The evening world. Newspaper, November 9, 1900, Page 11

4- MAYOR VAN WYCK’S REPLY TO T > | i] to certain banks. They were renowed from time to time, the Interest being pald by me, Finally the notes were paid in full by me, with Interest, out of the proceeds of the stock as hereinafter stated ape { Thad been a stockholder in the Knickerbocker tee Company of Maine long Previous to April 11, 18, and had pald for my stock therein $45,000, which was the fair market value thereof, [ received a printed circular about May, 189%, from the American lee Company offering to exchange thelr stock, share for " | Full Text of Mayor’s Reply to! - The World’s Accusations-- Sold All His Stock, Attorney-General Davies Advises Against the Removal of Van Wyck Because of Insufficient Evidence. To the Honorable Theodore Roosevelt, Governor of the State of New York; I do not now own any stock In any ice company and have no direct oF Ine Girect Interest in any such company, Upon April 11, 18%, | bought from C. W. Morse 6,000 shares of the stock of the American Ice Company for §%0,000, which was the fair market value thereo!, of which sum I paid $80,000 In cash by three checks and L gave three promissory notes for the balance, one for 960,000 and two for $75,000 each GAVE HI8 NOTES FOR $200,000, ‘The stock was tesued by me and by me delivered to Mr. Morse aa collateral security for the notes, Subsequently tho notes and collateral were transferred share, for Knickerbocker stock and | made such exchange. My entire holdings of the ice stock have been sold in the open market on the New York Stock Exel $281,219.25, sange in various lots for I paid for the stock $29,000, ADVISED TO SELL HI8 STOCK. When I was served with Justice Gaynor's order in the latter part of May, 1900, 1 did own 6,800 shares of the stock of the American lee Company; 5,000 of these shares I had bought from Mr, Morse and 60 had been received tn ox: @hange for Knickerbocker stock, My attention was then for the first time, fm the latter part of May, 10, called to the fact that the American lca Com: nek In the Cone Untt that pany had contracts with (he city to supply ice and ows wolidated [oe Company, which had leaves of docks from the elty. time I had no knowledge, thought suspicion (nat the Amertean lee Com- Pany or the Knickerbocker Ice Company of Maine ever did or ever would have Any Contract or other relation with the city or that the Consolidated fee Com pany had any leases from the city ‘When advired of the facts I began to sell my stock and continued trom intl June %, 10, when the last lot wae sold. # of (he stock the notes for §200,00 given by me ‘an lee Company stock were time to time to sell tho same Brom the proceeds of the rv upon the purchase of the 0,00 shares of the paid in full, with interest at 6 per cent DOES NOT OWN STOCK NOW, Binee the Mth day of June, 1%, | have not had any Interest, direct or in- Gireot, in any co company as stockholder or otherwise For all the stock bought by me ! paid the fair market value, solve any of It ae a gift or Upon a nominal consideration, HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF CONTRACTS. For the sake of cloarnens | will answer first the third and then the second @harge, because cach 1s somewhat tivolved tn the frat As to the third charge, that I be with the city, my anawar is as follows ‘Those contracts were made by thy without my knowledge pursuant to proviel them to do so indo; American lee Company April 1 contracts with the city of any kind whatever 1 was fret informed about the end of May, 190, that contracts had been made tn January, 100, with the American foe Company for the supply of ice to the clty of New York, and that was tho first intimation or Information that Thad that ald company had any dealings with the clty or any department thereof, Although | had the right to continue to hold sald stock without vio- lating any provision of law, 1 immediately began to sell the same and had sold all my stock by June 28, 1900 PLEADS IGNORANCE OF CONTRACTS. ‘The provision of tection 1,6% of the charter, after prohibiting a city oMcer from belog Interested In a elty contract, continues aa follows Aimer T did not re ame unlawfully Interested in contracts heads of administrative departments sof the charter, which authorized ndently of my action. | first became a stockholder in the 180, at whieh time the said company had no “If any person in this section mentioned shall during the time for which he was elected or appointed KNOWINGLY ao- quire an interest in any contract or work with the city or any de- partment or office thereof UNLESS THE SAME SHALL BE DEVOLVED UPON HIM BY LAW he shall on conviction thereof forfeit his office and be punished for a misdemeanor,” If any indirect interest in the contracts of the American Ice Company wae Aequired by me it was not within thie statute, because It was devolved upon mo by law and {t was not knowingly acquired, When f bought my stock In the American Ice Company it had no contracts with the city of New York and nono were in contemplation to my knowledge or Information, Many monthe after I bought my etock the contracts were made withoul my knowledge and without any volition on my part. My holding the stock could not be turned into a crime by the act of other persons over whom 1 had no contro? and of whose acta I was ignorant. An interest is devolved by law under this statute where it comes to a per- gon without any violation of the Jaw on his part. The Interest, If ary, which LT acquired was not only devolved by law, but It came without knowledge on my part, and when I was advised of the situation | sold the stock, le RUST HAD $20,000,009 CAPITAL ‘The practical and accepted construction of this ection and similar pro- visions in other oharters for upward of fifty years, ae Lam informod and be Neve, has been that a stockholder In a corporation having contracts with the city does not have a direct or Indirect interest in such contracts by reavon of his ownership of a minority of the stock The American Ice Company had in 1899 outstanding stock amounting to thirty million dollars ($80,000,000) divided into 800,000 shares of 8100 each, THE ICH TRUST'S DOCK PRIVILEGES. My answar to the second charge, that 1 became unlawfully Interested In docks and wharf lenses or privileges, Is as follows ‘The three grants of land under water to the Kniokerbooker lee Company of New York mentioned in the charge were made long prior to Jan, 1, 1898, when T took office, Vhey were simply Allowed to cont nue by the pres nt Dock Boars, ‘The lai under water at the foot of Wem Porty-third rtreet was let to the company In 1873 at $100 per year and by all Dock Boards was continued at that rate up to Deo, , 18%, when the privilege was terminated by the ent Dock Board and the Consolidated Ice Company (the successor in interest of sald Knickerbocker Iee Company of New York) was ousted therefrom ‘The other two privileses as to lands under water to the Knickerbooker Ice Company of New York mentioned In the charge were granted by Dock Boards prior to Jan, 1, 184, and were grants of land under water adjoining the piers of private owners, The private owners leeaod the docks to the Knickerbocker Ice Company of New York, and In such cases it has been for many years the prac- tloe for the city to lease to the tenant of the private owner the adjoining lands under water at the uniform rate of 2 cents per square foot. The tenant of the dock in selected by the private owner and tie Dock Department has nothing to do with the matter but to fix the rate for the land under water, DENIEB® APPROVING DOCK LEASES, ‘When the five plers mentioned In the charge were leased to the Consolidated Ice Company by the Dock Hoard about Feb. 11, 18%, that company nurrendered to the city a lease of the bulkhead between Weat Fiftieth and Weat Pifty-firet Streets, North River; a lease of the bulkhead extonding 1% feet north of One Hundred and Thirty-el@hth street on the west wide of the Harlem River and @ lease of the bulichead at the foot of Kast Ninety-third street, making in all three bulkheads, and alvo surrendered foe-bridge permite at the foot of Rast Bleventh street and the foot of Weet Fifty-titth street, On Bept. 2, 1898, the Consolidated Ice Company fendered to the city a pler at the foot of Thirteenth street, North River, and on Murch 10, 18%, the pler in Brooklyn which was one of the five piers in February, 189%, was taken from sald Consolidated Ice Company by the city, ‘The result of these transactions was that the sald Consolidated 1 Com. pany had less dock privileges since March 10, 189, than they had when I took office as Mayor on Jan. 1, 1896. All of the foregoing facts and clroumstancen above stated in reference to the letting and surrendering of plers, docks and lands under water appear in the records of the Dock Department, SAYS TRUST WAS NOT FAVORED, , ‘The charge that the retention of these four plers and the two privileges for the land under water by the Consolidated Ice Company enabled them to mo nopollae all the available docks for landing toe in New York City ts false upon {ts face and absurd in view of the many miles of docks and wharves upon the water front In New York, with thelr public and private owners competing for Ddusiness, When the sald leases were granted to the Consolidated Company of Maine I did not know or have in contemplation that the ir lee Company of of Consolidated lee Company of Maine ox any other ico "i ‘ ¥ m 4 mM pa galliaball " THE WORLD: FRIDAY EVENIN oF MAYOR VAN WYCK, OOOO ODO UOC TOO OOOO COU COOL UO companies were about to become or would become merged In the Amerioan Loe Company of New Jersey, or uniied with sald company in any way, or that it was tn contemplation by any person that there should he any union or merger Or purchase of stock between the sald compantes, DID NOT KNOW OF MONOPOLY 1 did not know and had no information or intimation that any property or leases of the Consolidated lee Company would become the property or be under the control of the American Company, The sald American lew Company waa organized In March, 18%), and until about that time [ had no knowledge or tn timation that the said company or any such company was to be Organized or was contemplated by any penson 1 had no knowledge or information that the Knickerbocker Ice Company of Maine was to be merged In the American toe Company of New Jorsey until May, 18%, whon 1 received @ printed atrular from the Amertoan lee Company offering an exchange of thelr stock for the stock of the Knickerbocker Ice Company of Maine ‘Tho wilegations contained In the charge marked “second,” to the effect that the Knickerbocker lee Company of Maine, tomether with the Consolidated Loe Company of Maine and other ive compantes were about to become merged tn the American Ice Company of New Jersey in the year 189%, or any part thereof, or that any such thing was {n contemplation by me are untrue GRANTS MADE WITHOUT HI8 KNOWLEDOB Phe continuance of the grants of lands under water and the making of the teases of the plers and bulkheads aforesaid were had and done without my knowledge, 1 had no voice nor vote in the Dock Board and took no part in much grants, | was not tn any way instrumental in procuring or influencing the action of the Dock Hoard thereon I did not know that such grants or leases were In contemplation by any person or that they were made until the latter part of May, 10, w en (he peti n was served Upon me in the proceeding before Mr. Justice Gaynor, Tam informed and believe that said leases were made and sald grants were continued by the Dock Board at rates and upon terms which were falr and reasonable and advantageous to the city, In good faith and in the fair and proper discharge of thelr official duties he following considerations will show that the ownership of the American tock by me did not constitute even a technical or inadvertent violation of sec. tlon 1.608 of the charter on account of any supposed Interest, direct or indireat, which | may have had in paid leases DID NOT VOTH FOR MONOPOLY, When I acquired my stock In the American Ice Company of New Jersey, on April 11, 189%, that company had no Interest dn the Consolidated Company, which then held (he leases: for the plore and the privileges for tte lands'under water, The American Company did not begin to acquire my stock tn the Con- solidated Company, as 1 am Informed and belleve, until June, 1899, Subsequent to that date the American Company acquired @ majority of the stock of the Consolidated lee ppany. 1 WAS NOT A PARTY TO ANY OF THE TRANSACTIONS IN WHICH THIS BTOCK WAS ACQUIRED BY THE AMERICAN COMPANY, When I aoquired my stock In the Amerioan Iee Compdny it had no relation of any kind with the olty of New York and was not interested in any leases which had been granted to the Consolidated Compgny, directly or Indirectly ‘The facts that It subsequently bec a stockholder in the Consolidated Ice Company cbuld net make {t an offense for me to continue to hold the American stock, NO? GUILTY OF OTHERS ACTS. T could not be made guilty of an offense by the acts of other persons over whom | had no control. I was not aware that Yhe Consolidated Company held any leases from the city of New York and therefore wae not aware that the purchase of atock in that company would give the American Company any Sn- terest In any such leases, ‘The facth did not give rise to any technical violation of section 1,9, for (he same reasons given with respect to the contracta 1 in my answer to the third charge. THE INTEREST, IF ANY, WHICH 1 AC. QUINED IN THE LEASHS AS A STUCK HOLDER IN THB AMERICAN COM- PANY WAS DEVOLVED UPON ME BY LAW AND WAS NOT KNOWINGLY ACQUIRED. The same considerations affecting this general toplo which I specify in my answor to the third charge was equally applicable to this 1 repeat here and r oI answer to gald econd charge the fac mattera wlated in the previous and su wequent sub-division of my answer. “NOT GUILPY" OF FIRST CHARGE, My answer to the frat charge is as follows: ‘The whole of the frat charge against me of malfeasance In oMce in creating and maintaining a monopoly or aiding the same and of violating seotion 15 of the charter of New York ts In all respects false, Every statement therein charging me of being comntaant of, concerned in or connected with any act, plan, arrangement or conspitacy with any person or perrone or corporation to create or maintain a monopoly tn the supply, tion or sale of toe of to prevent or rewiriet competition in the Ice Lusiner® or to affect the price of toe Is fale. 1 have never beep cogniaant of, concerned In or connected with any such Acts, plan, arrangement or consplracy and haye never in any way aided the fame officially or Individually DID NOT ENCOURAGE MONOPOLY ‘The allegation that the American leo Company or Its allies or friends had been by t tion of the Clty offers permitted to monopolige all the docks Available for Janding jee In the cbty of New York ts untrue, At all times since 1 became Mayor there have been « large number of upen piers and docks be longing to the city available for landing tee convenient to all parts of the city of New York, and such docks and piers could have been had by any person upon application to the Dock Department The facke respecting such docks are clearly presented in the evidence of J. Bargeant Cram and Charles P. Murphy, Dock Commissioners, in the pro- ceedings before Mr. Justice Gaynor, A llmt of such open docks, amounting to 104, then and now available for such purposes je hereto annexed. Healdes this there fro many docks and wharves owned by private persona which can be obtained by persons desiring the same, SAYS MONOPOLY I8 IMPOSSLBLE. ‘A monopoly of docks and wharves for landing Ice te practically an tinpons! bility Jn the elty of New York, The Dock Commiadioners have ffequently and publicly announced thelr réadiness to furnish such @ecommodation to all who require It, | NEVER IN ANY WAY OR MANNER INFLUENCED THE ACTION OF TH DOCK COMMISSIONERS A8 TO LBA OR PRIVY. ILEGES TO PERSONS IN THE (Cu BUSINESS AND NEVER IN ANY WAY SOUGHT TO PREVENT THE COMPETITORS OF THE AMERICAN 1CB COMPANY OR [78 ALLIES PROM OWTAINING BUCH PRIVILEGES. [tte ‘a fact that dock, bulkhead and wharf privileges in sald city should at all times be freely obtained by any pertons requiring the same for any purpose during my administration. ‘The charge that the tee companies named recetved exceptional street priv. fleges t» untrue. No particulars are given and'l do not know what is meant, 80 & more wpecific answer ts {mporsible, ADMITS VISIT TO MAINE. ‘The statement that I visited Maine to Inspect lee plants and property of the American ice Company or other companies named 4 untrue, I did go to Maine to make « woctal visit, While passing in the steamers on the Kennebec and Penobscot Rivers I saw the exterior of tce-houses, but did not examine them in any way, My absence from the elty on this trip for two ar three days did not caure a ect of my offielal duties It is charged that under the charter L was required to execute the laws of the Btate and that | ougyt to have taken steps to prevent of punish the alleged violations of the anti-monopoly laws stated in the charge. 1 was not aware that the persons or corporations named in the charge or any others were engaged in any plan, arrangement or conspiracy to create or maintain a monopoly In the production, supply or sale of fee, or to prevent or reatrain competition therein, or to affect the price thereof, oF to create or main- tain any monopoly whatever, and I had no evidence or information to that effect, L never heard any suggestion of any sugh thing aud it Hever occurred to me Until I saw the announcement of such @ claim In the newspapers in May, 140%, na BENJAMIN 18, ODELL, JR Ore) ehaaiayerey Ooo and immediately afterward the Attorney-General began legal proceadings against the American lve Compiny and its ers under the anti-monopoly statute and @ eriminal promeci*t bemun oder the mame matte by @ private yM Ale against sald company and one or more The nature and legal effect of the acte of the parties and corporations named in the charge were from that time under Investigation in the courts, both olvil and eriminal BAYS HI COULD NOT ACT. The powers of the Mayors offlee are Japted to the effectual enfor Meni of the anti-monopoly statute, Which requires prowedings tn the courts to be conducted by (he Attorney Genera Het-Attorney. ‘The eriminal ing was dismissed by the Grand Jury statute did not involve the lley that 1 should appear aa a private Prosecutor Upon miademeanors not affecting the muntelpality, but it it dM the failure of the criminal proceedings indicates there Was no ground for such action on my part T have thus dealt with every specific alleration concerning my oMetal cons dict contained inthe first charge, and have previously answered the charge that T recetved a Pt of etock, or re J wny stock upon a nominal conshiere: tion, ‘The other parts of tho first yo far 4s they rofer to me are general y part tending to show that | was pirkey or arranges Interente conected with the In character, and do not state any wel ont In any way connected with or ment elther to ronselidate foe business in New York so ax ¢ am ly or to advance the price of fee, or to show that the asmistance e oly governments or of ite oMcer of myself as Mayor, was in any wi fe nged for or obtained for such @ purpose, To such general charges only a Keneral answer Is pousible. BAYS ALL CHARGES ANB PALBE My @hawor ts that each and every one of the charges Is and are absolutely and unquaiifiedly false, | never wae ih any way OF manner comnisant of oF con: cerned In or connected with any iriieaction by tneans of which the Consoll- Aated Toe Company obtained control of oF ntores In any other companies named in the charge I did not know that such transactions were being had. I never was conneeted with, cognizant of or concerned in any trans: action by whieh the American lee Company obtained control of or interest in the stock or property of the corporations and indi viduals named in the charges, or any of them, exeept that I knew that it was exchanging its stocks about May, 1809, for the stock of the Knickerbocker Ice Company of Maine, which did no business in New York, 1414 not know that any of the persons named In the charge or any other Person oF corporation had desians at any time to create of maintain @ monop. oly in the tce business In New York prevent competition in the #ale or price of ler and f did not in any way, efther oMetally or individually, aaniat or aaree to unsist such plan, arrangement or transaction NEVER VAED OFFICIAL INFLUE combination. f individua 1. understanding or con infience or asatetance to Js or those who were man- ‘There never was any arrangement splracy to procure my oftte al, political be given to the Amerionn lee Company, or tin frle Aging Jt, or any other lee company, for any purpose whatever. ‘There never has been any arrangement of any Kind (hat T whould esate that company, of thove managing It, In any way, elther by the commission or omineon of Individual or official acts, and Lhaye never done ro 1 was never cognizant of any plan or arrangement (o monopolize the lee business or to preven! or reatrain competion ‘herein, or to advance the price of foe, and was never eoncerned In or connected with any auch plan, arrange: ment or transaction, and never amalited or agreed to nexiet any euch plan, Arrangement or transaction tn any way or manner, ofictally or indlvidually, DID NOT KNOW OF ADVANCED PRIC from #9 to © cents per hundred ny Way connected therewith or wiedge that the same was in 1 sow in the newspapers a With respect to advance In (he price of ter pounda, or any other advance, 1 was not cogniaant thereof, contemplation by any per r corporation tH Atatement that auch advance had heon made in May, 1900, I repeat here and reallege | wert {first charge the faote and matiors stated in the pr And subsequent eubdivisions of my anawer, Hach and every allegation cont tirce ChArReS Except auch aa aro hereinbefore admitied by me and 1 dany the eae and each of them, Hor the purpone of avoiding confusion of thought 1 state here the fact that the Knickerbocker lee Com York and the Knickerbooker toe Com: pany of Maine are two diatine! at arpora the korbooker lee Company of New York ce ' Sand the Knick yn Company of Maine was not ore 4) AK The stock which | owned war he Knickerbocker Ive Company of Maine w York State but never did any ousiness ha! any property thervin while the Knlekerbocker lee Company of New York prior to Ite dissolution carried on the ice buginens kt and in which | was never tne t ed As a Blockholler or otherwire puiticient either ‘The charges are In Jaw or in fact to warrant Bxecutive action and should be diemis (this point without any further proceedings, In addition co Lite they mode Wholly Upon Information and belief and ar fully met and disproved | swer and the papers annexed with the test mony \aken before Justice Gaynor There charges contily and solely a sertes of conclustons and opine fone of the porrons miiking them that Fam eullty of eriminal offenses, with no facts In thelr mupport N rt or judicial officer would place any person upon trial upon much statements f oftenre and the Executive should not proceed to the trial of a public offleer under elroumstinots which would not Justify auch action aceording to the princsples of Justice as declared in the ogurta. ROBT, A. VAN WYCK knowledge, Information of intentions, and am to al) other mattora therain information and bellef ROBT. A. VAN WYCK Aworn to before ine thie 2th day of Beptember, ih JAMES F KAVANAGH Notary Pubite, Kings County. Certificate filed in New York County mated It is true to my best know $< 6 ——— THE LETTER TO THE WORLD'S COUNSEL, As Attorney-General Davies re \ private letter from The World to ite attorney, the letter la here Rive Private Repiember 2, 1900 Mr. J. Noble Hayes, 129 Broadway, New York Cit Dear Hirt Heplying I bow to say that ‘The World han at present ne \ INDECTING THE PHOSECUTION againat Mayor Van Wyck before a Comm t Gov, Roosevelt should appyint one, The Governor's long delay indicates to me hie desire, if not to shift the fesponalbllity aa lie did the prosecution of the canal frauds, at least to avold oF portpone a decision. If the Governor had suspended @ Mayor, penting a legal inquiry, we should, of course, have aided, in every Way, the prosecution. Yours very truly, Wor TH ‘By the Managing Nditon HE WORLD'S ICE TRUST CHARGES DAVIES’S REPORT. ee een Attorney-Genoral's Office, Albany, Oct, 4, 1900, | Hon. Theodore Roosevelt, Governor of the State of New York, Chicago, Ith ¢ I have carefully exaimined (he answer and find that the same , tainw a specific denial of each and every charge Invoving any ert ity or luoral offense and & dotalied explanation as to the ciroumsl set forth im the charges from which such criminality or moral might bo inferred, First lot me say @ word as to the form of the ohar made wholly upon information and belief, They rn Bs Grounds of the petitioners’ belief nor the sources of thelr information Aa to the matiors alleged against the Mayor, nor is the petition accome panied by any papera, documents or other evidencg in ite support, The charges purport to be made by one David Ferguson and one Loule Southworth, These men are unknown to me, and neither their pede denees HOF Occlipations appear in the papers, excepting that the enswer of the Mayor asserts that they are reporters upon the New York World, When tho charges and the amended charges were fled with the names of J. Noble Hayes and Wheeler H, Peckham were ip upon the aaine as counsel in the proceeding, On the day when the Mayor's answer was prosentod to me, Sept. 29, Mr. Hayes wrote me @ lotter of that date in which he statod that neither he nor Mr, Peckham, had aa yet been retained for the purpose of procuring or presenti evidence which would be hecessaty to support the charges, 1 in a copy of bl Ayetd , Mr. Hayen's letter, you readily see, this loaves ua in a situation where ‘8 no responsible party with whom we can communicate or vaniee respect to the proceedings to be taken in case you should conclude that the appointment of a commission was necessary or advisal Tho Mayor by his answer admits that during bid@ecumboney, of the office he has been the owner of shares of stock in the American lee Company, He also admits that during the period in Which he was the owner of such stock the American lee Come pany had contracts with the city for the salo of ine to various de partinents of the city and for the leasing of docks belonging to the city, Tn my opinion the owner of stock in the corporation is inter ested within the meaning of that word as employed in section 1,558 of the Greater New York charter in a contract between the corporation and the city, In tho absence of a contrary decision by the cow Btate | feel that these authoritios are practically Controlling, Aitheary they are opponed to the view taken by Judge Dillon in hiv optnion which appended to the Mayor's anewer, But the more fact that the Mayor. Was Interested In & contract or contracts with the city in thie indlreot nanner {8 not, In my opinion, a auffictont ground for his removal, In order to justify his removal | do not belleve that tt te ni , to establish a case againet him upon which he could be convinted of crime tinder the provisions Of seotion 1,533 above referred to; hut Ide believe there should be clear and satisfactory evidence of his mora; guile In short, the answer shows that when the Mayor acquired hie stool’ {n the American Ico Company It had no business relations with the City of New York, and did not have for a long time afterward, and that as s00n a8 he discovered that It had such relations he immediately commenced to dispose of his stock, The answer giso contalna the expllett @enin! of any intention of creating or fostering a monupoly or of any knowledge or information of such a scheme. With a angle exception the answer is very complete and eattefactory, The exception to which I refer is the admission o the answer that the Mayor bought the stock in senctea tal the President of the American Ice Company and gave him promissory notes for $200,000.00 in payment of tha greater part’ of the same, Certain inferences may, perhaps, be logitimatoly. drawn from this transaction, but standing alone it is not re clent evidence of a criminal intent. In my judgment, the Mayor's answer should public at this time, Av I have already stated, ie ena allegations are cloar and explicit, and it might at gested that the charges should be dismissed or tet oe and the Mayor given @ sioner should at once be appointed speedy opportunity to exonerate himself, : JOHN 0. DAVIES, - 8.-My Dear Governor: Since i has been here tn response to the Wetter Whian Toned Peg Ay coved from Phe World, A eh ilar ser enencd ta o ¢ World, As the letter 7 leave a copy with me, but told me thee eed Troe | and tell them that he was going to furnish me with The letter was dated Sept, 21, and was to the effect ane to poe Ye Pe propose of the ayes undo it, and as IT certainly shou hot produce any evidence or take further he Soper, wail Gael ‘| ont frees for tt ox position the miserable and false suggestion canal matters, Mr, Hayes suggested that "Mt een wou The World to put some of us fn a hole,’ « “hole” but Mr. Peckham and himself, Es z ? F i § = = 5 pe = & 8 BR I tol ‘That you had every that Treason to belleve, and did believe, from thetr standing at the wore ready to proceed in good faith to the Ainiehe ‘That as oc they nea wore! his lotr of Rept 30 telose that Ne” Peakies: eof Miasst aee 8 letter of Sept clones ir, Pook! i a paps ene the cane, = ” @ Wor! repeatedly stated {n {te editorials could, proceed pon the evidence taken before Justice error ane’ ome time I have suspected, which suspicion is about confirmed, that did not propose to produce any evidence. 1 told thia to Mr. Hayes, 4 told him also that hia statement of the contents of The Wi to him of the 21st Inst. was stronaly confirmatory of my matter, to which view he fully assented, He also told me repeatedly {nformed The World people, and read me » which ho sent them in support of the statement. that | view, via.: It could be rested on the evidence taken before was preposterous, a4 all proceedings under the charge filed the to be de novo, Mr Hayes stemed to be very much disturbed over of Mr. Peckham and himeelf, He seemed disinelined to admit foree of the ridienious poaltion {n which he had found himeel kevted that he could find some other person or body spoke of the Clty Club, to take up the proceedings, T would crows that bridge when we came to tt. That to dace d of the matter had been orderly and dianified. ‘That {esue was now? Joined in the case and the partion who made the com: would have’ to sasume all of the responsibility. That you not invited thm’ charges, and {t was always presumed that pervone made @ tom- plaint had the evidenoe to sustain ft, and that it wae ur to go about the State or anywhere elee to week evidence to charges when complainants practically abandoned thetr cage, In view of his Interview with me, T am fully convinced of dom of not making the Mayor's answer public at thie time, eit son as etated In (he above communication, that aa you are absent the State you are consequently powerless to act upon the eubject, being the case might omll owt unpleasant criticism. At the time the Mayor was notified, {t was understood would be back in the State about Oot. 6. After that your was changed We had occasion to look up to ascertain just what your wna when we looked {nto the matter of the appointment of to the late Comptroller Morgan, and we made up our mind the Constitution you could exercise no power as Executive wide of the State. I think perhaps it te ell, as far ae thi concerned. that you are not to return before Oot, 20, beenuse between the present and that date will give Hayes and Peckham portunity to see what they can do, and, of course, you will have nection or responsibility with them !n the matter, Ag do not see where you oan be critictsed In the slightest, Peckham, who are men of high standing at the bar, assumed, se}, (o present charges against the Mayor, The latter was duly moned to answer them, which he bas done, Before the answer {t appears Hayes was notified that those for whom he do propose at this time to procesd, and he discloses for the time Peckham and himaelf are no longer retained. In addition, he {iscloses that his people, under a written communication dated 21 do not propose at this time to goon, You did not invite the but you have treated them in the ordinary way, and to use plain guoge, Mr. Hayes and the venerable Mr, Peckham have been “monkeys' of. Now, in view of everything, you will pardon me, my dear if T suggest that nothing be made public at this time which the situation of the matter, for the reason as above stated you powerless to take decisive action, and I cannot gee how to be injured in the slightest by any performances of Yours, very alncerely, f Yours, y y, 8 ot New. ran i # +S SES Bi ii iit f = =