encumbrances; can’t say how long he was kept out oi nis salary— some considerabie time, | Q. State to us whether during your experience | as head of the Department of Public Works your department has had any business with the Finance Department uring the incu beney o: Mr. Green, and if you bave been ob- structed and retarded or aided and assistedin tie prosecutlon of public works and pubiic improve- ments connected with your department ? THE DEPARIMENT OBSTRUCTEU | A. Appearing, as I viv, under order of the come | Mittee, f Wud siate that this matter is sume- | What gistasteiul to me; thers have veea personal feeungs, 1 f may use tre term, manifested against me ay head o; vie department, aud | must say that the department at times has been put to some difficulty in procuring material, a8 parties Would say they could not reauily get their money; | or, at the prices agreed upon by the Department | of Public Works, toese oills would run tiechauce | of being reduced, and parties would be compelled to receive the money at reduced rates or ieave their warrants, as tue case mignt be. Q. Sate whether your department has been alaed or oostrucied by the Finance Department. A. Idon’t think we have been atded, Q. We gon’t want implications. State plainiy whether your department duriug your aaunpi tration of 1c bas been atded or oustructed by the Winance Depariment, A. lshouid say it waa ob- structed. Q, Has the Finance Department to approve of | the sureties oD contracts 1p your department? | Has there been any vbstruction iu that Way? A. There have been déiays in approving sureties of | contractors unver tie O1diMance of the Common Council; | can’t particularize an instance of this, but tuere have beev instances Wien ue has taken @ MODtu abu irom LWo to three montus; | sup,ose that was owing to investigation being made py the Comptrower us (0 tne auequacy OL sume Ol the suveties akiny the contracts, THE KEASUN OF THE DIFFICULTY. By Alderman Shand ey—Have auy property holders compiained 1O you O1 Lhe Lexlect Of ap- proving sureites? A. i dun’t recollect upy partic- ular tustauce—tiere might nave been. By the Coairmun—Cun you give u reason for the difference vetweeu the heads o1 departments? What is the cause of the persoual feeung you re- Jeried to as eXIsiing agaluss you on ine part of the aead 01 the induce Department? A, 1 say, in answer to tou!, that 1 Cauuot say what actuates vne mind of the Comptrolier as toward me. Q You say rucuion to the depurtment orig- inated in # personal ieeling aginst you. Now, | we wanttv Kuow your reasous jor saying there Was upy personal ieelog vgainst you, A. From the munner uf the Comprroller in sume respects, Q Woatto tis manner led to tot bewery =A. He Was sometimes brusque and upiriendly. Q. Can you give us uu iostance waere he was brusque und untrienuly? | can’: recollect. Q Can you reivesn your memory? 1 aout know that i can. 4 Now, if i+ bas been very frequent you surely | cau Ox sume time, All the comuiutiec wauts to know 1s as to what has taken place between those two departments of tue city government, were harmony should prevali ior the pu.iic good. ou speuk of iustauces. We Would desire you to par- ucuarze one or two occasiuns when be w; brusque ana upirtend.y; whut that uniriendiiness consisted 01; what was the uniriendly act; wnat Was tie Uurienvly language? A. It wasn’t so Much that as is manuer. LIMITED POWERS OF DESCRIPTION. Q. Can you vive us a description of his Manner Q. Did be turn his back on you—anything you ciuzen? A. ican ouly avswer toac by saying the Vompiroller’s .eeltug 1oward me was uniriendiv, You state tat you leit the Comptrolier was uniriendly toward sou. Can you give the com- Mitte ao instance or an eXumpie Where he was brusque or uniiendiy ? A. L cannot parusularise. By Alcermau sbandiey—Was 1 in your office or in the Compiroiler’s oftice where this brusque and un.riendiy wction took place’ A, Somecimes in Alderman Snandley—Have you received that oMicial courtesy that should exist between two heads Of departments, bon acting Jor the public gova’ A, i don't tuink there has been tuat om. | cial courtesy ‘existiug that suouid exist—that cuurtesy tuat Would be due to the proper aud hur- mMoulous Working ol the city government. q. dow long was the work delayed on that oc- cagion? A. in one case some months; I should | sav Loree montis, | Q. it tus been publicly alleged that Andrew | H. Geen, Comptroller. has unjustly resisted tue payment ot legal claims against this city, toerevy causing the utnecessary expendi: | ture vut of tue public treasury ou: large sums of | Money, in co-ts, uisoursements and interest; tne committee desire that you should give them all bbe iwiolmation you possess with reierence to this adegauon, A. LCould not particularize any- ching; [can only state generally taat tne Comp- trolier’s construction of the law would some- }mes dider witu tiwt of the neads ol other ae- | dartineuts, and delays of payients woulda en- sue. & Do you recoliect any case of that kind? A. L recollect the case of the payment o some of She jab rers planting trees on the boulevards; the vomptroiler differed irom us, and the case wos tageu to the cours and delay was occ: sioned. | + Was the opinion of the Corporation Counsel taken on that cuse? A. I can’t say. VHE ACTUAL DELAY. Q. How long was tue work delayed? A. In one casé Sume montis; 1 don’t recollect how many | menins. Q. Is that the only tnstance of a legal claim he | bas resisted to your knowledge? A. Lhere might | be otiers that don’t occur to me Dow; he would * put bis consiruction op tie iaw, as any other de- artinent would, in making paymenis, and he | would apply to the Corporation Counsel ior advice, and in tuut way delays may have occarrea. Q. Do yuu recoliect any vther cases? A, I don’t Fecuileci auy others. Q. Couid you reiresh your memory on this point Detween this day aud the next dayot meeting? | & rossibly. Q 1 Wish you would, The second allegation is—"lt hus been | ubliciy alleged that said Comp- troller has al Various times en ployed numerous javured lawyers jor the purpose Of edectiug legis ion und Oj resisting the payment Oot legal claims, @li of Whuce lees have been puld out or the pubic treasury.” is there within your knowledge any case uf that kind? A. { Know of none except irom hearsay aud the pubic prints. | Q. You don’t kuow of your own knowledge Wiewuer the Comptroller bas paid Iawyers to re- 6ISt payments and eflect legisiauon as alleged ? 4. i have no personal knowledge. | Q. U you recolect any case in which you can | give your opmion or advice to the committee, | Will (.e reascns ior your opinion oF advice, tuey Will cousider 1t—-otherwise reject 1b? A. On tots | subject i have no actual knowleage; I don’t Know Wun ne paid; only kuow vy reports in the news. | papers. . DIPLOMATIC RFTICENCE. | Q. Was any case brought to your knowleage luring your aduanistration Of your present omce where lic empioyed special counsel? A. Yes. q ‘To resist a ciatm of eflect legisiation in any Way wit regard to your department? A. | can only answer (iat | have no positive knowledge, | eXcepl irom persons appearing a8 counsel for or | Qeaivs’. | q. Cau you give any information to the commit. | tee to chabie Wuem tO reach Luis tact; do you know Ol any parties living tne imiormation? A. No, except Lue Comimissiuner ot Accounss, q. Any private parti A. Know of no private | parves, | q. slave you been connected with the Board of | Appor ioument? A, Yes; up to the passage oO: Lue | Charber O. isis. , 1148 4iso adeged here ‘i at said Comptroller has Uiegally devo ed certain sums set apare tor special pores Ss by the Hoard or Appornonment aud tne aWS O1 Chis State to olber pul poses not autuorized by suid Board of laws’ —do you koow anytuing Of that’ A. No. & (tis further publicly alleged “tnat said Comp- | troiier bas at Vurtous times unjustly and mali+ clolisiy delayed toe payment of the salaries and Wages of public oficiais and servants, therepy | diverting stu set ipart oy the Board of Appor- By the Chuirmun—it is tui ther pubitcly alleged that Comptroiler Green nas retarded the gruwtn aud prosperity vl the city; vive the committee your opiuion whether tbe adauimisirauon of the Finance Department by Mr. Green has been such as to retard the growtu abd prosperity of tue city. THE GROWTH OF THE CITY STOPPED. A. That is @ Very wiMicuii question (0. me to an- swer; vut l would say, ‘rom iny own standpoint, it there bad beet a More hveral policy adopted there mguc¢ have veea greater progress and growti; Fdon’t know of any public Works baving been retarded by lim, except im a geaeral way. lu tais connection witness referred to the River- sie avenue and the Moruingside property, | Which, if prosecuied, would have improved prop- erty ahd eased taxation, but in these two cages the bead of the tinance Departwent ad put different construcuon on the law. By Aidermat Saundley—Do you know of his ha ing emupioyed private counsel at Albany? A. Not to ily KuOWledge; i saw people there who were sala to be iuterested for the kinance Department in cases beiore tue Cominittees; | saw an oiicer on | his payroil named Morrison there; don’ know | What ue was operauug on; also saw Dexter A. | Hawkins there. ‘Lois closed the eXammation of Mr. Van Nort. TESIIMONY OF MR. HOWE. Mr. Lindsay J. Howe, Commissioner of Accounts, Was the next witness, Q. How long liave you been Commissioner of Accounts? J s1uce June Is, 1873. \ Wil yp Please to state, in accordance with the frst resylviou, Whether the Comptrolier has, Win your knowledge, resisted the payment oi just ¢ ais, A. i recail One Instance Wuich 1 can meni we appiled to the Board of super- visors tor an appropriation to carry on our work, for clers lire, &c., irom Jupe to December, aud this appropriation Was granted. Q. Were ine clerks paid? A. No, sir; the Comp. troiler deciued ty make the payments allowed oy this appropriatiody ant our cierks bad tu sue for their salaries every month irom June to t.e ist of January. Q, How long were they kept out of their money? A, [don’t know fur wnat leugtu o1 time shey nad to go without their salaries; the Corporauon Counsel gave Wis opinion, in October, that the claims should oe pald, and withdrew the cases irom the reterce beiore whom they Were pending. THE KESULY OF GREEN'S POLICY. Q. Did tney get tieir pay? A, Yes, sir, by judg- ment of tue Court. Q. So tbat in these cases the interest and costa had to be paid by the city tm addition to the amount of the claims? A, Yes, sir. 4. Now in regard to the second resolution, ao | you Know O/ any cases where the Comptrolier has | employed iawyers to affect iegisiution at Albany, &c.? A. | desire to make a statement at tis point. {aod my colleagues are vow engaged in MiakiNg au investiga ion the afairs of tne De- | partment of Finance, wo: will be submitied to | the Mayor and Common Council; in tuis report Wo shall state all the acts within our knowleage | bearing upon toe management of vie city ftnances by the Gompirolier; | submit that it woud be better co wait fur this report, Which will be made | @¥ 8oun As Our Investigation Is completed, | Aldertnau Purro,—!l the otoer members of the | committee consent Luis question will be Walved, | Tos Was doue, Messrs, Bulings and Shandiey | agsentiug Lo tie proposition, QUESTIONS WaIVED. Q. Now, what do you Kbow of the Comptroller's tionimeut Jor especia: purposes co viner ovjecis? | A. | suail Ma € the Same auswer to this question; | my answer will be embraced in tue report uf the COMMIss1oneErs Of AvCOULtS, Alderman Porroy tien asked several otner qu Hons as too her delays in lawiul payments of sal- aries and as ty the efect 0: ‘he Co nptroller’s policy upon the growto aud development of the city, but they Were ali waived tor tue reason stated above. Alderman Purroy then desired to know how | you teil us of any | posed improvements. | work to be given to the many thousands of work- soon the investigation of the accounts of the De- | artment of Finance would be completed. Mr. | we replied be couid pot tell, bat, when pressed to give an approximate answer, he said not for | thirty days probably. | By Alderman Shandiey—Mr. Howe, what can la\8 and obstructions on the Part ot the Finance Department as affecting the | exercise of your duties? A. Well, we have been obstructed by the refusal of the Comptroller to | furnisi papers which we consider necessary in order to muke a th rough investigation of bis de- | partment; the Comptroller clauns that he bas a | Tight to decide whicn papers he shouid iurinish as and which he sbould not. THE COMPIROLLER'S COURTESY. Q. Have you ever upplied tor papers of this | character which the Comptroller bas refused to | furnisn’? A. Yes, sir; only two weeks ago | ap- plied for the monthly balance shee. as made up by the Comptroller—it was in printed bianks—and Was refused; } frst applied to tue Depaty Comp- ‘roller aud then to the Comptrol.er, od was re- fused vy bota of them. } Q. Any other instances? A, Yes, sir; a day Or | two alterward we applied for the monihiy ledger — balances of the difereut bureaus; were first re: jused by the Deputy Comptroller, and woen we Went to the Comptroller he declined to talk to us. Q. What reason did he give tor tmis conuuct ? A. (Mr. Howe smiled as he gave ine repiy) ue sald that be couldn't have his valuable time taken up by talking to us. (Laughter.) .» Did you finally obtain possession of the papers’ A. Yes, sir; my colleague, Mr. Wester- velt, notified him that he Would appiy to the Su- preme Court for an order, and we got them the next morning. Q. How long had you applied for them before you obtained them? A. Two or turee days, OFFICIAL DELAY. And were you delayed in the exercise of your | duties by reasou Oi tus re:usal? A. Yes, we Were very greatly delayed during the time. Alderman Purioy requested the witness to ex- jain his report of October 10, 1873, woich stared hat certain securities ol the sinking 1und were missing in the Department of Finance, out the Witness declined to answer the question, as the reply would be more !uily set forth ii the Commis. siouers’ forthcoming report. Messrs. Purroy and Shandy were in favor o) making an auswer com- pulsory, but Alderman Billinas tiougne the excuse Was Vaild, ana the question was laid over, Q. Do you know oi: otner instances In which the Comptrolier obstructed you in the periormance of your duties? Yes, sir; | remember that woen We appiied to nim jor ail the unpaid claims against the city he declined toturnish them on the ground that their pubiication migat give them a sem- blance of justification or legality; subsequentiy he gave them to us irom time to time; in the meanwhile we were seriously retarded in the per- Jormance ot our services, Q. How long was the delay? A. Sometimes as much as a week; we were unable to make our re- Port, a8 we telt that we required all tue unpaid Claims to prepare a correct report. Tae committee tuen adjourned until Monday next, at ten o'clock, when Mr. Van Nori’s exam- ination wiil probably be resumed. Meanwhile It 1s probubie that the committee will apply tu a Court | for an attachment agaiust Corporation Counsel Smith, who, they say, is the oniy witness tnat has been subpa@naed and lated to put in an appearance without sending au excuse, WHAT THE COMMISSIONERS ARE DOING. A representative of the HERALD yesterday visited most of the bureaus of the city govern- ment and found many of the Commissioners ab- sent, At the Departwentof Parks the Secretary, | Mr, Irwin, reported that tne Commissioners had | all been present, but haa leit, He stated that the commission bad now under consideration tne | | Maps for the extension of Brooks avenue, and at the next meeting would probably adopt the pro- At the Commisstoners of Charities and OCorrec- ton there were found Mr. Phil'tps, the venerable Secretary, and Superintendent Kellock, who were the only “visible” representative s of a poweriul commission. Visitors soughtin vain fora mes+ senger or doorman to convey their cards to the Commissioners, but Mr. Pail- lips met every one with @ courteous re- sponse, A visit was made to Superintendent Kellock, of tie outdoor poor, who had between two and three o'clock yesterday over 500 persons Waiting upon him .or the usual charity contribu: tion 01 money, He was so busily engaged with the issue 0: cash that it was 10 poss1die (0 speak to bim; but iroin one of the attacués the information wus optained tnat beiore two P.M. he had dis- | bursed over $2.0u0 1n tickets Jor money, | At tne Board of Healto all tne Commissioners | were found on duty and in session witn closed doors. It was ascertaimed irom an official of the department that Dr. Day, panitary Superintend- ent, and Commissioner Matsell, of tae police, were closeted with tiem. In the Police Department there was found on | duty Commissioner Duryea, and the ofticer at tne door reported tnat tue otuer Commissioners had put im an appearance fora littie while, A door- Mun Wiin a basket of wood declared that none of the Commissioners were present; and it was only alter great vitticuity and consiveraole skirmishing that General Durvee was ound. At tne office of tne Fire Commissioners, at fifteen minutes belore three, the Ouly revresentatives of the department who could answer questions were Mr. Jassen, @ subordinate clerk, and Fire Marshal Sneidvn. President ieriey, his associates, and even Mr. White, the secretary, were avsent. The department did not even have a messenger to an- swer inquiries or direct the vaiious visitors who cailed ou ousiness tu the desks where tuey could transact it. Tne Commissioners of Docks were on duty yes- terday, as well us Messrs, Lynch and Jackson, who act as secretaries of the Board. ‘Tne lew Commissioners seen, imcluding Mr. Van Nort, who as late aS @ quarter to four was found at his desk, report nothing new and no probabilliy for any immediate ingmen now seeking employment. The recom- mengation ot Mayor Wickoam that oeads ot de- artments refrain {rom attempting ty influence egisiation at Albany has had some effect, as is shown vy the number oi well-ied Commissioners | who yesterday were cn dut Betore closing tuts urticic it may be propor to state that (he Excise Commissioners Nave set a commendable example to other departments by so arranging their private business tha. one of the three Commissioners snall always be present. Yesterday Messrs. Stewart, Stiner dnd Marsball | were at their office, and at no hour oi the day was there occasion {or & visitor woo asked ior a commissioner to turn away disuppotaoted, MUNICIPAL NOTES. The Mayor was very busy at his office yesterday and signed an immense numver of warranis. ‘The Mayor has pot yet signed the Strack ordi- Dance relative to the use 01 snow ploughs and sweepers by city ratiroad companies, H the Board of Aldermen will meet to-morrow a two P.M. Henry Clausen, Willlam A. Fowler, William 0. Kingsley, William A. Boud and Commissivner Van Nort were awong the visitors to tue Mayor yester- day. ity Chamberlain Tappan makes the following weekly report:— Balance February 13 $673,142 Keceipts of the week 1,425,331 Payments of the -veek. 175,215 Balance, February 20. REAL ESTATE. pie The announced sales at the Exchange yesterday attracted a large audience and were dispused of 1ollows:—Mesers. A. H. Muiler & Son sold, by order of the Cou.t, under the direction of George S. Sedgwick, referee, a house and Jot located in Fitty-filtn street, west of Madison avenue. A. H. Nicolay disposed of, under the direction of 0. S. Ackiey, referee, one lot on Eighty-iourth street, west of Eleventh avenue, James M. Miller sold by order of the court, under the direction of H. W. Alien, referee, the premises known as No. 359 Broadway and No. 71 Franklin stree:, aud, by order oi the executors of Thomas Mcvabe, sold the premises No. 378 Eigoth avenue, and . 24 Mott street: Mr. Oliver Bryan soid, by order of the court, under the divec:ion oi J. Hayes. ‘eferee, a house and lot on Flity-fith street, West of First avenue, | Mr. R. V. Harnett sold, under tne direction of Maurice Seyne, releree, houses and jots on Prospect place, between Forty-second and Forty-thirad streets, and, under tue di ection o; J. B. Oun, 1eferee, dis posed of a house and lot on l2sih sireet, west of ‘Third avenue. Messrs, Bleecker & C sold under the direction ol b. J, Shanaley, referee, a house and lot on the southeast corner of ihicd avenue and 108th streets and wir. B. Y. Fairchiid sold ac puolic auction & nouse and lot on 126th street, east of Kighth ave- nue, Annexed are the full particulars :— NSW YORE eROrERTY—o¥ A, ut. MULLER A¥D $08. 14s.b.s No and bon ss. of Btn st, 100 IL Ww, of Jot 224x100, Kautinan... $45,000 BY A. Ih AY AND CO. 1 lot ns of 64th st. 150 fe w. of Lith av., 25x100.5, Mary. Bunker, Plaintit... ccc. ceceeeee 2,100 BY MILLER. | 155, iron front b. and 50 Broadway, w. 8, } Hit. sof Franklin sii; jot 21105, and thed 8, mi. front ¥, and 1. No. Ti Frangit si. adjoining the ‘above in the rear; lot 2i1ux76 J.B 7 tear vail 144. bk. b. and 0. S78 SUN a 14's. bk h 8 het + hot daa. dau 14,870 don't. ¢ both st, 2I4L1 fw. of | 1880.8 hand onus doth st, 214, J we Bee ee tRbatode AY Rindverey plaatilfe..e.. + 8.200 | BY KY HAMSKIT, . | 1880.8. 0. and J. ons ¢ corner Vrospect place | ‘and $id st, lot 17.1x53, Walier L. Caran, piaincil 9,760 | 136.0, 8 I all one. 8. Vrospect place, 35.91 nh | St, lot 1.Sx08, Walter i. Coline, piaintit. 7,000 sho and Lou's. 8 L2Sun st, 207.011. Ww. oF sd | fot IsGxw.li; John HM Gregory, plaluut,,... 8660 | 8Y bb 148 brick tenement h. corner 34 and 18th st, lot 17. paint 950 126th. s! ay 128, and b. brick h. and, t.. a, De Walitears.. 6,100 200 1h @, of Sth av., Lot 20%09. 11 | to omice, | ence vetWeen six and seven, in such a connection, | bardly deserves notice, | transactious related THE MAYOR AND THE GOVERNOR. Mr. Wickham’s Final An- swer to the Governor. CHARLES O’CONOR’S VIEWS. The Testimony in the Cases of the Corpora- tion Counsel and the Fire Commis- sioners Sent to Albany. The Mayor on Monday sent his final answer to the Governor in reply to the latter’s lengthy let- ter published last Thursday, im whicn the Gov. ernor argued to show that his request ior tne testimony in tne cases of the Corporation Counsel and the Fire Commissioners wno were removea by the Mayor was a just and proper one. With this answer the Mayor not only sent all the test- mony taken in the cases of the removed oMcials, but he encivsea a letier addressed to bim by Mr. Charles O’Conor, in which that eminent lawyer gives his opinion upon the delence made by Mr. Delafleid Smith against the charges preferred against him oy the Mayor. A portion of Mr. O’Conor’s letter was made public some time ago, but tnat part which referrea to the case of the Corporation Counsel has not heretofore been published. ‘ihe /oliowing is the letter MR. CHAKLES O’CONOK’S LETTER TO THE MAYOR. New York, Jan, 29, 1875. Hon. Witi1aM H. WickHAM, Mayor of the city of New York :— SIR—Having perused the answer of the Corpora- tiou Counsel, | proceed in compitance with your desire to communicate such suggestions thereon as seem likely to be useful, For brevity, | may use the phrases “Ring” and “City Ring,” now grown so familiar, They are not necessarily re- proachiul or offensive. The word “King,” a8 used in political parlance, means simpiy a untted circle | of individuals engaged in some onject, enterprise or pursuit. In tnis communication it reters to the four persons who controlled our city government in 1871. A great distinction may justiy be made between them, for it has never been established | that more than two of them fraudulently received any public money or had actual kuowledge of any such fraud or even cotemporancous notice of its commission, 1, The respondent ence held a writing which distinctly offered ¢3,000,000 tor a release of certain | r ; Tapuing an uniavorabie cunciusion may, aud nut | 3a offenders, ‘This paper snould be immediately called for and placed in sale custody, 80 a3 to be accessivie to the city authorittes, 2. The ordinance governing in Starkweather’s case allowed two per cent Jor assessments re- | turned as unpaia atter “two personal demands tor payment have been made by tne Coilecior or Deputy Collector.” Starkweather divided with Tweed, Barber and others, his fictitious deputies, $130,000 as commissions on assessmeuts that were not and could not bave been made the subjects of ® personal demand eyen once, much less twice. Aside irom other ovjectious this one is insuper- able. The amount was received from Comptroller Connolly, aud the respondent insists that it can- Not be recovered back. ‘The result of a proposed suit can never bo more than a matter o1 upinion, and consequeutly po more can be said touching tue respondeni’s proposition than that it seems to be erroneous. Sulted certifies that, as Conuoily knew all tue facts and pald voluntarily, he thinks tne city is concluded. 11 this be law, all prosecutions agalost the Ring and their associates, except peruaps Cunnoliy himself, should be at once abandoned. But the authorities cited by him do not sup- port bis position, and in T. C, Fields’ case, page 82, the Court o! appeals distinctly over- ruied it. ‘re prigciple that a bar resulteerom Voluntary payment with knowledge oi tne tacts 1ssound aod weil estaolished ; but, as against the government, it does not apply to payments made by @ public office? without authority or im contra- vention of law. (United States vs. Hunter, 5 Peters’ R., 187; Johnson vs, United Staves, 5 Mason’s R., 440, 441.) Stark weather’s euormous and unlawful draught from the City Treasury, as @ subordinate, was dl- vided by him with a set of fictitious deputies— one of them being Tweed, a chiet iu the existing and notoriously corrupt city government. That Connoliy, another of these corrupt chiefs, knew all the facis and yet paid voluntarily, could hardly ve a defeuce, if the common law has any Cluiin to be esteemed ‘the perieciion ol reason.’ in nis official 1etter of November 19, 1574, to May or Haveweyer, the respondent argues tuat StarK- weather received tus mouey in good laitb. shat | Position dues No’ Seem Lo be LOW insisted on. ‘The responuent properly concedes that ois judg- ment ougbt not absolutely to control in tus Matter; anu oe, thereiore, offers to bring a auit if you requestit Rigutiy and neces ariy this oer 18 accuinpagied by a suggestion that, in sen event, other counsel must be Gesiguated by you and paid by the city to perform nis ouicial duty in couducing the suit and in advecaung it. ‘This seems ab uckhowicugiment that he could Not act aS Counsel tur the city mM this large case. ‘The iniereuce is irresistib.e; his preat icelligeuce Gould not fail tu recognize it. This iact alone would seem to render his removal a necessity, 3. in respect to the Baird case, nut one of the facts stated io your ietter is questioued, and that i the appropriate coiucideuce 10 time between tne release o1 the 1eieree irom the Joues case aud the mouou to reer tae Baird cae. Your staie- ment is strictly and literally true; the atiempt to impeach it ails totaily. Tue respouvent's velore meutioued leiter to Mayor Havemeyer expressy Stutes (iat the motion tu discuargs that reveree irom :he Joues case was heard January 14, i874, Notice of the moron to reier tue bairu case Was peed on the 8th Of tuat same twourh or tne 19th, he Cuiucioeuce is periect. What mfeences are deducibie {yum it or irom any other undened or juiiy proven circumsiance ts for your consiwera- tou. 4. NOL a8 One of the charges; but incidentally | your letter suggests that Mr. Hurvey, wolle noide Ing, by toe responde ('s gill, a pubiic olive un- der the city goverament, Was chosen 4 reieree in seven causes, Phe respondent las suowa quite cieariy tat one of these s:ven was so referred prior to the time of that gentiemau’s appointment itis BOL perceived, uowever, ihui your objection to tig bravcn of tie respondent's prace tice 18 (herevy materially Weakened. ine differ 5. ne only oiner charge ts that the Court of Appeals beving, on June 9, denied tne ex- isteuce Of any judicial remedy against 1weea, ex- cept the suits theu pendiug in the respoudent’s | departinent, he tailed ty take any proceedings tn | | those suits for five months thereaiter. 1his charge | is specific and precise. It 1s eastiy understoud, | and aby Wan of common intelligence wav will Keep | his attention fixed upon the vesiqnated period | Miust see thut it is compleceiy sudstautiated. It | has no relation whatever to auy time except the | indica, five months oetween June ¥ and Novem- | | ver ¥, 18’ nor ts the siigntest compiaint made agalust Wie respondent for any supiuedess in Lats respect at any time prior tu dane 9 1874. In com. | meuting Upon the eVasive policy of the Ring you | remaiked (hat tue iocai sutis gotien up by them. €8 against themselves were quetiy “nursed aiong,” While the siaie's suits were strenuusiy | resisted. Tuough this was deemed su.tavie as an argument agaiost leaving (ueir appointee in cons trol oO! the department which was charged | With the prosecution of the suits against them, it iad po conneciion with tne Speciic charge assigned as a cause for the re moval. Ii the respondent imteuded wo vindicate their motives ana repei (iis impUtacin Upon taeM, Nis acts and Dis correspondence witi the Avtorney General ava his as issants prior to June 9, 1574, might be relevant, and pe: soos Who did not give very cise atiention to the whole vistory of tims | business Might reach 4@ conciusion tbat tue Ring policy Was greatviy and cruejly misrepresented. But these prior ‘acts and correspondence are wholly irrelevant, a8 a deleves of the respondent from the speciic and omy charge made agamst him tH this connection—i(o wit, Coat (rom the time tt becaine proper aud necessary ior him to prose: cute weed he wholy tailed to do so. Bearing in minu that no complaint ts made Against the respondent tor che non-)rosecution of Tweed at avy time prior to dune 9 Ist4, it wilh readily be peiceived that the correspondence aud is AUsWer dud vecurting prior lo tuat date have, at inost, Dut ap incidental reievaucy To the mater 1 Gand, and that merely on the polut of moive, bven as to thal thelr Veudency ads Of observativa, Tuer real oimee and effect i fhe avswWeris the very saive as (oat Perlovmed tu ali CaSes DY ProuX Peeitals of rele: vant circumstances, ‘they over ask attention, draw it away from the true point ol inquay and emvairass Minds DO. 1utimacey Couversant Wita the suvject io aii its details, Ap, toaching, tben, tae (rue imquiry, was the Prosecution oF Tweed negieeted ivr the Whole o the five modtas alimved tor 1.18 Lo Le Observed Firsi— Lhe LWo stits pouding ageins: Tweed la Lite Law Deparimea: on tne Sta ot June, i874, nad been cuimmenved by his predecessor th Ociover ls7l. One was by the city, No step hus ever been taken id that suit beyouu serving a sum- The counseiior woom he con- | | and U'Conor, SHEET, mons: nor does any step in it appear to have been nevessary or proper. the decision o1 tue bigbest court, so otien relerrea to, indicates that tne suit by the county is the only one that cao le successiuily prosecuted. All that bas been said or shuil be here said touching tne prosecution or DoD-prosecution of Tweed vy the Law Vepart- Ment suvsequently to June ¥, 1574. relates to the county suit. Confntog ourselves to this last named Bait will conauce to viearness On Juve 9, 1874, the county suit was at issue, reaoy jor trial, apa on the calendar. Mr. Peckham, the Only person with Whom the respondent cou- Jerred I rejation 10 this snit, states that mmedti- ately alter the decision in the Court of Appeals in June, 1874, he proposed to bring it to trial, aud Was positively loruidden to do so by the respon- dent. Here the case slept, of course, until at some dace not precise.y asceriained, bu! certaimy sao- fequent to the gth oi Novemoer, 1874, correspond: euce took place between tiose geutiemen, seem- ing to authorize Mr. Peckham to proceed. By 18 Terms (nis did wot oecersurily refer to the case against weed. Whether the respon- dent 8» understood it or intended cau only be @ matter of conjecture, Mr. Peckham con- Strued it as retiesing nin from the respondent's protuvition, aud in Deceinver, 1874, he took steps to pusu the case agains Tweed to trial. Aimost Upon the insiant the respondent dismissed iim Jrom all conuection with tiator auy ocner DuUsi- mess oO: te Law Department. Tiis was late tn December, 1874. ‘she respondent's action siuce your charges were served upon Dim canuot Properiy ve noticed, 2d. Lt will be seen that, with one exception, all the correspondence wita any of those concerned iu toe Stale suits, annexed to tue respoodeut's @bsWer, bears date prior to June 9g, 1874, ur subse: quently to Novemoer 9, 1874. Of course each letter reiers to te condition of things existing at its date. That one exception is the corresponuence Marked S and 1, betweea the responuent and General barlow, dated Jjuue 24 and 25, Isi4. Its Inception was Geueral Bariow’s letcer of June 23, 1874, Which the respondent has not produc ‘That correspoudenve related to a set of suits ior what are famiilarily termed “King Irauds,’? tue case against Starkweather oeimg one or them, ‘That correspondence originated in General Baie Jow’s desire Lo prosecute those particular suits | dv did not relate to the suit against 'weeu, cous | quently that correspondence doex not couch tne poiutin hand, 11s ouly use 18 to SHOW thal, as LO U1tS B2a1NSt Sturk weather and others, voc tu- diug tweed, General Bariow evinced the same | reauibess tO prosecute that Mr. Peckham exuibs ited in relation tou the suit against Tweed, ‘Tuer oMiciousuess was treated with tie most uL- eXcepliouaole imparuality. Both were dismissed ay thesame tume- i, @, ON or soun aller December 30, 1874, This is the whole cas to the specific charges against the respoudent. ArCely @ BiDgIe lack us- serted by you in relereuce to tnese Charges 1s drawn in question, so far as the most curefut scrutiay coud discera aby attempt of the Kind in the answer, the proof ul each fact asserted in the harges is above shown ty be absolutely periect. | ‘tbe luieiences which migat tena to impugn tue | Yesponden'’sy motives ure ail uemied by nim; und men may weil aiffer in tue question ot their accuracy, For any public purpose | or duty it does not seem necessary to main | tain wuy of them. Neitner the privaie morais nor | the personal character oi the respondent could v2 successiuliy MMpeachea, In cucse respects be | »tauds uuquestionably and justiy on the same | higt plane in public and private esteem us every oue of the professional gentiemen reierred to vy tim. Citcumstances leading Ww anu even war uairequentiy do, exist in cases Waen that High | Judzment when sees alt things and caunot err acquits the party of apy O:jectionabie intent. Should you tuink fit to remove the respondent rom ofice you will doubtiess consider the pro- priety of eXpressing in your order to that eflect tis personal excuipation, A a Ei ie Ya ai eee ee) Jt 1s fit to say here that, except by letters ap- pened to his auswer, all dated prior to Juue 9% 1874, 1 ever had avy interview with tue respon- deut or any correspondence with wim, directly or iudirectly, tum the time ul his appulatmeat uatil your charges weie served, at oc in waich any bUSs\hess Matter Was or Could prop: rly have been reieired tu; and jurcher, taut t Was never invited to amy such consultation as 18s sugzested in the lenanige ur. Pecknam and mysell, dated January ‘fhe respondent makes the foilowing statement :— “Waeu the uuurt of Appeais aismissed the Siate Suits (be gentlemen above named (U’Uonor, Ba jow and Peckhauw) Were continued my couns: Without pausing lo observe on the singular idea here, as 10 ocuer places, evinced by this very ques- tivnadle use O1 Lhe possessive pronoun, | must say Ubat so Jar as this statewent refers to me itis nub accurate. Stage of Lae LUSMess tue respondent, Preparatory LO ais diswissal 01 Messrs. Barlow aud Peskuam, @uvised Mayor Vauce, in au ofictal communica tvn dated Decemver 30, 1874, that, by my “pracu- cai witlarawal,” be has been let “witwout a seuior cuuusel.”” Ln its entirety and in every one 01 1f8 elemental paris this stavement was without color. It is uot meant to mumate, nor is it be- lieved, that tuere was any wilful wisvepresenta- tion, The iacts, however, are precisery the re- aware taatihud withdrawn irom general prac- lice, 1@ COUld Dut larly Dave BUppoOsed thai my in- ciination or abuity to serve the puolic gratunousiy in (us DUsLUess Was dimMioshed by that circuu- stance. Its manifest tendency was to crease botu. iu connection vith the dismissal o1 General Bar- low aud Mr. Peckham, In Deceuber, 174. a lew jJacts not poted in your letter, vul iucidently theowins iis ht upon the question Louw beiore you, may properly be stated. ‘Lue great leading and iuliy estublisued Ofence Was a thelt of $400,000 Commonly caued the Court House iraud, ints was one of ti se eXiraordivary transactions 1m respect to which but itle protessioual ingeuuity was re- quired to frame a plausibie argument agains: the existence Ol apy judicial iemedy whaiever. Whea, 10 1874, OO the tidings that sults by the State were Imminent, the Corporation Counsel, who bad re- fused to prosecute, was advised by one of the im- pilcated tu sue Nimselr and the others, two very euient aud bighiy respectable memvers of the Bar were consuited by him. sively circulated. On its teuth page, im arguing agulust the rigav of the Stace, tne earned gentie- Lich said that the-iacts constituted ‘a iraud or Misconuuct in respect to which au action must have accrued to the people of the county, if it be act onabie at all.” It must be supposed that tne gentivinen who thus veutiluted a grave douvt whetuer there was any remedy wuatever con- tinued to be assuciaied witu the Corporation Counsel until the munth of December, 18/2, wnen, as appears by letters wnnexed to bis answel, the respondents witndrew tueir retainers aad sent lis so-calied retainer to Barlow, Pecknam eee: the two years succeeding this da.e one of the latter gave attention to the State's civil suits, and two of Luem, Mi. Peckhum and General Barlow, presented the State's dic Ment wito suck zeal, Vigor and success that a leading co-conspirater Was sent to the State Prisou, Tweed was sent to the Penitentiary, aud the resto. the kuown officials were ariven’ ito exile, These iacis being distinctly veiore the mind tue two classes of associate cuunsel between whom, on Decemver 30, 18/4, the respondent d.scriminated. tHe formally dis- | Missed cru any agency in the Ring prosecutions messrs, Barlow aud Peckium, the Counse: wno had tnus eiiciently pursued the conspirators, and suustituled in tueir place tue very geatiemen who had promulgated their solemn aodubt whether any action at ail coud be Maintaloed agatust them, luese facts cannot and will not be denied. In view of them 16 1x lor you to decide, in the whoie case, Whether, consisteatiy with your duty, you cau leave tne respondent in charge of the suits aguingt TWeed aud bis 1raudulent associates. * * * Very respectiully, CH. O’CONOR, MAYOR WICKHAM’S ANSWER. The following 1s tbe Mayor’s communication to the Governor, which accompanies the above letter and the testimony in the cases of the oficias against Whom charges have been made, and upon ptoo! of which the Mayor decided to remove them :-— New York, Feb. 22, 1875, Governor SAMUEL J. TILDEN, Albany, N. Y.:— DEAR SiR—Your ietter of the 17th inst, has been Treceivea and careiuily considered. With great deierence to your judgment upon any proposition of law, I cannot out adhere to the construction of the statute of 187% set forth iu my letter 0: the 10th inst., and which was acted upon by our respective predecessol It is, that the statute does not coulempiate a new trial upon the hierits, by the Governor, of au appointed oMicer of the city government, who has been removed by the Mayor, for cause and after a hearing lad, Any other view seems to tavolve a practical subjection of the goverament of the city of New York to tne Executive power o/ the State more compiete than even that jor years maintained through the op- pressive commissions jormeriy appointed in Ale banoy. And, indeed, [ do not understand that your letter indicates any conflict between usas to the rights and duty of the Mayor in the cases men- tioned, \t 1s proper, however, to remina you that my letter reierrea to a number of precedents ior we course pursued; bUL tnat your reply seems to assume thut | hud suggested but oue, And, as to thal one (the removal of tie Commissiouers of Public Caaritles aua Correction), you have been LLsied as LO Material acts. iu that case Major Vance forwarded aothing Wiatever to the Governor. except the tWo papers Udlisved im bue Culy kecord, Vecemver 20, 1974, velug WS Certidcate of removal for ihe Stated, accomp nied by tue statutory Gomi nica. HOW in Writing Of (be Mayor's Feasums Or Woat Le had done, The papers are biel, and, upon read- ing Liem, the Governor's approval oF tye removal tae by the Mayor Was expressed tu Writing, as required by the law, Lt Was brougat back to New ; Yors oy the Mayor's own messea,e:, Who han | been Dut a few hours in Albany. ‘| enclose to: | yoar miormauon 4 copy of the vumber uf the Cy Kecord convaimng all the documents. | Governor Dix bad, a year beiore buat date, de Subsequently to tie decision of tue | | Courtof Appeais (Juae 9 1874) nothing Whatever | passed betweeu che respondent aud my- self, directly or indirecity, oo any sub- j ject, public or private. And so iar srom consideripg me his counsel at this ein it termined upon the course in such cases prescrided to bim by tue statutes. On The 318t Devemoer, 1873, Mayor Havemever hal remove: Alexander 8. Toplanyi, a city mi shal, Jor Cause, and after a number of hearings. It is tO De Observed Chat The /ToVIsiogs O! the Btatu Which you have discussed oniy in relevence to the cases Of hewls o: depariments apoly equally te city Marsa: and to all the other interior ap poinied ofticers wh e mentioned in the charter and nut specially excepied from their operation. Ib foplanst’s case -he testimony and papers, now 00 file 1b this olice, ure voluminous; but potan Was lorwarded to tae Goveraor of considered pb} hitn, except a briei witer from the Mayor. commu Hicatiug ts reasons for tie step, aud tne certify cate of removal made jor the cause MM Lt stated, Tue Governor promptly returned the certificate, with Loe Word “approved” indorsed over his 8 hature. Copies of Lie papers Im that case are e| closeu for your information. lugs Were had im the matter of » ¥Clly Marshal, removed by Mayor Havemeyer; and copies o/ the papers in that case also are enclosed. Thece Was B) case in witch Governor Dix ever asked jor or received trom the Mayor anythiug more tiun a letter aud certificate, such as ure above mentioned, aud which estavl sued the forme cureiully followed by me 1a my commuatcations te you ot the di tost. ASLO the Supposititious case you suggest, of @ removal by tie Mayor jor a cause supported by alieganous one or wor Wich migut chamee to be to the Governor pers nally knowo to be am founded, | would remark tuat, 1! ibe Governor, hoiding meantime the certificate of removal, Should communicate that information to tne Mayor it would be eariticd to, aad would receive irom Coe latter the most attentive consideration ’m connection wi'h the Ofer evidence in the case. ‘The Mayor mig tt (hereu, on be able either to wir! draw his act 01 removal or 10 explain to the Gov- ernor tae relevancy to (he other jacts in the case to the information communicated by bim, as all the evideuce might seem to require, ihe Vayor woul. stil bo the judge of the facta, in like manner a removal by "he Mavor for cause might ve suupoited 0 us eveu better aud more 1utimately KuOWD co be true by the Governor Wno received tian by tne Mayor who jorwaraed them. ror example, itis nov esumed tuet, ig the case of EB, Delafeia Siath, Esq. the present Mayor could add to the kKnowleage which tae present Governor, more than auy one except, pers ups, Mr. O'Couor, possesses of tne acts Which made Mr. Smitu's removal necessary, Kut, suil retaipiug the Opinions heretofore and how stated as to the prerogatives oi my office, which it would be unbecoming in me, even toward | you, to have held sudject to aby personal or polit: ‘They united | 1m an opinion whicn ne priuted and exten- | leat COusideratious or LOL tO have tius reserved Jor the benefit of my successors im ofice, 1 shali not pecome an obstructiva to you im tae perform. ance or jour duties, The interests o1 good gov. ernment shall not be endangered vy action of mine, Tue pubiic service requires concessions trom me of Whatever can be made consisieatly with duty, aud {have vo inciimation to withhold them, Certainly, to you personally I shail alwayt ve ready to accord Wuucever can be reasonably asked of me. Audtam glad to be at liberty now to regard thac county to which you have relerred—and, ag Ido so, you will uuderstand that, by acceding te your request a$ to the cases how awaiting your approval, lam but making courteous expression jereuce Lo your personal wishes i this ir iastanc 2 pleasure in sending to you herewith all the 'S Which Were bere me in making, on tae nsf, tue certificates of removais and the com. Munications in writing te you of the reasons upon which (be removais Were bused, ‘The proceedings 1m reiereaee to the Fire Com. missioners were instituied on the 2d uit, by ® letter to them, by my direction, Irom my sec! tary (of Walch a copy is herewith enclosed), ri questing their atteucance at my oltice two days tuereaiter, io the Matier Of a report made by the Columissioners ol Accounts concerning the Fire Departmer Phas report had been imade tomy predecessor in oitice, and had veen by him ree jerred to me for activu, Ali taree of the Commise slouers attended at the tme designated, and [ had wita ail of them a conversation ia which 1 delivered to them a copy of the report, and called thelr attention Lo Lie Charges aguinst them iu it made. i (nen told them that they would be heard ona day specified—w.en one or more of them agi appeared aud asked jor an extension of time in wach to prepare their defences. Upon tne Jourved day ail taree of the Commissioners at tended veiore me, aud, iu the course of conversa ton, buuded me ther auswers, 10 writiag, to the charges preierred by the report. It Will ve ovserved that their defences do no} otnerwise than argumentatively, controvert thi More material allegations Of act stated in the report of tke Commussioners of Accounts. As to the matters whica are iL Lue Written answers met by direct Geniais, | Dave, upon tae papers pow sent to you, aud UpUD ly OWND inquiries, found the jacts to be as stated in my letter to you of the 3¢ inst, on the subject. it is proper to remark here that, since the re- movals were made, | have received trom Mr. Hatch a separate communication (which 14 also sent to you. denyiug complicity in certalu mutters Charged aguiust the others, but wulco are said to have bee UnKnOWD co Dim—and claiming immu. Olt) irom respousibiity tor certain utaer matters, in whicn he says that he offered resoiutions in the Board which were voted down by Messrs. Perley ana Van Cott, Had that paper been before me when my letter ol the 3d Was writien Isnould have theu given Mr. Hatch the veueft of suca exculpation trom oral delinquency as cau ve 1airly based upou it, Bul, upon ibe whoie cuse, | cousider it obligatory to hold mim to an official respoastioility for the very reprehensible conuttion of affairs in tue Fire Depactinent during his connection with i ‘The papere sent to you are Many oi them or nails, and you are requested to return them all tne tes Of thts olllce. Ut tne proceedings hag before me orally in these Matters Lo minutes were made at the time, and, indeed, asx to Mr. Smutu’s case, they but veritied the ipformation indepeadeutiy possessed by you, Agail requesting your prompt action to the red to, aud witd assurances of m) pere ), Wits great respect, your friend and obedi- entservant, WILLIAM H. WICKHAM ELECTION OF OFFICERS—FINANCES. Yesterday afternoon, pursuant to adjournment, a meeting oi the directors of the Brooklyn Bridge ‘Was held at the ofice, No, 2l Water street. There were present :—Lawrence Tarnure, James McLean, James S. Motley, Jonn Rielly, Lioya Aspinwail, Charles G, Canda, David M. Stone, James & T. Strananan, Thomas Carroll, Wiliam Manshall, George L. Nicholis, Samuel Booth, Mayor Huater, Samuel S. Poweil (Comptroller) and Mayor Wick: ham. The latter named official occupied the chair, Tue minutes of the meeting having beet read and approved, Mr. Strananan submitt-d the following from the Comunttee ou Nomina tuious:—: resident, Henry ©. Murpoy; Vice President, Avram 8, Hewitt; Secretary, U. P. Quintard, He satd the committee was not yet ready to veportas tow Treasurer. A Daliot Was tuen taken ior President aad Vice President, William C, Kingsiey and Lawrence furoure ac ing as tellers. Tue entire vote cast was sixteen, which was for the officers nomiuated, Mr. Quine tard was chosen Secretary. Mr. Kingsley moved that Mr, Preatice be appointed Treasurer. He ad- vocated economy, and Was of the opiniou that Mr, Prentice Would accept Positiva wituout pe- cuulary ieward., He was elected Treasurer, te act Uotil another should be chosen, [t Was suge [ase that a committee be appoiuted to look alter ridge legisiation at Albany, Oo — mortiog ol Mr. Aspinwail a committee o1 two was appointed from each ciry to take charge of the bridue bills. Mr. Turnure said he wanted to nave i: ua derstood waat the bridge was to cost. It wae rumored that it would cost fen or flitesa milltone additional. It wouid be well that tn sore and the public should Know all avout to and that they should kKoow whut the edect o their accion Wil be buiore proceeding. A Houncial statement made up to February 1, 1875, was read by the Secretary, irom Waich it appears that there is a Dulance Of Cash on dand to dae of $11,916 7% ‘The luvil: ties Of the company avount Lo $ 80,000, The Board aqjouraed to meet on Monday alter. noun, THE PRODUCE EXCHANGE, Yesterdiy the Produce Exchange nad an im portant meeting in re.erence to the great question of the grading of grain. Mr. Jonn M, Hughey spoke in an able manner in opposition wo the rules a8 recommended by the committee, but big principal ovjection seemed to be on the score of the titie, Messrs. George H. Webster and Wiliam J. Preston followed in leugthy speeches 1a favor of We rulesas recommended hy the committee te the Board of Managers, Mr. Preston nad not conciided his ac gument when the Board ad Journed until Friday morning next at baliepast ten o'clock. There were appropriate resolutions passed by the petroleum (rade tn reference to tue decease @ a Vuiued memver, Mi. ADNAH NEYMARE, who departed this ine (as heretofore noticed ip these CoiUMNS) AL San Diego, Cal, OM the 1708 lust. Resolutions were pase! condoling with bie fantly anda eXtolling tie character Of the d@ ceased, THE CANAL DELEGATION £0 to Albany to-day to present the resolutions ia regard to the canais, hererolore adopied bp; Exchange, ada tt ts suposed that uportant legie. lation may ve moulded to suit toe requirements of the Mercualts and the exigencies of trade by tae ellorts of cae commities pained. THE VISITOS AT THE EXCHANGE yesterday comprised tie folowing oames:—J, B, Gale, oF sorwien, Coun., by Hugnes & Vo. 7 Obarleg MousioNes, ul ColmmoUus, Oni, by Be Roee. Urot-on, vu: Litusville, by OWen Fete of Savannan, by W. A. Work; 4! ol@aisaip Utnelo, vy C . & Co.; BF. Koverty, 0: Buflalo, oy My Fleicuman; OA. Mad 2110, OF Orig -@u Ume> taad, by G, « al; dacob Le Prapler, oF Mut Ma. Culumen; Captain Meoderson, of steamsnt aiexacdra, oy W. Ludsou; (homas Garret, Beast treiand, by George Smita & Co.} Captate, Rushrap, of Neeway, by Ohrmau & 0.3 Herinag Wilhams, of Kaliimore, “by W. G. Bracker; Bu Gy aruuid, Of Parser, Pas, bY JOUR O. Come