The New York Herald Newspaper, August 17, 1875, Page 5

“TAR CANAL FRAUDS Second and Third Reports of the Commission. TESTIMONY OF ENGINEERS. Explanations by Mr. Seymour, Jr., of Manipulated Returns. CONFESSIONS OF STATE ROBBERY. How the Stealing Was Done. The Scientific Method of Turning One Into Four. (HAGINARY WALL AND INVISIBLE ROCK. The second and third reports of the Canal Investiga- Ung Commission have been forwarded to the Governor. Upon the former he has already taken action, by re- questing the Attorney General to enter a snit against the contractors. Accompanying the sccond report are extracts from the testimony of engineers and officials tonnocted with the Cana! Board, a summary of which Is given below, The testimony of Mr. Horatio Seymour, Jr., confirmed as it is by tho unwilling admissions of Mr. Scott, 1s worthy of attentive perusal, and appears to fully justify the prompt action of the Governor:— BECOND REPORT. H. D. DENISON’S CONTRACT, RAST OF TOR CITY OF UTICA. To His Excen.ency tae Goveryor ov Tun State ov New Yorn :— On the 9th day of September, 1869, and the same day that the Port Schuyler contract with H. D, Denison— treated of jn our first report--was signed, another con- tract was entered into between the State and the same TL. D. DenisM “for removing wall benches on the Erie Canal, from the junction of the Chenango Canal there- with to the eastern limits of the city of Utica, and for constructing a vertical wall along the berme bank of said canal, from a point near Clay street, cast- ward about 1,500 feet.” As in the case of the Port Schuyler contract, and, in fact, with all the contracts now pending on this division of the canals, urns we can learn, no survey, map, estimate or specifications, such as the law requires in all cases to bo made by the Division Engineer, approved by tho State Engineer and Surveyor, submitted to the Canal Board for their adoption, and filed in the office of the State En- gineer and Surveyor, betore a work can be let, was ever made, alpen submitted, adopted or filed. Upon this point yonr attertion is invited to the testi- mony of the State Engincer and other witnesses an- nexed, No. 1. The amount for which tho contractor bound himself to perform the work specified in the contract was $10,617. The amount credited to him on tho Ist of March last, with at least a third of the work unfinished, was $50,700, The Commission visited this work on’ the 26th of April last, accompanied by Horatio Seymour, Jr., tho engineer Who had been placed in charge of it in Decom- ber preceding. R The work dono on the berme side consisted of about 1,09 feet of slope wall, commencing some 1,300 fect West of the city limits, and a vertical wall extending from the west end of this slope wall to Clay Street Bridge, within the limit of the city of Utica, 6,886 linear feot, Of the latter 100 linear feet were laid in coment. and the rest dry. ‘The specifications required that the slope wall shall be composed of field or quarry stone of good shape, the wall to have “an average thickness (measured at right angles to the slope) of 15 inches more, when the engincer shall think it necessary to protect the work,” and “no stone to bo laid in such wall less than 12'inches in longth at right angles to the face We found the average be geste of this wall, from twenty-six m remeuts ih one opening, instead of being 15 inches, was only 9 20-26 inches, and in an- other, from twenty-cight measurements, only 9 13-23 inches. In no place did we find it nearer the specifica- tions. The epecifications require ‘the rear of the wall to rest apon a base of clean, hard gravel, at least 9 inches thick at right angles with face, the’ compensation for the wall to include the expense of filling the space with | ravel.’? Fernere was no sign of gravel beyond this wall, and the weight of the testimony is that none was used. The dry vertical wail commences etghty-one chains and forty feet cast of Clay street bridge, at which point itterminated. We tore this down in seven different places, We did not find any portion of it constructed according to contract. Only a very insignificant pro- portion of the stone were of the minitnum size permitted by the specifications, and although the contract re- ourth of the volume of the wall to be com- <iers or building stone as deep as the wall, ne, Tt was a face wall, laid 80 as to expose ¢ of the stone, filled in behind with small Btones wit t bond, bedding or disposition of any kind. ‘All the coping and ties were estimated and paid for as white ouk timber, There was not a piece of white oak on the work; but, with the exception of about 100 feet at the west end, of hemlock, this vertical wall was coped throughout with bastard beech, birch and maple timber of scant proportions. ‘Twenty-four pieces, purporting to be ties, only from twelve to eighteen inches in length, were found framed into the coping, within a distance of 850 feet. What they lacked iu length had been originally concealed from the eyo of a superficial observer by earth, which tho rain had sinee washed to a considerable extent throngh the loosely jointed wall into the canal. The portion of this wall purporting to be laid in coment we found of hke character as to work, size of stone and their disposition. The mortar had no more lenacity than equally dry earth, Though this wall was all built: since 1870, it is already badly bulged and dislocated. Several sections have fallen, and all of it will stand in need of considerable re- annually. The coping upon it, made as itis, for most part, of the most perishable woods of our for- est, was badly dec A, Hesides the difference between such a wall as the con- tractor eng 4 to furnished, and the shameful piece of work he has put thero, the estimates show that upon evory item of labor’ and materials that entered into” it the State has — been grossly over- charged. Over 2,000 yards of rock excavation wero credited to the contractor in places where, by sounding to the depth of two fect below canal bottom, no rock could be found, The space included between the rear of the wail and plane inclined at an angle of forty-five degrees from ils base was estimated both as excavation aud embankment, though very little earth was moved at all, and what was under the contract was not charge- able as embankment. The excavation of all the old bench was estimated to the contractor, though over the part of the work more than a foot of the old Dench still remains undisturbed in the canal. Large quantities of hemlock timber for foundations were estimated, of which we could find no trace in the work. More than 70,090 feet B. M. of maple, birch and beech were estimated as white oak, Over 7,000 cubic yards of rock blasting were esti- timated, though we have no evidenco that a yard of work entitled to this classification was done, Under these points your attention is invited to the annexed extracts from the testimony of Horatio Sey- mour, Jr., Assistant Engineeri n charge of this section of the canal since December last; of Mr. R. J. Cantwell, his predecessor, under whose supervision most of it was done, and of Winfleld 8. Lasher, a leveller, who was in- structed by Mr, Seymour to inspect this work and re- port upon it, Mr nour estimates the amount which was ered- ne contractor throug false and fraudulent for which he had no pretext of a | ited measurements and tlaita at $14,121 26 In his summary of these fraudulent measurements Mr. Seymour pnts down excavation and embankment in tear of vertical walls, as given in the estimates of the | tnginecrs who made theto, having no personal knowl- nige of the work when this was alleged to have been flone, We havo sinve agcertained from the testimony of the enginecrs w supervised the work that 7,959 cubic fards of earth excavation was constructively estim: ihe greater part of which was never done. This other fraudulently estiwnated excavation in the prism of the canal we belteve to aggregate 8,000 yards, which, aL twenty-five cents a yard, winount to $2,000, Mr. Seymour's estimate ot the amount of ork and materials faenished by the con. | rom $l4,121 35 to $16,121 35, Mr, Seymour's predecessor, by false estimates were made, puts gos at & much higher figure, as will r by the extract from bis testimony, No, 2, which cil, have spoken of the work on the berme canal how invite your attention to the character of the work done under that portion of the ich des tor the removal of wall benches lope walls wlong the tow-path une distance, Jr., Was appointedgAssistant cha No Utica office December 1, 1k. J. Cantwell, who in turn was detailed to A day or two belore the water was let out canals Mr. Yates, Division Engineer, was ait told Mr. Seymour that this work was isou immediately, No survey und had been made, nor had astirements prescribed by law st erfoncous and frandulent estimates owing day the contractor sent a eu and tore ont the bench wall for nearly tho veoh taken, fang of 1874, | entire extort of the contract, 12044 chains, of about a mile anda half, throwing the stone on tho tow path or ju the canal, and thus rendering vayigation at that NEW YORK HERALD, TUESDAY, fht Tmpracticable in case, from any accident, the pro- im ent should not be completed before the ing of the canal. jo orders were given todelay this work until it could be cross-sectioned, nor to contine within prudent limits the stretch of bench wall torn out. On the day the work pened Mr. Seymour was absent from Utica | with Mr. Greene, the Deputy State Engineer, bat be- fore going directed Mr. Cantwell, one of his assistants, to run a base line the whole length of the work; to put in iron pins from whieh to —_ross-section, and to get as many cross-sections a8 possible, The line was ron on uh day the work of tearing down the wall commenced, and during the second day some cross-sections were taken by Cantwell, but without any reference to the base line, of which, indeed, no record appears to have been made, of at least preserved, Mr, Cantwell professes to have made one and lost it. A few cross-sections wero taken after three-fourths of the wall was torn out, but no distances from the base line to any point were 6e- cured, Tho first instruction which Mr. Seymour received in regard to this work came from Resident Kn- gineer Babcock, the day before the bench walls were torn down, directing him, not as he should have dono, to stop Denison’s men tll a proper survey had been made, but to get as many cross-sections as he could of the stretch of the canal covered by the contract, with- out interrupting the work of demolition. The next instructions were from Babcock and Yates, through some men in Seymour's office, to “use slate for lining and to live up_ to specifications, though the speci- fication required him to use clean, hard gravel for lining; also to estimate slate rock excavation at tho same price as rock-blasted excavation, though no blast- ing was done and the cost was double the fair price for slate rock excavation, : Mr, Seymonr very properly declined to swear to esti- mates made on such principles; the contractors com- Jained, and thereupon Mr. Babcock gave him somo lessons In the art of measuring work on canals, He was told to estimate a wall as fifteemm inches thick if another engineer had so reported it, thoagh he knew by careful measurement that it was but little more than half that thickness; that an eight-inch wall was better than a fifteen-inch wall, and firially that a vertical wall should be estimated to the contractor as if excavation had been made for it on a slope of one to onc, whether the excavation was actually ‘made or not, and that the contractor was to be paid both for excavation and em- bankment regardless of the plein provisions of the con- tract to the contrary; Mr. Seymour, wishing to be sure that he had not mis- apprehended the directions of tho resident engincer, sent him a note to ask if he had correctly understood that the contractor was to b» paid both for excavation and embankment and whethor made or not. Mr. Babcock answered this letter, not in writing, but by sending a Mr. W. 8. Scott, “who he represented as having had large experience in measurements of work.” “He, said Mr, Baboock, “will explain to you the do tails of the work, method of ‘estimating slope,” &c, ‘This Mr. Scott was a young man who, till he arrived at Utica with this letter, had.never done a day's work on acanal in his Itfe. The misston to help Seymour measure this work to the satisfaction of the contractor was his vary first experience of canal ongineering, and ho improved so rapidly under Mr, Babcock’s instructions that withiu a month after his transfer, in April last, frem this Utica work to Deni- son’s work at Port Schuyler, treated of in our first re- port, he swore to false estiniates for labor and materials of the cash value, by his own admission, of $5,084 27. Your attention !s invited to. the extract trom his testi- mony, which is annexed. With all Mr. Scott’s asststance, Mr. Seymour was unable to make Denison’s work or materials measuro any more than he had already reported, Mr. Babcock insisted, Mr. Seymour resid, the contractor withdrew from the work and Mr. Soy! aour was instructed to go on and build up the wall sufdciently for the purposes of navigation, which he did. For the more detailed ac- count of these proceedings your attention is invited to the annexed extracts from Mr. Seymour's testimony. On the 1éthof April Mr. Canal Commissioner Thayer submitted to the Canal I3oard the following petition from Mr. Denison, which twas referred to the Attorney General and Canal Commis sioner:— To tnx Honxorante Canat, Boarp:— The undersigned respectfully asks your honorable to cancel his contract for remewing wall benches on the Erie Canal, from the junction of the Chenango Canal to the east ern limits of the city of Utiew, and for constrneting a vertical wall along the bermo bank from a point near Clay street enstward, &c., for tho follov-ing reasons :— First.—There is no available’ appropriation from which to pay for the same. & spel iy betta esis done ean only be done extra work, iy you: “Xone 14 187. H, D, DENISON. Thus it appears that th. 's contractor, after running up a bill against the State amounting ‘to $50,700, under cover of a contract whicl. only provided for an expendi- of $10,617; after beinjy credited with 5,304 yards of wortbless vertical wall,’ rhich will subject the State to a continual expense for iepairg till it is rebuilt from its foundation; after pocke: dog ofer $16,000 for work which we believe was never done; after tearing down a mile and a half of wall benches, for no better purpose, appar- ently, than to place thw) State in his power, now has tho effrontery to ask the Canal Board to cancel his contract, and to assign reasons {cr his application that are, if pos sible, more fictitious tlian his estimates, We are satisfied from: the evidence that he wished to have his contract cano sIled, not, as he pretends, because ~ the appropriation was exhausted, but because he was required to give the St ate an equivalent for what he ro- ceived from it; becanse his work chanced to come under the supervision of an ¢officer whose firmness and tidetity, in Honorable contrast with the conduct of his immediate superiors and colleagi1es, rendered a farther continuance of his depredations 11 der that contract impossible, But there is ono fer sure of this caso more revoltin; than any to which w.1 have yet referred. Mr. Cantwell the engineer in char; » before Mr. Seymour, not content with false measurements of work and materials in every monthly estimate tliat he mado, immediately previous to his removal ané. after the manner of the unjust steward, deliberatel 5’ effaced his field notes made’in 1870, which showed only” 570. y: of rock excavation, and changed 1,450 culvic yards of earth excavation, at twenty-five cents the yard, into rock cutting at $1 a yard, This alteration of his books and increase of his estimate in favor of the contractor was made four years after the work had been actually done and paid for. ‘The original alle wance of 570 yards of rock excavation was doubtless as fictitions as the latter addition, As- sisted by three «mgineers, we carefully tested all the work included in this estimate at numerous stations, and found no trace of rock within two feet of canal bottom, but did frad a timber foundation, which effectu- ally excluded all presumption of rock excavation, and demonstrates a ]t a8 to the State, beginning in fraud and consummated in. crime, of over $2,020 11, As to the me tives which impelled Mr, Cantwell to perpetrate thts crime, and the resident and division en- gineers to conrilve at it, we bre not yet quite prepared to express an opinion. Had we been permitted to ex- lore the books of Messrs. Denison, Belden & Co. this Toguiry might have been greatly simplified, We should fai.of our duty if we dismissed this sub- ject without der.ouncing the inexcusable conduct both of those who ad rised and of those who assented to the construction of the vertical wall provided by this con- tract, There was no pretext whatever for such an ex- pensive style a(/structure, There are a few hi at ‘one end of the work, but most of itis bounded by an open common.,.for which docking privileges were en- tirely unneces sary. ‘The contrac « provided for only 1,500 linear feet of vor- tical wall. Biy-the connivance of the canal authorities, including the then State Engineer, Mr. Taylor, a resi- dent of Lticn, who very shortly after the contract was let became otre of thé proprietors of the adjacent land, this wall was extended along the entire length of his property anil beyond, an aggregate distance of over a mile, Most-of the excess we find built while Mr, Taylor was himself State Engineer. Upon this: subject we invite your attention to the tes- timony annexed of Mr. Seymour and of Mr, William B. Taylor. tis diMeult to regard this pretended improvement from any paint of view as other than a profligate waste of the putiic money in the interest of a knot of land speculators and lawless canal officers and contractors, The partis interested in this contract are H. D. Denison, J.,J, Belden and Meade Belden. JOSEPIL M, BIGELOW, D. MAGONE, Jr., A. E. ORR, JOHN 1D, VAN BUREN, Atnant, August 12, 1! Commissioners. THE TESTIMONY. Me Below isegiven extracts from the testimony taken be- fore the ‘Commission, in which the main points of the evidence, confirmatory of the charge of corruption, is given in «etail:-— STATE ENGINEER SWEET. Sylvan as H. Sweet, State Engineer and Survoyor, was tho first witness. Ho sail that there are no sur- veys, ma ps or specifications or estimates, such as is re- quired by, law to be filed in his office preparatory to let- ting tho contract for the removal of wall benches on tho Eric Canal, from the junction of the Chenango Canal therewith to the eastern limits of the city of Utica, and for the construction of a verti- cal wall along the berme bank of the canal, from a point near Clay street bridge, eastward, under that act, chapter:'$77 of the Tiaws of 1860 CANAL COMMISSIONER THATER, Canal) Commissioner Adam Thayer was reealled and examined regarding the recorts of the repairs of the Eric Crna} from the junction of the Chenango Canal to the eartern limit of the city of Utica, also on the con- tract for strengthening the canalfrom Port Schuyler to the lower Mohawk. Ho said he yould find no record of. any proceeding in his office prior to the letting of the contré.cts. JONN PB. TATES Mr. Tates, Present Division Engneer of the Eastern Division, was next called. His tstimony was on the samo topics as Mr. Thayer had beet examined upon. It was 4'so tq tho same‘import as regrded the manner of doing the business of contract Jetting, During the courts of the examination the flowing question was | asked! and the attached answer giver :— maps, plag and specifications | for by the law to be made niract ean ¢ Engineer ? plans, specitications or mps we have not STIMONY OP HORATIO SEMOUR, JR. : Commissionors came & Utica fF examined the veall, and subsequent to thathime [ have taken meat armeents of the wall on thderme side; Einade | estin ates of the amount of materht in the work, and | have partially completed an estimub, the true amount in goods, price paid in the estimate, pring, as near as [ am. able, the true amount of work and material fur- nist od. @._ Will you please give the resnitot those compl tione | of thig work done previous to Yur taking charge? A. Ihave a statement bere which gips the amount of = be let, a A. Utlicuat vw material in the estimate and the price which should have been paid, with the difference. Q Readit? A. With regard to the excavation, all having been done previous to my taking charge of the work, I have no way of judging as to whether the amounts given here aro an accurate representation of the true amounts or not; I therefore put them down as 1 found them in the book; the excavation was, of course, entirely ont before I came there, and L didn’t feel competent to swear as to whether these crozs-sections are correct or whether they are not cor- rect, and I don’t vouch for them in any particular; I have taken the estimate of Mr. Cantwell upon the 1st of December, 1874; his quantities os given there; I will give the discrepancies—perbaps that is tho best way; there is credited to the contractor Ist of December 6,973 cubic yards of rock, at $1 a yard, making $6,973; I find 4,909.92 yards of rock at’ &1,’ making $4,970 very nearly—a difference of $2,003; I find’ no embankment, according to the’ requirements of the contract; 1 find no lining; there has been allowed embankment 9,194 yards, at 25 cents, making $2,298 50; there have been’ allowed of lining, 2,953 yords at 2ifeents, making $738 25; I find no lining and no embankment whatever; there has been credited to the contractor 186 cubic yards of the vertical wall in cement -at $5 a yard, making $930; I find 93.92 yards, making $469 60—a difforence of $460 40; there hns been’ credites to the contractor 5,118 ' yards of vertical wall, dry, making $17,913; I find, 3,610.35, moking $12,636 22—a difference of $5,276. 78; there "is “eredited to the — contractor’ 73,800 feet, board measure, of white oak, at $40 a thousand, making $2,952; I don’t find any white oak in the wor there is credited to the contractor 89,700 feet, boar measuro, of hemlock, at $29 a thousand, making $1,794; 1 find 70,140 fect of hemioek, making $1,402 SO, a dif- ference of $391 20; 1 find credited to the contractor 4483 feet linear of snnbbing posts at 40c,, making $179 20; I find 440 fect, making $176, a differ- eneo of $320; there. is credited to the con tractor 2,426 pounds of wrought iron at 0c. “@ pound,’ making $242 60; I find 1,696 pounds, making $159 60,°a difference of $83; there is eredited to the contractor 1,825 pounds of spikes and nails, at fc., amounting to $146; I find 678 pounds of spikes and nails, amounting to $54 24—n differenco of $91 76; I find credited to the contractor 1,104 cubic yards of slope wall, at $2 a yard, making $2,208; I find 404.9 yards, making $900—a difference of $2,115. Q Was there no price in the contract? A, No, sir, Q. He substituted the hard wood for the oak, and reharged accordingly. A. Yes, sir, Q. Did you find any falso ties? A. T connted twenty- four false ties, or ties which did not extend back of the docking timber. Q, They were of an avernge length of how many inches? A. Not exceeding eighteen inches, Q. What should have been their length? A. Tho Jength should have been, and the length which the con- tractor erodited for was, eight fect, Q What is the gross amount in dollars and cents of tho discrepancy in that contract, as now stated by you? A. $14,121 35. Q. Does that include the ties? A. Yes, sir. Q. Yon with us to understand that $14,121 35 were received by the contractor more than the amount of the work? A, Yes, sir. Q. Do you know whether he has charged there for imaginary excavation and embankment for the imagin- ary slope? A. I would say that I don’t know with re- gard to the excavation whether there isan excess of charge or not; that throughout the work the wall was put in excavation, and, therefore, there must be no just charge for embankment; there has been charged to embankment the amount which I gave here, ENGINEER W. 8. BOCOTT, Then following is an abstract from the testimony of Engineer W, S. Scott:— Q. Now, can you tell me whether you made any actual measurements to ascertain whether this was of the thickness, or whether you assumed it was two and a-half feet on top? A. No, I didn’t mako any measurements previously. Q. Is this allowance of two and a-balf feet at tho top of the wall and allowance of a batter of three inches to the foot the result of actual measurements or an assumption that that isthe size? A. It is partially a result of measuroment. Q. Then it 1s the result of measurement and assump- tion? A. Yes, sir. Q. About how many places on this nincty-six chains did you measure and find it two and a half feet in thick- ness? How many places did yon measure that you can now speak of from any data you have got? A. Three laces, ‘ sp Q What distance were they apart, about? A.[By three places I mean three different walls, Q. On how many places of the threo different walls did you measure the wall at the top? A. I don’t know, Q. Do you Know, at any place, what the thickness ‘was at the top of the wall, from actual measurement ? A. can’t locate any place. Q Why did you say it was from measurement when you cannot say you can locate it at any place? A. Bo- cause I did take measurements, Q. You cannot locate the place? A. No, sir; but I can locate the wall. Q. Which side was iton? A. The towpath sido, just west of lock 18. Q. How thick was it atthe top? A. Two anda half feet. Q How high was {t perpendicularly? A. The wall was partly nine feet and partly ten feet. Q. Do you know on what angle the base of the wall was set? A. No, sir. Q. Do you of'any of the wall that was constructed while you were there in charge? A. No, sir. Q. Are you able to say whether it was built on a line parallel with the bottom of the canal, or on a line that was at right angles with the face of the wall as built? A. It was mostly intermediate between the two, I think. Q. The question is, do you know? A. I don’t know positively, i Q. Do you know how many yards of excavation you estimated for during the whole timo you were there? A. Earth excavation, 4,385 yards. Q. How much of’ that was for excavation actually made, and how much is included in that 4,385 yards as a hypothetical allowance, regardless of the fact that it never was made; the reason I ask you is this: I notice an extraordinary entry here on this paper, ‘Estimate of work done under Mr. Thorne and under Mr. Scott, and estimated by the latter in accordance with the in- structions of the Investigating Commissioners ;”? I want to know who, of this Commission, ever gave you any in- structions? A. No one, Q. Now, [| want to know now much of that 4,385 yards was actnal excavation, and how much of it was a Eypothetioal, knowing the fact yourself that the excavation had’ not been made; can you tell? A, I cannot tell. Q Can you approximate it? A. Yes, sir. Q. About how much was so allowed, as near as you are able to tell, from ali the data you have got and from you best recollection? A. There was all that and more, too, according to the estimate; but some of that I don’t know anything about; and I gave that quantity, and to that should be added—from information derived from others—what was about the actual quantity on some of the pieces, Q. Do you want that answer? A, No, sir. By Mr. Van Buren—Q. How can you have more error than the whole thing? A. That is what I tried to ex- plain to Mr. Sweet the other day. Q. Do you know about how many yards of earth were excavated under this contract during the time you were there? A. Yes, sir. Q. Abont how many yards wero actually excayated during the time you wereé—I speak now of actual ex- cavation? A. During the time I was there 1,225 yards, Q. Was that the wha nount® A. Yos, sir. Q. Then where yer get the excess of 3,100 yards it takes to make up the amount for which you gave estimates? A. That was included in ahypothet- ical slope back of the vertical walls. Q. Between where? A. Between the arbitrary slope of 1 to 1 and the vertical plane in the rear of the wall. Q. How much of the 3,100 yards do you account for as being actually excavated, ‘according to your best judgment? A. I cannot say anything about it; I don’t know. Q. Why don't you know; were you not there? A. I wasn’t there. Q You are asked just this simple question, how much of his 4,385 yards that you allowed for was for actual ex@avation, according to your best knowledge and all the light you had? A. That, I say, was 1,225 yards, : Q. All the actual excavation, is that right? sir; in that 1,225 ya {after reflecting) A. Yea, 18 an assumed allowance, @. Ofhow much? Tell me, first, how much there was of actual excavation; tell me how many yards of earth excavation were actually made that are embraced in this 4,385? A. Tsay 1,225.3 yards, Q. You said a moment ago that this embraced am as- sumed allowance? A. No, sir. Q. Do you «understand the answer to be that 1,225 yards would cover all the excavation that it was neces- sary to make in order to do this work for which you have given an estimate of 4,385 yards? A, Yes, sir. Q. Now, then, bow much did you allow in your estimates for the work that was done during the time you had charge of it? A. 2,237 yards, Q. And 1,225 was what you think it ought to have been? A. Yes, sir. Q That would make a difference of 1,012 yards? A. Yos, sir, Q. And you allowed an estimate to this contractor of 1,012 yards that he never excavated at all? A. Yes, sir. Q. That is your judgment and your oath? A. Yes, sir, Q And it is your best recollection now fortified by the measurements you bave and all the data you have be- fore you? A. Yes, sir. Q And from an actual examination of the work since you have been called here for examination with # view to ascertaining the trath? A. Yes, sir. Q. Now, is your conscience satistied that 1,225 yards is an abundant allowange for all the excavation tt be- caine necessary for this contractor to make, and that ho did make? A. Yes, sir, Q. You allowed to him in your estimates for work done under your immecdtate supervision, 2,237, when it ought to have been only 12257 A. Yes, sir. Q You allowed to hiin in s, including work done under your supervision au er you came, in the aggregite of 4,385 yaras? A. Yes, sir. Q. And the difference in what had been estimated for during the time you supervised the work’and what you allowed for was 2,148 yards’ Yes, sir. Q. How did you arrive at that quantity? A. By cal- culating from the cross-sections and da lurnished mo amount included betw a slope of one to one k of the walls ut the several polnts and the line of ch, and subtrac 1 that the amounts pre- viously estimated at th nts. Q Now, then, you g 148 cubic yards that you allowed for and didn’t sec done; how tnnch of that do you assume to be false’ if there had becn other esti- Inates, and you had made calculations on « large quan- then, of course, more than the 2,148 would be % A, That is it, Q. Itisall false? A. Yes, sir, Q. Now, the distance}on which you computed it and the angles satisties your mind that it is an arbitrary and faleo allowance’ A. Yes, sir. ‘And you understand that the 2,148 yards in- cluded in that estimate for Work done when you were not there was false? A. Yes, sir. Q You understand your duty in this behalf that this Board wishes of you—to get at the exact trath and AUGUST 17, 1875.TRIPLE SHEET. : Justice between the State and the contractor? A. Cer- tainly, sir. ‘ Q Tosummarize it now; you allowed in your estid mates for excavation 3,160 yards, without any facts to Justify it and contrary to the truth? A. Yes, sir. The expense to the State for allowance for work not done was $790 on excavation? A. Yes, sir. Q And without any fact to justify it? A. Yes, sir. Q@ You know the error amounting tm the aggregate to acash sum’of $5,084 21, are included in your esti- mates during the time you went there for work dono and material furnished? ‘A. During my estimate; yes, sir. TESTIMONY OF II. SEYMOUR, JR., CONTINUED. A. The first instructions I received in regard to the work were from Mr. Babcock, Resident Engineer; bo instructed me that a base line should be run, and that iron spiles had better be driven into the ground im order that its location might be retained, Q Can you fix the date of those instructions ? A. That wan I think, the day before the wall was torn down; the next instractions were given me during the month’ of December; Mr. Babcock and Mr. Yates camo to Utica on their way along the line of the canal; I was absent in Albany; they gave me orders to use slate for lining, and to live up to specifications; this was reported to’ me by some of the men in my office, with whom they left word; I would like to ask a .qnestion; that is, whether, with regard to these instrac- tions, I give what was eaid to me by the Deputy Attor- ney-General and by tho Auditor in regard to this work, or whether I confino myself to the instructions given by those engineers? My impression ts that if you received anything like Pertinent advion in reference to the discharge of your duties from the Attorney-General, it is pertinent to this investigation, and equally so as to the Auditor, Mr, Seymour—It would give ‘a clearer idea of the his- tory of this case if I did so; the first time that I camo to Albany, at the time when Mr. Yates and Mr, Bab- cock were in Utiea, I camo down for the purpose of ascer- taining what it was proper for me to do in regard to the uso of slate for lining, also as to the classification of tho slate rock formation in the canal, and which was being excavated at the time; the Deputy Attorney General and Auditor advised me that they knew of no law which favo authority to the engineer to name a price for material which was not bid for and not named in the controct; after I had finished the estimate for tho month of December the samo qnestion with regard to the rock rose again, and, as there was no price in the contract for rock which could be excavated without blasting, I considered tho excavation of that material shoul: come under the head of extra work, and you will notice in the estimate book that I put that down under the head of extra work; it has since been erased, Q. That you have entered there as extra work? A. Yes, sir. Q) And you say it has been erased? A. Yes, air. Q. By whom? A. By my orders; when I came to Albany I went immediately to the’ Attorney General and the Auditor, and they again said that they knew of no Jaw by which the Resident Engineer was authorized to fix the price of extra work; they advised mo then not to swear to any estimate ‘until the Resident En- gineer coukt show me any authority for naming the price; I went to the office of the Resident Engineer, Mr. Babcock, and asked him to his authority for fixing 'a price for extra wor! showed me aclause in a blank form of contract of a Jater date than that of Henry PD. Denison’s, in which tho Resident Engineer was authdrized to tx the prico of extra work; Mr. Babcock then ordered me to put the price of this loose rock at $1 per yard, and to combine the two items of rock in the estimate under ono head and classify them as rock, Q. One of which was rock, estimating both as extra work? A. Yes, sir; and one being the amount of rock excavated previously to my coming on the ground, about which I knew nothing, and that there was some re whieh I had excavated myself on this contract, or oxea- vated under my orders: theso two hoe ordered me to combine under one head and erase the word “loose,” and classify it all as rock at $1 a yard. Q. What, in your opinion, was’ a fair price to allow the contractor for this excavation of loose rock? A, Fitty cents a yard. Q Why do you say fifty cents a yard instead of $1 a yard, which was the contract prico for removing the rock? A. One dollar a yard was the contract price for removing rock in which it was necessary to use powder: this rock was excavated entirely by tho’ use of picks and bars. Q Could it be removed with greatease? A, With considerable ease. Q Could it be removed about as fastasclay? A, I should consider tt could be removed with about the same facility as hardpan, which isa sort of cemented gravel—gravel and clay cemented together. fs I took a very competent engineer, E. D. Smaltey, and carefully went over the work and measured it, and it made a difference of $200 in favor of the contractor; which, as ho had worked since tho first measurements wero ‘taken, and it was impossible to separate tho work, was mall difference. I discovered during this measurement that 8,000 fect of oak, with which the contractor had been credited, was not’ on the ground; this lessened the $260 to $39. 1 made the fact known to the contractor as soon as possible, but he was still dissatistied. I received a letter Jartuary 25, introducing Mr. Scott, Tt was as follows :— HL, Sermon, Jr., Beq., Assistant Engineer :-— Drax Stn—This letter will introduce to you Mr. William 8. Scott, Assistant Engineer. He goes up to your office to as- sist you. fs The contractors, Messrs, Denison & Belden, aro still dissat- isfled with your astimate, and as you have had them re- viewed by an engineer who has not been employed by the State, and consequently has no official status, [ thought best to send up Mr, W.-Scoti, Assistant Engineer’ on the Canals, who has had inrge experience in. measurements of work, to go through with yon and review the work done this winter under you. You will, with him, make reeross sections of the work and recomputations. The fact that you neglected to take cross sectigns of the rock only at the ends might he used to the dis- advantage of the department by the contractor, and I have thought it would be better for all interests that an engineer not directly from the Utica office, but who is in the State em- ploy, should review the work with you. He will explain to you the details of the work, method of estimating slope, Ac. trust that Mr. Scott and yourself will work pleasantly to- gether, and that the result of the measurements will agreo with your former estimater,, Very truly yours, . BE. BABCOCK, Resident Engineer, Q. Tho Mr. Scott referred to was the Mr. Scott who was assistant engincer on the work between Port Schuyler and the Lower Mohawk Aqueduct, under Mr. Babcock ? A. Afterward, I understand, the young gentleman in the other room had charge of that work. Q What experience had he had then as an engincer, do you know? A. Ho informed me that he had never been employed upon the canals previous to the time ho came to Utica, Q. To what experience then did Mr, Babcock refer when he spoke of his experience as an enginecr? A. He had had some oxperience on the New York Central road, where he assisted, I believe, the Divisiog Engi- neer, Yates, Q. You was also employed on that road at that timo? A. Yes, sir, Q. Mr. Scott appeared, did he, with, that note? A, Yes, sir; he brought this letter. Q What did he do or propose todo? A. With Mr. Scott and my party I then cross-sectioned the work as accurately as Lwsa able to do with some four fect of snow in the canal anda foot of ico and water; I was contident that this estimate was an over-éstimate, and that It was impossible to come to any accurate knowledge of the true amount of material removed by the conttactors until the snow and ico and water were out of the canal; I therefore, in making my affidavit to the estimate, changed the form and stated the true condition at the time that the measurements were made, which affidavit T will read :— State of New York, County of Oneida, 4.—Horntto [Seymonr, Jr. Assistant Engineer, being duly sworn, deposes and says that he has made the measurements and computations for the work embraced in the foregoing estimates “for removing wall benches on the Erie Canal from the junction of the Chenango Canal to the eastern limits of the city of Utica, and for constructing a vertical wall along the berme bank of said canal from a point near Clay street castward about 1,500 feet—H, Denison, contractor; and that the quantities therein stated do not exceed fhe amount of work actually performed according to such measnrements and eomputations up to the Ist day of February, 1875; that the work was covered with snow to the depth, in some places, of four fees, and it was impossible to get_at the foundations, as there was a foot of ico and water in the canal; that said measurements and computations, though necessarily not ab- solutely correct, are as nearly so ts the circumstances would permit, HORATIO SEYMOUR, J Sworn to before me this 4th day of February, 1875,— Onvitie BP. Auex, Notary Public, Utica, Oneida county, Rey, ‘Q. What did Mr. Scot do, or propose to do, when he came up? A. Mr. Scott advised mo that—I want to bo very careful about this, which is the reason I hesitate, because I think there may be some possible mistake in my recollecting the conversation—as near as I can recollect, he stated to me that Mr, Babcock advised that I measure this excavation on the slope of one to one back of the vertical wall, and that I measure embank- ment in some places, and if the contractor didn’t take ‘out this material back of the wall, and was unable to put up bis wall with the earth standing perpen. dicular — Q That is with a vertical cut? A. With a vertical cut4that then he was to be paid fog both excavation and embankment; if he was not forced to take out the earth it was his good Inck. Q. That you considered an answer to your letter? A. Yes, sir. Q. The one yon wrote? A. On tho cighth page of tho letterpress, : Q Anything else—any other lessons in the scien and art of measuring work-on the canal as professed at Albany? A. Nothing else that I recollect. Q Did you follow Mr. Scott's instrnctions in regard to measuring excavation and embankment first? A. No, sir, Q Why? A. Because I consider that it is a false sys- tem. Q And an injustice to the State? A. And that it isa as! of the State, Q You made that affidavit? Continuo, please. A. At the time [ sent the aflidavit I wrote Mr. 8. EK. Babcock, resident engineer, the following letter (pago 15, lettcr- press book):— Mr. 8. B. Bancoor, Resident Engineer — Dean Sin—L have just finished the estimate for January. I endeavored to get the elevation of the rock at every station, as you directed me, and found it impossible, on account of t frost, which is very deep. The lining of slate is frozen in, so to make It very dificult to distingnish between it and the id slate, It is'also impossible to ascertain now how fur the rork rans ont into the canal,as there isa foot of ice and water, not to mention fonr feet of snow. I think that it is duo, in Justice to the State and to the contenctur, to leave this matter until spring, at which time only can it be accurately determined. Very respectfully, HORATIO SEYMOUR. Jt, , In reference to that letter, recived, as it would seem, Vetoro the estimate arrived in Albany, I received the following Jetter from Mr. Babcock, marked 27 in the letter book ;— Feanvary 6, ngineor :— By the terms of the Pte the contractors all Every monthly estimate but the close one 1 present Horatio Seymour, Jr, Assistant Dean Sin—Your letter was recel contract Lam obliged to estimate the work they may do each month. is only an approxim: retail is for the purpose of covering any errors in monthly estimates, and it is your duty. to estimate them up, all they have done ench month, end your estimate shonld cover all the work ‘done, fand not leave ® contingent remainder to be ascertained three of fonr months henes, As your estimate is in for Feb: Fuary it will be best to let the rock rest. until nes month't to. although the contractors can demand the full ex timate; but 1 presume there will he nu trouble about it, Very truly yours, 8, E. BABCUCK, Resident Engineer. Shortly afterward I received the following letter, dated February 6, page 28, ~ Horatio Seymour, Jr Dean Sim—Your ovtimate is of no axe aa an official Anon. ment. The Revised Statutes, chapter 9, titie 5, section 4, amended 1848, chapter G2, provides that the Attorney Gen- eral, whenever requested by the Comptroller, Anditoror tho Stato Engineer and Surveyor, shall prepare proper drafts for contracts, obligations or other instraments which may be ted for the use of the State. The blanks which are for- rded to you are the official forms and must be wed. You ill sond to me & proper affidavit at your earliest conven- ioneo. Very traly yours, 8. E. BABCOCK, Rosident Engineor. A. I made no reply to that letter, bat came to Albany and through my unclo appealed to the State Engineer. Q Mr, Sweet? A. Sweet; my uncle, Horatio Seymonr, and Mr. Sweet, State Engineer, sustained me in my position, in the position which I had taken in ro- gard to the aMdavit; shortly after that I received » jeter dated February 9, as follows :— Hoaario Seruogn. J+., Assistant Engines Drat Stu—Colonel Yates, Diviston Engineer, had an Inter- view with your uncle, Governor Seymour, tovlay, and the Governor stated that you had consclentions scruples to sign. ing the printed form of the affidavit and wikbed to be allowed @ modification of the form. I can see no great objectl mr answering “To tho best of your knowledge "oF such other reservation a& rou choose upon printed form; only make it brief and concise. ‘affidavit, sg I understand Jt, only is in- tended to cover over-estimates, not mena that the monthly estimate is a full and accurate statement, but that it is an‘approxtmation leaning in toward a full oF toward a second estimate. Personally, I have no objection to your making any extent of explanatory affidavits thas you may choose; bnt should rather prefor them, as they would carry with them a history or explanation, at least, under 5 ee A POLICE CAPTAINS TROUBLE TRIAL OF CAPTAIN M'CULLOCH—THE CASE AD JOURNED UNTIL FRIDAY NEXT. The trial of Captain McCulloch, of the Seventeenth Precinct, was begun yesterday morning before Polica Commissioners Matsell and Voorhis Ex-Mayor Hall appeared as counsel for the defendant, and Mr. McLean, counsel to the Board, looked out for the prosecution, Mr. Hall said the charges against his client were dtvided into two sets, In regard to the first series, em- bracing the old charges made against his client while he was in the Twenty-ninth precinct, ho pleaded that the accused should not be again placed in jeopardy, as ho had already been tried on them and unani- mously acquitted by the full Board, As to certain of tho charges in the second Set counsel also claimed that the defendant ought not to be put npon trial upon them, they being too vague and indefinite, not informing him who were the wit nesses against him, thereby rendering it impossible for the Captain to defend himself. In regard to the old charges, that tho defendant did not take steps to sup- press gambling and panel houses in his district after which the estimates were made out, uy that the former engineers desired uniformity, and so bad a printed form prepared under direction of the Attorney General. Very truly yours, . BABCOCK, Resident Engineer, I was informed by Commissioner Thayer, about April 10, that the work which was on the contract of H. D. Dennison, at Utica, had been abandoned, and I was ordered by him. Commisstoner—to on and em- pry ‘men and purchase materials and finish that work, am now engaged in doing so. THE THIRD REPORT, Sabjoined is the third report of the Commission, The testimony spoken of is from Messrs. Seymour, Smalley and Thayer:— To Tne Governor ov Tir State or New Yorn:— On the loth day of March, 1874, a contract was executed by John Brown, of German Flats, with the State ‘to furnish all materials of a sound and good quality and perform all the labors necessary to con- struct and finish in every respect, in the most substan- tial and workmanlike manner, ‘stone abutments and approaches for Canal Bridgo at Hulser’s farm, West Frankfort.” When we visited this work in April last one abutment was finished and workmen wero employed on tho second, ° The testimony to which your attention is. invited con- firms our observations as far as it was then possible to extond them,” The foundations of one of the abutments was not on a level with the other, nor was it on the canal bottom; the stones were not of dimension size, nor of a good quality in other respects; they wero badly jointed, the cement had become, for’ the’ most pari, ‘worthless by exposure; the foundation timber, though charged to the State’ as new, was all taken from an old bridge. the new’ one was designed to roplace, and no credit appears to have been given ‘the State for uny of it; and finally. when remonstrated with by the engineer in chargo and directed to desist from the work, the contractor not only disregarded such remonstrance, but was permitted to continue and complete the job- in wanton disregard of the terms of his contract and in defiance of the orders of Horatio Seymour, Jr., the engineer in charge of the construction, Tho engineer's estimate for this work was $2,500. It was awarded to Mr, Brown on his bid, for $1,448 50. OF this sum $1,326 had been paid to the’ contractor be- } fore half the work was done. So far as we are advised, no money has been paid to Brown since his work was denounced by Mr. Seymour. It has not been formally accopted by the Canal Commis- sioners, nor has any action been taken by them to com- pel the contractor Brown to execute his contract ac- cording to law. Jobn Brown is the only person interested tn this con- tract, so far as we can learn, Your sattention is invited to the testimony annexed, for a more detailed statement of those features of this case which invoke official censure. JOHN BIGELOW, ‘A. B. ORI D. MAGONKE, Jr., JOHN D. VAN BUREN, Commissionera, HEAD MONEY. aie niniiaiideccneteeen WHAT RICHARD O'GORMAN AND COMMISSIONER LYNCH KNOW ABOUT ITS REDUCTION—THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEB. The Legislative Committce investigating the affairs of the Commission of Emigration continued its session at Castle Garden yesterday. ‘The first witness examined was Mr. Richard O’Gor- man. He testified that ho was Commissioner of Emi- gration in 1866, and so remained until 1873; during a great portion of that time he was President of the Board; in 1870 and 1871 General Jones was counsel to the Board; in 1870 General Jones handed the witness a letter of resignation, which ho (the witness) kept in his possession for some time in order to allow General Jones time to reconsider his determination; he did not wish that General Jones should resign; ho believes that at that time General Jones was connected in business with Messrs. Wilson & Rice; he had an idea that at the same time Michael Nolan was employed as a clerk by Gencral Jones; tho question of the reduction of head money had often been discussed in the Board; he understood that there was a nominal understanding between the shipping interest and the Commissioners to the effect that ifthe head money was reduced there would be a corresponding reduction in the passage mongy, and tho port of New York would bo therefore benefited; the Board passed a resolution asking the Legislature to re- duce the head money; previous to the passage of the resolution a committee was appointed from the Board to consult on tho subject with the shipping interest; in accordance with the desire of the Board he went to Al- bany to sugmit to tho Legislature the resolution; ho also went to present to the Legislaturo a memorial ask- ing that the commission be reimbursed by the State for the interest paid by the commission on the mortgage they bad obtained on their Ward's Island property; during the couree of ten years the interest had reached the sum of $150,000; THR STATH THEN ASSUMED THE DEBT, and the Commissioners belteved that they ought to re- fund the interest they had paid, which sum wonld have placed them on a firm financial footing; in Albany he appeared before the Committee on Commoree and sub- mitted his opinions; there was a bill, he thonght, sent up to the Legislature previous to his visit; he thonght Mr. Casserly took charge of the bill; he had roceived no information that Mr. Nolan had been retained by tho steamship companies until he was examined in 1872 by a Logislative Committee; ho did not see Nolan in Albany, or have any conference with him in regard to the head money reduction; he knew of no other bill except the one mentioned having been bronght before the Legislature; he had not supposed that there could be any opposition to the bill, and had scarcely given it any attention, having specially gono to Albany in rela- tion to the memorial previously alluded to; he never had any business relations with Nolan. He related at some length the working of the commission during his connection with it; he would not recommend asalaried commission; during the timo he was in tho commission it worked with rearonable harmony among the mombers; while in the Board there were no sine, cnres; he could not answer whether it would be better to reduce the number of Commissioners. Commissioner Lynch was next called. He testified that he had been a momber of the Board since 1870; as far as he could observe, all the members of the several boards performed theit duties honestly and with reason- ably fidelity; the present Board is as attentive to duty and as able as any that has preceded it during the past five and a balf years; in the genoral duties of the com- mission important improvements have been made; the improvements were effected w'thout additional expense to the commission; the Board is at present in good working order, notwithstanding its financial difficulties; some of THE RMPLOYES ANY OVERWORKED and are not properly compensated; almost all that ex- Commissioner Stephenson stated’ in his teatimony in regard to his (the witness’) conduet as a Commissioner was on hearsay; when the Clerk, Pegley, classified the poor emigrant girls in the Labor Bureau as ‘free lunch grabbers” and ‘shard cases" he tore down the lists and reprimanded the Chief Clerk for allowing such an out- Tage to be perpetrated; since Mr. Stephenson left the Board there has been order and harmony; Stephenson's malignity toward the witness showed the stuf he wrote 4 of its object; the witness then spoke of the reat benefits afforded to the emigrant and the State by the institution; to let the institution fail for want of support would be not only bad po! but almost crimi- nal he gave an account of the Irish Emigrant Society, of which he was President; mainly through Qs efforts, he said, the Commisston of Emigration was brought into existence; since 1847 — $11,000,000 in gold equivalent has been remitted by the society to the Old Country, and he thonght that ‘most of that sum was to aid in bringing people to this country; the society has established a savings bank hero, the Emigrant Industrial, that now | holds $14,000,000 for 28,000 depositors, and within the | last year it has dispensed $53,000 arities; the wit | ness was a member of the committee that conferred with the steamship companies; the subject of the re dnetion of the head money was discussed ; the committe ived from the steamship companies the impression ‘anetlurt would be made to reduce the passage | y if the Board would recommend and succeed in ng the Legislature to reduce the head money; at that time he had no knowledge that the steamship com. panies had employed any one to look after their inter- ests in Albany, but found out soon after, amd when he Joarned the arrangement they had made he was very much surprised and indignant. Mr. Lyneh then gave @ history of the proceedings in. relation to the legislation on the head money bill, whieh has been repeated several times in the testimony of former witnesses, He thought that in 1870 tha salaries of several of tho officials were too high. Ile donied a largo portion of the testimony of Commissioner Stevhengon, having received information of thoir existence, couns@ asked the Board toexamine the record, from which ff would bo seen that the defendant had been tried ané aequitted on these very charges. In relation to all the other charges the defendant pleaded not guilty, The charges are:—First, that on the Ist of May, 1874, defendant, then in chargo of the Twenty-ninth precinet, used harsh, violent and profane langnage to David J. Toohey, and spat on him and o*herwise abused him, and that on'the Ist of December, 1878, defendant received $15 from ono Vicfor Branson as a present, without the knowledge of the Board of Police, Second, that Captain McCulloch was guilty of condact unbecoming an of in attempting to obtain money from Vietor Branson threats to interfere with bis business, and did forbid divers persons in a house of ill-repnte to deal with on. The charges alse relate that while in the teenth precinct he advised Annie Small not ta appear before the Legislative Committee, say- ing that,she would not be allowed to live io New York if she did, and that he caused an assault to be made on David J. Toohey, and employed men for that purpose, and caused the arrest of two respectable women without cause or warrant, and caused them tobe ‘and locked up, and that he received money koopers of gambling houses, houses of prostitution and impropor resorts. President Matsell said that the Board would look at the record and seo whether Captain McCulloch hed already been tried and acquitted on some of the charges now presented, «If so, they would not put the Captain again on trial except some new evidence should be intro duced. He thought the Court would be unanimous te not putting the Captain again on trial on the old charges. In regard to the new charges, the Court would examine them carefnlly, and if they decided that the suggestions of counsel wero proper the amendments desired would be made. The Board then adjourned until Friday at teo o'clock, when their dectsion will be rendered, THE COUNTERFEITING BUSINESS. WOLF COMMITTED FOR EXAMINATION—SECRET SERVICE MEN ON THE TRAIL IN PHILADEL- PHTA. Yesterday forenoon William Wolf, who was arrested on Sunday evening, in Williamsburg, on suspicion of be ing connected with a gang of counterfeiters, was ar- raigned before United States Commissioner Winslow, The prisoner, who appeared to bo very nervous, is @ Gorman of education Ho is evidently, however, a man of depraved habits, He pleaded not guilty to the charge, and was held toawait examination, bail being fixed in tho sum of $5,000, It is very doubtful that he will be able to obtain tho required bonds in Brooklyn. The Marshal, at the request of the prisoner, telegraphed to a Mr, Wolf, Press office, corner of Seventh and Chestnat streets, Philadelphia, a brother ofthe defendant, to come on here, William Wolf, who is about thirty-five years of ago, states that he has known Francis Massey, the pro- priotor of the boarding house and saloon at which he waa arrested, for the past six years. This assertion is stoutly dented by Massey, who disclaims all knowledge of Wolf until last Friday, when he engaged lodging at his placa. To Deputy Marshal De Cluo, Wolf gave im- portant information, which 1s for the present withhold from the public with a view to promoting the ends of justice, The United States Secret Service men were placed In possession of tho information yesterday, and they were greatly rejoiced, as they say—whether truth- fully or otherwise time alone can reveal—that this ar- rest. gives them the ono missing link of @ long chain of evidence which will now enable them to unveil an extensive bogus eur. reney business in the City of Brotherly Love. Officer De Clue says that he is satisfied that the fifty cent stamps which William Wolf was engaged in passing are from Philadelphia and aro the work of a gang located ia that city. He does not believe that there is any con noction between the Franklin avenue currency oper- ators, who came to the surface in the Torrini case, and the Philadelphia frauds. The arrest of this man, to use his own words, ‘‘was all dumb luck, all chance.” The icture of the prisoner was taken for the Rogues’ Gal- lery. _He was then removed to the Raymond Street Jail. Tis examination will be held on Wednesday morn- ing at ten o'clock. A SINGULAR BURGLARY. Yesterday morning, when the porter employed tm the wholesale establishment of Philip Nettre, which oo cupics the upper portion of No, 108 Grand street, arrived he discovered a hole in the floor, just at the foot of the main stairway, about two fect square. Hig suspicions were immediately aroused that all was not right, and, assending into the main salesroom, found quite a quantity of the goods in a disordered state. He was at once satisfied that a burglary had beon com. mitted, and forthwith sent word to his employer, Upon ‘the arrival of Mr. Nettre he found examination, that about $5,000 worth of valuable goods had been stolen, The burglars accomplished their work between Saturday night and Monday morn ing, but how they gained admittance is a mystery which for the present the police seem unable to solva, A number of burglars’ tools were found, among them an anger, which fitted the holes made in the floor, The entrance must lave been made through the basement of the building, but none of the locks about the premises seemed to have been tampered with, THE LATEST DEVELOPMENTS—MR. DEAN MIS® ING—-SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION OF MR TYLER. Yesterday morning the police authorities of Jersey City awaited for hours the appearance of Mr. Alonzo B. Dean to account for his disposition of the money paid him by Thomas Hickey asa preminm on an insurance policy of $3,600, on behalf of the Lancashire Insur- ance Company, of Manchester, England. Mr. Dean, however, failed to appear; but Mr. Henry 1. Tyler, the general ageat of the company, to whom injustice hag been done by the representations of Dean, appeared and pronounced the recoipts handed by Dean to Hickey, with Mr, Tyler's signature attached, to be bogus. Several other parties, including Mr. Jobn Anness and Mr, Blakey, who had paid moncy to Dean on the latter's Topresentations that he was an agent or broker for the company, called on Mr. Tyler, who informed them he had not received the premiums so paid. The amount of Dean’s defalcation, so far as known at present, doow not execed $200, Hickey and others, who paid thelr premiums to him and wero victimizéd, offered to pay the premiums again to Mr. Tyler and suffer the | but the latter gentleman declined to accede to the roposition. Hickey swears that Dean represented to im that he was the agent of the company. A Henanp reporter called on Mr. Tylor yest afternoon, and that gentleman stated that Dean had not paiel him th ints given him as premiums. He satd that Hickey » receipt except Dean's memorandam on the policy. Dean had no receipt or indorsed check te show, else he w © produced it at Police Head- quarters, As he failed to do so the public could draw thoir own inference, A friend of Dean had called on him and offered to compromise the matter by Leta d over the amount of the default, but Mr. Tyler deeli “L de not care,” added Mr. Tyler, “to make any com- ment on Mr. Dean's circumstances further than that he has not treated us as we should expect.” A warrant hag been issued for Mr. Dean's arrest. THE BROOKLYN DIAMO WILEY SENT TO JAU—THE RECOVERED, Yosterday forenoon George Wiley, alias George Marsh, who was arrested on Sunday in New York and handed over to the Brooklyn police on suspicion of being one o the men who stole the $5,000 worth of diamonds and chains from the jewelry store of Mr. Kline, No, 142 Fourth street, in Williamsburg, was brought before Superintendent Campbell, at Headquarters, Ho was submitted to a most rigorous catechism with the hope of eliciting information that would lead to the detec- tion of his ‘pals’ in the commission of the robbery. He made the invariable answer, “1 don’t know nothing about it; and that’s all Dye got to say. “Well, finally said the patient Superintendent, “if that ts 80, yon shall be remanded tojail, and, in the meantime, Will find some information concerning yourself and your friends in another quarter.” Marsh, or Wiley, who hag but recently heard the prison door close upon him, waa then taken to the photographers, where a pretty fair picture of him was obtained for the Rognes’ Gallery, He was then arraigned before Justice Elliott, and to the Raymond Strect Jail, Mr, and Mrs, Kline have identified him as the man they saw in the store just before the discovery of the robbery on Thursday PROPERTY TO BB The detectives say that other arrests are hou pected in this case, and that there can be ‘en teiae tbat all the stolen property will be recovered,