CRAVEN 
 Answer of A.W. Craven, 
 
 Tf 
 225 
 N5 
 C8
 
 ANSWER 
 
 W. CRAVEN, 
 
 "JCT. 
 
 (' II A U<i KS 
 
 ERNANDO WOOD, 
 
 MAYOR. 
 
 , .lul 
 
 XEW VOPJv: 
 B A lv ]: 11 A- ( i ( ) D W IX, ]' It | X T I', i: S 
 
 PRINTIVC Ilnr-,K S(^l VI!K, 0] ilAF.r., 
 
 1860.
 
 ANSWER 
 
 A. W. CRAVEN, 
 
 CHIEF ENGINEER CROTQN AQUEDUCT. 
 
 CHARGES 
 
 FERNANDO WOOD, 
 
 MAYOR. 
 
 NEW YORK, July 31, I860. 
 
 NEW YORK: 
 BAKER <fe GODWIN, PRINTERS 
 
 PRINTING-HOUSE SQUARE, OPPOSITE CITY HALL, 
 
 1860.
 
 CROTON AQUEDUCT DEPARTMENT, ) 
 OFFICE OF CHIEF ENGINEER, f 
 
 July 31, 1860. 
 To the 
 
 SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF THE 
 
 BOARD OF ALDERMEN: 
 GENTLEMEN, 
 
 A message was transmitted to the Board of Aldermen, by 
 the Mayor, on the llth instant, in which he says : 
 
 " In consequence of serious disagreements and insubordination, I hereby re- 
 move Alfred W. Craven from the office of Engineer of the Croton Aqueduct 
 Board, and Thomas B. Tappen from the office of Assistant Commissioner of the 
 same Board." 
 
 In the use of this language, the Mayor appeared to forget 
 that, by the Charter, he had no power to remove an officer 
 without the express consent of the Board of Aldermen, nor 
 without cause. The message proposed to remove me without 
 the consent of your Board, and without any statement of facts, 
 enabling your Board to determine whether the "serious disa- 
 greements and insubordination" existed in fact, or whether, if 
 existing, they constituted causes for removal. 
 
 This communication having failed to receive the approval 
 of your Board, the Mayor undertook to correct his error, and, 
 on the 18th inst, transmitted another message, in which he 
 states that he has " the honor of submitting some additional 
 reasons for these removals," and that he is " confident they 
 will meet with the prompt endorsement of the Board." 
 
 These two messages have been referred by the Board to 
 you as a special committee, and I have to thank you for your 
 courtesy in granting my urgent request for a full investigation. 
 
 Although the assurances of my fellow citizens, constantly 
 volunteered in numerous gratifying expressions, might seem to
 
 warrant my treating the accusations against me with disdain, I 
 deem that this very confidence, so unreserved and so kindly 
 exhibited, should be justified and rewarded by a clear and per- 
 fect statement of my case. I cannot but feel that such entire 
 trust in my integrity when it is thus assailed, demands from 
 me, in simple gratitude, that I should show it is not misplaced. 
 
 In doing so, I must tax the patience of all who for the sake 
 of truth will read or listen to this paper. It is well known that 
 a falsehood can be told in three words, which it will take three 
 pages to disprove, and that this is eminently so where profes- 
 sional and technical matters are concerned. 
 
 I will examine each of the Mayor's messages fully and in 
 detail. In order to do so fairly and frankly, I will state the 
 charges against me with a directness which he has failed to at- 
 tain, and will unfold the covert insinuations with which they are 
 accompanied. The issue is not simply the retention of my 
 place that is but a trifle in the balance the issue is one of 
 character of private and official integrity, and therefore, to 
 me, of life. If I had been assailed by a private citizen, I 
 might have given the assault such a degree of consequence as 
 his personal character would demand. But when my assailant 
 happens to be the Mayor of the city, and, from his public posi- 
 tion, embodies his attack in official documents, to remain on 
 the records of the city forever, I cannot let them pass in silence 
 or contempt, but must expose and confute these calumnies, not 
 only for my own sake, but for the sake of my friends, and of 
 all men who appreciate private or professional character. 
 
 CHARGES OF THE MAYOR. 
 
 The charges in the second message of the Mayor, are four 
 in number. 
 
 First. That the work done, and the work remaining to be 
 done upon the new Reservoir, now in course of construction, 
 largely exceeds the original estimate of such work made by me 
 as Chief Engineer ; that the quantities of such work in vari- 
 ous items differ from the estimate some being largely in- 
 creased above, and some very largely decreased below the 
 original estimate ; that wherever these changes have occurred, 
 they have proved very beneficial to the contractors, and
 
 largely increased the cost of the work to the city, with the cov- 
 ert insinuation that the changes were made by me, because 
 they would be beneficial to the contractors, and because I was 
 acting in their interests, and not in the interest of the city ; 
 that I have made a mistake in awarding the contract to the 
 present contractors, whereby the city will suffer loss ; that I 
 had made expensive and peculiar changes in the plans of the 
 work, whereby its cost is increased ; that I have been wanting 
 in ability, industry, and integrity, whereby the interests of 
 the city have been sacrificed ; and that I am disqualified for 
 my position, and some other person more competent should be 
 appointed in my place. 
 
 Second. That, in the work of paving Forty -ninth Street 
 from Third to Lexington Avenue, with trap block, the Engin- 
 eer did not exercise proper vigilance ; that the materials em- 
 ployed were not in accordance with the contract, but that an 
 inferior quality of stone was used ; and also that the work was 
 performed in so negligent a manner as to cause it to settle in 
 many cases, immediately after its completion ; that the Croton 
 Board had notice of the defective character of the materials em- 
 ployed in the work, but, notwithstanding, gave a certificate of 
 its completion and acceptance. 
 
 Third. That an error of eight inches in the maximum was 
 made in the grade of a sewer now in progress in Fortieth 
 Street, Ninth Avenue, Thirty-ninth Street, and Eighth Avenue, 
 which error may involve the city in litigation and loss, and 
 which throws a serious responsibility on the Engineer of the 
 Board, showing the want of the constant care and entire accu- 
 racy demanded of one to whose professional skill is entrusted 
 the construction of important public works. 
 
 Fourth. That John Cornwell and William Conboy, em- 
 ployes of the Department, who had a private job for the exca- 
 vation of a cellar at Yorkville, were accused before the Croton 
 Aqueduct Board, in December, 1859, by John Chappel and 
 three others, to the effect that Cornwell had furnished powder, 
 fuse, and tools belonging to the Department, to aid in the per- 
 formance of this private contract, and had allowed men in the 
 service of the Department, and under his supervision, to work 
 upon this cellar, and had fraudulently returned to the Depart- 
 ment the time the men were thus engaged, thus causing them 
 to be paid by the Department for labor performed on private 
 work ; that notwithstanding the admission of Conboy himself 
 that he borrowed powder, fuse, and tools, from Cornwell, both
 
 of these persons are yet retained in the service of the Depart- 
 ment ; that Mr. Tappen, the then acting President, and myself, 
 the Chief Engineer, ought to have had them indicted for con- 
 verting the public property to their own use, and had them 
 excluded, by their conviction, from ever receiving or holding 
 any office under the city charter ; that we have upheld them 
 in despoiling the city refused to invoke the most decided vin- 
 dication of the law against them, and, by keeping them in 
 service, have subverted " the good faith and honesty" of the 
 Department. 
 
 Such is the substance of the reasons for which you are 
 called to assist in removing me from my position as Chief En- 
 gineer of the Croton Aqueduct Board a position which I have 
 held for the last eleven years without having, so far as I am 
 aware, ever incurred the slightest suspicion of dereliction in 
 duty, of inability to discharge the responsible labors imposed 
 upon me, or of want of fidelity to the public interests. 
 
 I shall answer them in the order in which they are above 
 referred to, and shall in doing so examine somewhat minutely 
 the various items of each charge. 
 
 RESERVOIR. 
 
 First, As to the Reservoir. 
 
 Under this head, in order to have the whole subject thor- 
 oughly understood both by you and the public, I am obliged 
 to go into details which would be unnecessary if I were ad- 
 dressing a body of engineers. 
 
 It is necessary then to understand what this Reservoir is to 
 be what the land upon which it is constructed originally was 
 for what purpose the estimates of the various kinds of work 
 upon it were made and in what manner we arrived at the 
 supposed quantities of work to be done. 
 
 The object of this construction is to obtain space for im- 
 pounding or storing a sufficient quantity of water within the 
 city limits, and in immediate connection with the street mains, 
 to supply the inhabitants with water during such time as any 
 repairs to the main aqueduct or conduit of masonry make it 
 necessary to shut off the usual daily flow into the city. The 
 present Reservoirs are insufficient for this purpose. The amount 
 stored in them is so small compared with the daily consump- 
 tion, that we are unable to keep the water shut off during a
 
 greater period than seventy hours at a time, whatever repairs 
 may be necessary while the condition of some parts of the 
 aqueduct is such, that the necessity for more thorough ex- 
 amination and repair than can be done in that period, 
 is steadily becoming more pressing. This subject engaged 
 my attention almost immediately after my original appoint- 
 ment as Engineer, and foreseeing the importance of the early 
 completion of this work, I urged forward, as far as lay in 
 my power, the legislative steps necessary for its commence- 
 ment. The property selected for its site was not, however, 
 obtained until 1856, and the appropriation for its construction 
 was not made by the legislature until 1857. The site lies be- 
 tween 85th and 97th streets, and between 5th and 8th avenues, 
 embracing an area of 106 acres, and although situated at consid- 
 erable height above the level of tide water, the centre of it was a 
 natural basin surrounded by land and rocks of various degrees of 
 elevation. This basin was a swamp or morass, covered more 
 or less with water, and rendered difficult of accurate examina- 
 tion by the thicket which covered the surface and filled the soil 
 with its matted roots. The charter of the city required that 
 this, like all other similar work, should be done by contract, 
 and be awarded to the lowest bidder without any distinction and 
 the established practice of the Federal, State, and City Gov- 
 ernments does not permit that work of this kind should be let or 
 taken in solido, or by the lump. The practice requires that an 
 estimate should be formed of the relative quantity of each item 
 or kind of work and material to be employed in the entire con- 
 struction, and that contractors should bid a certain rate or price 
 for each item or kind. Such rates or prices, multiplied by the 
 estimated quantities, would give the total result of each 
 bid and a comparison of such totals would determine 
 who was by the law, the lowest bidder. The undertaking of 
 the work was not dependent on its cost. The Keservoir was a 
 necessity, and would have been ordered by the city even had 
 the original estimate of its cost been double what it was. But 
 even had the undertaking been dependent on its cost, so long 
 as the government was not deceived by my estimate of the 
 total cost (which I shall clearly show hereafter), minute exact- 
 itude in the relative proportions of the different quantities making
 
 8 
 
 this total cost, was not indispensably necessary for the purpose of 
 letting the work. It was desirable that they should be as 
 exact as it was possible to determine ; but as each contractor 
 would bid upon the same estimate of quantities, and the real 
 object was simply to ascertain, in obedience to the charter, who 
 was the lowest bidder upon a supposed basis, it is clear that 
 when the estimate was made, the bidders stood equal and upon 
 the same footing with each other. 
 
 But how was even a probable estimate of each kind or item 
 of work and materials required for the total construction, to be 
 ascertained ? The surface of the entire area of 106 acres could 
 be seen with the naked eye. In many cases the surface gives 
 indications of what will be found underneath. But this area 
 of land was peculiar, as I have before described it and who 
 could tell what would l)e found beneath its surface ? how much 
 solid rock ? what kinds of rock ? how much earth ? what kinds 
 of earth ? how much of the materials, either of earth or rock, 
 would be fit to use in the construction ? Engineers have no 
 more power of subterranean insight than ordinary men. We 
 did the only thing practicable in such cases. We examined 
 with unusual care the entire surface, and by excavations in 
 some places, and the use of iron " sounding rods " at very short 
 distances apart over the entire area, we arrived at an approxi- 
 mate result. Our borings with the rod were carried down as 
 far as possible, sometimes reaching to the depth of thirty feet ; 
 but these soundings could not always be relied upon with en- 
 tire certainty. In some cases the rod might strike a rock 
 which would indicate the solid ledge, but which, upon the devel- 
 opment of the work, would prove to be simply a large boulder, 
 or else an upward projecting point far above the general level of 
 the ledge. So also with the kinds of rock and the kinds of earth, 
 no data could be given which would be entirely reliable. 
 The officer in immediate charge of these examinations was 
 the present efficient engineer of the work, Captain George 
 S. Greene, late of the U. S. Army, and for some years 
 Professor of Mathematics and Engineering at West Point 
 Academy. A more thorough investigator or more upright man 
 can nowhere be found. And I assert confidently that a 
 closer approximation to the real quantities, as developed in the
 
 9 
 
 construction of this work, could not have been made on this 
 piece of ground, unless at au expense which would be en- 
 tirely unwarrantable. We did not therefore expect to obtain 
 a result showing the actual number of yards of excavation, 
 whether of earth or of rock, or the precise character and 
 proportions of the materials which the site of the proposed 
 reservoir contained. We simply expected to obtain data 
 which would enable the contractors competing for the work to 
 form some judgment ot its requirements and its cost, and 
 thus put them on an equal footing, and further to enable me 
 to give to our Board my own views of its probable total cost. 
 The examinations resulted in the following estimate of quanti- 
 ties : I quote from the specifications. 
 
 " (81.) Quantities estimated for the construction of the work, on -which the 
 comparisons of bids will be made. 
 
 * E. 792,519 cubic yards of excavation, composed as follows, viz: 63,304 
 cubic yards of soil and other materials not suitable for the 
 construction of embankment, to be placed in spoil banks, 
 within the space mentioned in specification (1), (of which 
 17,362 cubic yards will be placed on the outer slopes of the 
 banks) ; and 25,000 cubic yards of excavation from the pud- 
 dle ditches, to be placed in embankment or spoil bank ; 
 704,215 cubic yards of excavation for puddle and embank- 
 ments. 
 
 F. 284,894 cubic yards of rock excavation. 
 
 G. 78,988 cubic yards of puddle in the ditches and embankment. 
 
 H. 642,589 cubic yards of embankment, exclusive of the puddle bank. 
 
 I. 20,938 cubic yards of broken stone lining of inner slopes. 
 
 K. 47,111 cubic yards of stone paving or slope wall. 
 K 1 . 2,009 cubic yards of paving laid in cement. 
 0. 555 cubic yards of brick wall, laid in cement. 
 
 P. 833 cubic yards of concrete on the middle bank. 
 
 Q. 54,000 square feet (superficial measure) of sheet piling." 
 
 At the same time, being aware of the uncertainty of any 
 quantitative estimate in a case of this description, and being 
 desirous on the one hand that the city should be guarded 
 against extra claims, and that on the other hand, no competitor 
 for the work should be misled, the following clause was inserted 
 in the proposals, and immediately following the estimate of 
 quantities :
 
 10 
 
 " Other quantities, dependent on developments in the progress of the work, 
 are not estimated. The foregoing are the quantities which have been estimated, 
 approximately, for the construction of the work ; they form, however, no part of 
 the contract, and persons bidding are cautioned, that the Croton Aqueduct Board 
 do not hold themselves responsible that any of them shall strictly obtain in the 
 construction of the work, and the contractors are required to examine the plans 
 and the ground, and to judge for themselves, as well of the quantity, as the 
 distance of haul, and other circumstances affecting the cost of the work, and to 
 make their bids for each item independent.of others, so far as relative quantities 
 are concerned." 
 
 The above clause was also included in the contract and 
 specifications. 
 
 The proposals having been advertised, bids were received 
 on all the items of work and materials, from seventeen dift'er- 
 ent individuals or firms. The bids were so much per foot or 
 per yard for each item, and multiplied by the estimated quanti- 
 ties resulted in totals varying from $614,001 97 to $1,914,730 46. 
 And this extraordinary difference in the totals was not greater 
 than the rates or prices for which the different competitors pro- 
 posed to perform the various items of the work showing con- 
 clusively, what in practice is well known, that the price or rate 
 at which a contractor is willing to do one portion of a large 
 work, is no evidence that such rate or price is considered by 
 him to be remunerative. They frequently propose to lose by 
 some portions of the work, and to make up the loss by the price 
 or rate which they will obtain for other portions. 
 
 The contract was awarded in the summer of 1857, by our 
 full Board and the Comptroller of the city, to Fairchild & Co. ; 
 the law requiring such award to them as the lowest bidders 
 complying with the ordinances prescribing the form of making 
 bids. The total of their bid was $632,473 33 ; that of the next 
 highest bidders (Cummings & Co.) was $729,807 25. The 
 contract was not confirmed by the Common Council until the 
 spring of 1858. 
 
 With these general explanations, I now proceed to the first 
 subdivision of the Mayor's general charge in regard to the 
 Reservoir. On the 2d of May, we furnished him at his request, 
 a table showing the quantities of work already done, and com- 
 paring them with the estimate ; but without asking from us 
 one word of explanation, he sends in his message of July 18th,
 
 11 
 
 in which he states that the following remarkable discrepancies 
 appear between the work as done and as estimated. 
 
 INCREASE OF EXCAVATION. 
 
 First. " That the excavation has been increased from thirty 
 to sixty thousand cubic yards, or 7 .per cent." 
 
 I have shown you the inherent difficulty in forming a close 
 quantitative estimate for such a work on such ground, and the 
 strong probability that the quantities would not be verified by 
 the actual progress of the work. I have shown you that my 
 experience enabled me to foresee these contingencies, and that 
 I did foresee and did provide against extra claims against the 
 city, by the warning to the contractors and the express stipula- 
 tions of the contract itself. I will now show you, under each 
 head, the special cause for such discrepancies, and I shall then 
 leave you to determine whether it is fair or manly to say of 
 them, with obvious obliquity, and without asking a word of 
 explanation, that they are "remarkable." 
 
 The exact quantity of excavation is even now a matter of 
 conjecture ; but whether it will involve an increase of 7 per 
 cent, or not, it is nevertheless true, that it will be considerably 
 in excess of the amount as originally estimated. The rea- 
 sons for such increase are these : 
 
 REASONS FOR INCREASE OF EXCAVATION. 
 
 First. When the work was commenced, the more depressed 
 portions of the site of the Reservoir were very wet. To render it 
 fit to receive the embankments, and also to enable us to pro- 
 cure by excavation, proper material for those embankments, it 
 was necessary to make large ditches through the site of the 
 Reservoir to draw off the water. 
 
 This, of course, increased the excavation ; that is to say, in- 
 creased it to the extent of the number of cubic yards of excava- 
 tion which each ditch contained. 
 
 Second. The material thus excavated, instead of being car- 
 ried directly into embankments, was necessarily collected in 
 temporary places of deposit. "When the ground was suffi- 
 ciently drained to permit the construction of embankment, it
 
 12 
 
 was necessary to remove the material from these tempo- 
 rary banks to permanent embankments, thus involving a 
 double excavation. The work upon the Reservoir was com- 
 menced in the spring of the year 1858, when the ground was 
 wet from the melting of the snow and from the spring rains ; 
 and far greater difficulty was experienced on this account than 
 would have been the case, if the contractors could have entered 
 upon it early in September, 1857, as was anticipated at the 
 time the estimate was made and the contract awarded. 
 
 The Common Council, however, did not confirm the 
 award of the contract soon enough to enable the contractors 
 to commence the work at that time. 
 
 Third. Upon excavating, it was found that in many places 
 the earth was not of proper quality for embankment, and the 
 contractors were obliged to dig much lower in the site of the 
 bottom of the Reservoir than was anticipated, to obtain earth, 
 which was suitable. 
 
 The contractors, it will be seen by a reference to the first 
 section of the contract, were bound to take their materials for 
 the construction of the Reservoir from the ground, if they could 
 be obtained ; and if they could not be obtained upon the ground, 
 they were entitled to charge, for such of the materials as they 
 procured from other sources, a price additional to that agreed 
 upon in the contract for similar kinds of materials found within 
 the lines of the Reservoir. 
 
 It was, therefore, to the interest of the city, that materials 
 should, if possible, be obtained from the Reservoir grounds, 
 and it was to prevent an increase in the price of the materials 
 necessary for embankment, that I directed the increased exca- 
 vation to be made within our grounds. 
 
 It was foreseen that this difficulty might arise, and a pro- 
 vision was inserted in the 10th section of the specifications to 
 this effect : 
 
 "(10.) The earth, within the working lines of the interior slopes of the basins, 
 will be excavated to the depth of forty feet below the top of the exterior Reservoir 
 banks, and as much lower as may be required by the engineer, to obtain materials for 
 the embankments or for the puddling. The surface of the bottom of both basins to
 
 13 
 
 be worked to the same depth, and to such slopes as the engineer may direct. The 
 exact depth cannot be determined until the surface of the rock is uncovered. 
 Whenever it may be necessary to go below the bottom of the Reservoir, as it shall 
 be established by the engineer, to obtain materials for embankment or for puddle, 
 the space so excavated shall be filled up with such waste materials as the engineer 
 may direct." 
 
 Here, it is shown that we were fully authorized by the con- 
 tract to order an increase in the excavation, should it become 
 necessary for the purpose of obtaining materials for embank- 
 ment. The necessity did arise, and the excavation was 
 materially increased thereby. The pecuniary advantage ac- 
 cruing to the city (not the contractors) by the order to obtain 
 the required quantity of material from within the limits of the 
 Reservoir will at once be perceived by referring to the Con- 
 tract. Section 
 
 " (E.) For all excavation, whether hardpan, quicksand, stones, boulders, or 
 otherwise, excepting solid rock which requires blasting, and excepting boulders 
 more than half a cubic yard in capacity, and for disposing the materials accord- 
 ing to the specifications in spoil bank, or in refilling excavations made to obtain 
 materials, or embankments, or puddle bank, or puddle, to be measured in exca- 
 vation, twenty-one (21) cents per cubic yard. 
 
 "(II.) For embankments, including the soil one foot in depth on the outer 
 slopes and exclusive of all puddle and all masonry and broken stone on the 
 slopes, in addition to the price paid for excavation in item E, or for furnishing 
 materials in item N, when the engineer may direct, materials to be furnished 
 from outside the Reservoir ground, to be measured in embankment, one (1) cent 
 per cubic yard. 
 
 "(N.) For earth to be furnished for embankment, should the engineer direct 
 any to be obtained beyond or outside of the Reservoir ground, in addition to 
 the price paid for embankment in item H, to be measured in embankment, fifty 
 (50) cents per cubic yard." 
 
 That is to say : If the earth for the embankment were fur- 
 nished from within the Reservoir grounds, the contractors, for 
 excavating and putting it in bank, were to receive 22 cents per 
 cubic yard ; if obtained from other sources, they were to receive 
 51 cents per cubic yard for it. 
 
 4th. The nature of the Rock encountered in the actual 
 working, materially added to the amount of rock excavation 
 as originally estimated. In many places the rock was found 
 to be of a porous, friable character, full of cracks and fissures,
 
 14 
 
 and utterly unfit for the base of the puddle trench. This 
 contingency was also provided for. 
 
 The 12th section of the specifications in the contract con- 
 tained this provision : 
 
 " When any fissures, seams, or soft rock, are found within the basin of the 
 Reservoir, or under the banks thereof, the rock is to be excavated to such extent 
 as the engineer may direct, and the space filled with concrete, puddle, earth, or 
 sand, as may be required by the engineer." 
 
 It will be apparent from the above, that not only was our 
 Board authorized to carry out these portions of the contract 
 providing for this method of prosecuting the excavation, but 
 that my duty, as an engineer, left me no alternative but to avail 
 myself of the provisions made in the contract for this express 
 purpose. 
 
 Let us now proceed to the consideration of the second spe- 
 cification of the Mayor's charge, under the head of the Reser- 
 voir. 
 
 INCREASE OF PUDDLE. 
 
 2d. " That the puddle has been increased by an amount of twenty-five or 
 thirty thousand cubic yards, or thirty-seven per cent." 
 
 Before entering upon this subject, I will briefly describe 
 what " puddle " is : 
 
 A "puddle trench' 1 '' or " watt" is a space in the centre of the 
 embankment which surrounds the Reservoir. It is made of 
 mixed materials (earth, clay, and sand) worked together care- 
 fully with spades while wet. Properly made, it is impervious 
 to water, and is the barrier on which we rely to prevent the 
 banks from leaking. The embankment alone cannot be de- 
 pended on for this purpose. Although in some degree water- 
 tight, the main function of the embankment, exclusive of the 
 "puddle," is to resist the lateral thrust of the impounded 
 water. Below the base of the embankment, the space for this 
 puddle is carried, in the form of a trench, to the solid rock. 
 Above the base of the embankment it is carried up, or con- 
 structed, at the same time with the embankment, and it is then 
 sometimes called a " puddle wall" If the embankment rests 
 on, or starts from ordinary earth, and the puddle trench is not 
 carried down to the rock, the water will pass through the earth
 
 15 
 
 below the puddle wall, and thus escape. To ensure perfect 
 work, therefore, it is better to carry the puddle trench down to 
 the rock in all cases where it can be reached, within available 
 distance, unless, indeed, the earth on which the embankment 
 rests is in itself impervious to water. In the new Reservoir 
 the water will be enclosed by a puddle wall, resting upon the 
 solid rock throughout its entire length. At no one point, there- 
 fore, can the embankment leak. 
 
 With these explanations and remarks, I will proceed to 
 the 
 
 CAUSES OF INCREASE IN PUDDLE. 
 
 1st. The porousness and friability of the subterranean rock 
 encountered in the puddle trenches, which, as I have above 
 shown, caused an increase in the rock excavation, produced 
 necessarily a corresponding increase in the puddle. In many 
 cases the fissures and holes in the rock rendered it utterly unfit 
 for the bed or base of a puddle trench, and the contractors 
 were required, in such cases, to continue their excavation until 
 they reached a bed of solid rock which was suitable for this 
 purpose. This, of course, produced both an increase of exca- 
 vation and of puddle. The deeper the excavation for the pud- 
 dle trench, the greater the amount of puddle required to fill it. 
 
 2d. In sounding the ground for estimates of quantities with 
 the iron rods used for such purposes, an engineer is frequently 
 deceived as to the amount of rock contained in the ground, 
 from the fact of the rod happening to strike upon a boulder or 
 a point of rock which appears to be the main ledge. This 
 occurred in our examinations. Upon excavating, it was found, 
 in many instances, that where solid rock was presumed to 
 exist, the engineer's sounding rod had been stopped by a boul- 
 der or by an upward projecting point of rock, and that the 
 main ledge was far below the level indicated by the rod. 
 
 In some such instances we were obliged to go ten feet 
 deeper to reach the main ledge of rock. Under the southern 
 bank, we were compelled, by the character of the rock, after 
 reaching the ledge, to excavate through it twenty feet further 
 to get down to a bed which was proper for the puddle The 
 additional excavation, both of earth and rock (and the conse- 
 quent increase of puddle), owing to these causes, under the
 
 16 
 
 western bank through the swamp, was exceedingly great, the 
 character of the natural earth requiring its entire removal for 
 a width equal to half the width of the base of the embankment. 
 This excavation extended down to the rock, and the space was 
 filled up with puddle a proper and justifiable arrangement of 
 materials. 
 
 By section (7) of the specifications and contract, you will 
 see that the contingency of increase in this particular also, was 
 foreseen and provided for. 
 
 "(7.) Puddle ditches are to be excavated to the rock under the centre of all 
 the embankments, where the rock is not lower than forty-six feet below the top 
 of the exterior Reservoir bank: and in any loose, broken, soft, or porous rock, the 
 ditches mil be excavated to such depth as the engineer may direct." 
 
 So much for increase of puddle. 
 
 DECREASE IN EMBANKMENT. 
 
 The 3d subdivision of the Mayor's 1st charge is : 
 
 " That the embankment has been decreased by an amount of 215,565 cubic 
 yards, or one-third less." 
 
 The reasons for this decrease are these : 
 
 1st. From the apparent nature of the ground it was in many 
 places uncertain how far we should have to go, below the natu- 
 ral surface, to find good material for the bed of an embankment. 
 A large allowance was made for this, and provision made in 
 the specifications for decrease, should it be found advisable. 
 As our work was developed, it was found that at certain parts 
 of the work we should not be obliged to go to such depth for 
 a proper bed as we anticipated, and for which depth we very 
 properly had made an estimate. Less embankment was there- 
 fore necessary but for the same reason less excavation was 
 required; first, the excavation required to go down to the 
 proper bed for the embankment ; and, second, the excavation 
 necessary to obtain materials to make the embankment, had it 
 (the embankment) not been thus decreased. As a yard of ex- 
 cavated earth will not make a yard of compacted embankment, 
 the saving or decrease of excavation by this development was 
 more than twofold the amount of decrease in the embankment.
 
 17 
 
 Thus, a large amount was in reality saved to the city ; and if 
 the price for excavation in the contract was a remunerative 
 one (which, notwithstanding the assumption of the*Mayor, does 
 not appear), this development or so-called " change" was greatly 
 against the interests of the contractor. 
 
 2d. Another reason for decrease is in the embankment yet 
 to be done, and it is this : A road now contemplated by the 
 Central Park Commissioners, around the Reservoir, enables us 
 to fill against the outer slopes of our banks with waste mate- 
 rials out to a level with their road, instead of covering these 
 slopes from top to base with a foot of selected soil for a turf 
 protection to said slopes. The amount of this soil was origin- 
 ally included in the comparative estimate, as embankment. 
 
 STONE PAVING AND PAVING IN CEMENT. 
 
 The 4th and 5th subdivisions of the Mayor's first charge 
 are as follows : 
 
 " Fourth. That the stone paving has been decreased by 
 an amount of 46,911 cubic yards, or ^ only of the original 
 amount. 
 
 "Fifth. That the paving in cement has been increased 
 by an amount of 18,867 cubic yards, or more than nine times 
 greater." 
 
 SEASONS. 
 
 Inasmuch as the decrease in the dry slope wall, or what is 
 designated in the contract as the " stone paving" arose from 
 the same cause which increased the amount of the paving in 
 cement, I shall answer these two subdivisions together. 
 
 The increase in the paving in cement will be to a still 
 greater amount than mentioned by the Mayor ; to wit, it will 
 be increased to the same extent as the dry or stone paving is 
 decreased. To explain : 
 
 It will be seen by reference to section 19 of the specifica- 
 tions of the contract, that it is provided that, 
 
 " The interior slopes of all the banks will be covered with 8 inches in thick- 
 ness of stone broken to pass through a 2-inch ring ; on this will be laid the pav- 
 ing, 18 inches in thickness, of a single course of stones set on the edge at right 
 angles with the slope, laid dry, and well wedged with pinners. Th stones to be 
 laid in such manner as may be directed by the Engineer, the base of the paving to 
 extend to the rock, or to such depth as the Engineer may direct ; the stones to be- 
 sound, and of proper shape to make neat and compact work."
 
 18 
 
 The original intention was, therefore, to build a dry or rip- 
 rap wall on the interior slopes of the embankment. The esti- 
 mate of the quantity of paving required for these slopes \vas 
 47, 111 cubic yards (see Estimate). This estimate will correspond 
 almost exactly with the quantity which will be actually put up 
 when the contract is finished. The quantity of stone paving 
 has not been increased or diminished. It is simply laid up in 
 cement instead of being laid dry. The reasons and authority 
 therefor I will now show. 
 
 It was found, as the excavation progressed and the character 
 of the rock within the lines of the Eeservoir was developed, 
 that the stone was unsuitable for a dry wall. About 175 cubic 
 yards of this wall was laid dry, and the stone was found to be 
 so unfit for a serviceable wall, that the Board directed the con- 
 tractor to take it down. 
 
 The question therefore arose whether the contractor should 
 be allowed to furnish suitable material from other places 
 outside of our lines, or whether the stone should be laid in 
 cement. The contract contained full provisions to meet thia 
 contingency also. See contract (section IT). 
 
 *' Should the excavation within the outer slopes of the exterior Reservoir 
 banks not furnish sufficient material of a suitable quality for puddling and em- 
 bankments, in the opinion of the Engineer, then the contractor will be required 
 to furnish enough material to supply the deficiency, and of such quality as may 
 be approved by the Engineer." 
 
 By section K of the Specifications it is provided, that 'the contractor shall 
 receive, "for paving or constructing slope \vall, the stone to be takejt from the rock 
 excavated, and for labor in constructing the same, $1 25 per cubic yard." 
 
 By section K a it is provided, that for the same stone, "laid in cement mortar, 
 including all labor and material to be measured in the work, the contractor 
 shall receive $4 00 per cubic yard." 
 
 By section L, it is provided that the contractors shall receive, " for stone to be 
 furnished for the paving, in case the stone should not be deemed suitable for paving 
 by the Engineer, in addition to the price above stated in item K, $3 per cubic 
 yard." 
 
 The price, therefore, for a dry wall to be paid to the con- 
 tractors, in case they furnished the material from outside of 
 the Reservoir lines was by the contract $4 25 per cubic yard ; 
 while the price to be paid to them, in case they used, for the 
 wall, the stones found loithin the lines of the reservoir, laid in
 
 19 
 
 hydraulic mortar, was as above shown, only $4 per cubic yard; 
 and assuming that the total quantity of slope wall when finished 
 will correspond with the quantity estimated, to* wit, 47,111 
 cubic } 7 ards, we shall have the whole laid up in hydraulic mor- 
 tar, for $11,444 42 less than it would cost if laid dry with any 
 stone available outside the reservoir ground. 
 
 The whole of this subject was most carefully and thoroughly 
 examined by myself personally, and at different times by my- 
 self in conjunction with my colleagues in the Croton Board. 
 The ground was visited, the stone examined, and the question, 
 engaging, as it did, our earnest attention, was fully discussed 
 in all its bearings. 
 
 Having become satisfied that it would be utterly impossible, 
 within any reasonable expenditure, to construct a suitable dry 
 wall out of the rock found within the lines of the reservoir, 
 and the contract providing that the contractors should receive 
 less for paving in cement-mortar with the stone found within 
 the lines, than for building a dry wail out of stone procured by 
 them elsewhere, at a meeting of the Croton Aqueduct 
 Board, held on the 20th day of May, 1859, at which my then 
 associates, Messrs. Myndert Van Schaick and Theodore R. De 
 Forest, were present, I introduced the following preamble and 
 resolution, which were then unanimously adopted : 
 
 " Whereas, It has been found (by the Chief Engineer) that 
 the excavation within the lines of the new Reservoir does not fur- 
 nish stone of sufficiently good quality to make a suitable facing 
 for the interior slopes, if laid dry, but that the same stone will 
 make a good slope wall if laid in hydraulic cement ; therefore, 
 
 " Resolved, That the said slope-wall be laid in cement to 
 such extent as the nature of the stone may make it advisable ; 
 such change, and such character of the work being provided for 
 in the contract" 
 
 It is proper to state in this connection, that a wall of stone 
 laid in hydraulic mortar, in the manner in which this work is 
 done, is better for the purposes for which it was designed, than 
 any dry wall which could be constructed of any stone what- 
 ever, of equal dimensions.
 
 The dry wall was originally selected as a matter of econ- 
 omy ; and if the stone had proved good, a dry wall constructed 
 of it would have been sufficiently substantial in the outset, 
 though liable to require earlier repairs. When I found that 
 the stone excavated would not answer the purpose, I aban- 
 doned the dry wall, and resorted to the substitute (already pro- 
 vided for in the contract] which involved the least expense to 
 the city. 
 
 In referring above to my colleagues, I would not be under- 
 stood as wishing to divide the responsibility of this substitu- 
 tion. As the professional adviser of our Board, I gave my 
 opinion and gave it decidedly ; and in this, as well as in all 
 points touching the Reservoir, I am not only willing, but anx- 
 ious, to assume the entire responsibility. Everything tbat has 
 been done, has been solely for the perfection of the work, and 
 nothing has been done which was not a clearly-expressed part of 
 the contract. Even had we not been so entirely fortified by 
 the forethought shown, and provisions made in the contract, I 
 would have recommended work for which there was no pro- 
 vision, rather than that the Eeservoir should be imperfect. 
 Nay more even could I have imagined that any one existed who 
 could impute to me unworthy motives for my action, I would 
 have advised or directed all that has been done under the contract 
 without reference to the question whether or not it would be 
 beneficial to the contractors ; and for this simple reason that 
 I owed it to the -city to do their work honestly and well, with- 
 out being deterred by the risk of personal calumny or con- 
 temptible suspicion. 
 
 There has been in fact therefore no decrease in the stone 
 paving / the same amount of stone paving will be laid as esti- 
 matedbut instead of being laid dry, it is laid in hydraulic 
 mortar for the reasons above stated. 
 
 INCREASE OF CONCRETE. 
 
 The 6th subdivision of the Mayor's first charge is : " That 
 the concrete masonry has been increased by an amount of 
 33,568 cubic yards, or more than forty times the quantity ori- 
 ginally estimated."
 
 21 
 
 The reason for this increase was the charactei of the rock 
 hereinbefore described, as developed in the depths of the exca- 
 vation for the puddle trenches. It was found so full of fissures 
 and seams, even after blasting the porous and disintegrated por- 
 tion away, that it was deemed essentially necessary to cover it 
 with a layer of concrete, as a bed or base for the puddle. 
 
 It was supposed there would be more or less of these fis- 
 sures and seams encountered, but it was impossible to divine 
 their number or extent, and therefore impossible to make any 
 accurate estimate in respect to the quantity of concrete neces- 
 sary to fill' them. 
 
 Anticipating, however, that concrete might probably be 
 required, the following provision was inserted in the contract : 
 
 "SECTION 12. Where any fissures, seams, or soft rock are found within the 
 basin of the Reservoir, or tinder the banks thereof, the rock is to be excavated to 
 such extent as the Engineer may direct, and the space filled with concrete, pud- 
 dle, earth, or sand, as may be required by the Engineer." 
 
 As it could not be known whether it would be necessary to 
 lay a bed of concrete for the puddle, and if so, to what extent, 
 an estimate was made simply of the concrete which would be 
 required on the surface of the middle or dividing embank- 
 ment, 833 cubic yards, which is just the amount which will be 
 required there. 
 
 It will be seen from the above, that the variations from the 
 estimated relative quantities by way of increase or diminution 
 in every item of work alluded to in the Mayor's message, have 
 resulted either from the nature of the ground as developed, or the 
 character of the materials as excavated ; that the estimate itself 
 was not, and was not intended to be, an accurate statement of 
 quantities, but the best approximation to accuracy which, under 
 the circumstances, could be obtained. As an Engineer, I do not 
 hesitate to declare that the estimate was thus accurate in all its 
 parts. The only apparent change of plan from the require- 
 ments of the contract, was the substitution of a wall laid in hy- 
 draulic cement, for a dry wall on the interior slope of the 
 Keservoir. I have shown that this " change" was foreseen and 
 provided for, and was induced by the nature of the rock encoun- 
 tered, and by the desire on my part to avoid the necessity of
 
 procuring materials for a dry wall from outside the Reservoir 
 lines, at a greater cost I have also shown that this "change" 
 (if that can be called a change which is provided for in the 
 contract) was concurred in by the Croton Board unanimously. 
 
 It may, however, be inquired what authority had the Cro- 
 ton Board to authorize this substitution. The answer will be 
 found in the following extract from the contract itself, which 
 not only authorizes all that we have done, but would have au- 
 thorized an actual change of plan, had the developments of 
 the work made a change necessary for its perfection. 
 
 "And said parties of the second part further agree, that said Croton Aqueduct 
 Board, or the engineer, may make alterations in plan, form, or dimension of said 
 work, either before or after the commencement of the construction. If such 
 alterations diminish the quantity of work to be done, they shall not constitute a 
 claim for damages, or for anticipated profits on the work that may be so dis- 
 pensed with. If they increase the amount of work, such increase shall be paid 
 for only according to the quantity actually done, and at the price established for 
 similar work under this contract ; and the contract will be regarded as com- 
 pletely executed and fulfilled, when the work required by the altered plans is 
 done and paid for, as herein provided. 
 
 And it is further agreed, that if the work shall be increased by the enlarge- 
 ment of any part of the same, or by any contingent work which the engineer 
 may deem necessary to facilitate the execution, or render the work in any par- 
 ticular conformable to local circumstances, or which may be deemed by the 
 engineer necessary for perfecting the work, beyond what is provided for in this 
 contract and specifications, such increase shall be paid for at the same rate as 
 similar work is herein contracted to be paid for; and if such work is not similar 
 to work herein contracted for, it shall be paid for as an extra item, at a price to 
 be agreed upon previously to the commencement of such extra work." 
 
 It was under this authority that the Board acted in making 
 this " change ;" an authority which was reserved to them by 
 the contract for the express purpose of meeting such an exi- 
 gency. 
 
 CHANGES BENEFICIAL TO CONTRACTORS. 
 
 But it is alleged against me, that " whenever these changes 
 have been made, they have proved very beneficial to the con- 
 tractors, and, in most instances, have largely increased the 
 amount which the city must pay for the work." 
 
 What is the proof? The Mayor admits his ignorance of the 
 subject. He says : " It requires either the professional knowl- 
 edge of an engineer, or the experience of a contractor acquainted
 
 with such work, to determine the actual value of the different- 
 kinds of work required for the Reservoir." And he adds : " Not 
 having this knowledge, I have availed myself of the opinions of 
 the most skillful contractors." And where are their opinions ? 
 He finds them in the bids of Gumming & Co./br those particu- 
 lar items of the work which happen to le lower than the bids on 
 the same items by Fairchild & Co. The total bid of Cummings 
 & Co., was the next above to that of Fairchild & Co. What 
 authorizes him to say that the bids of Fairchild & Co., being 
 in some instances higher than those of Gumming & Co., shew 
 them to be remunerative ? I have shewn to you that by uni- 
 versal experience, the bids for special items of a work are no 
 evidence that such bids are remunerative; on 'the contrary, 
 that bids on certain items are frequently made at a known 
 loss. IF/fy select the lids of Gumming & Co., and ignore 
 the bids of the sixteen other contractors ? 
 
 Take the items quoted by the Mayor : 
 
 Excavation has been increased beyond the estimate. Fair- 
 child & Co. receive 21 cents. The bids for this item varied 
 from 12 to 60 cents, one being at 12 cents, two at 20 cents,, 
 and Gumming & Co. being 22. Who can tell, testing the 
 matter by such bids, whether 21 cents is remunerative or not ?" 
 or, to use the language of the Mayor, " very beneficial to the 
 contractors." By the test which he has adopted, of selecting 
 the lid of Gumming & Co. as a criterion, Fairchild & Co. 
 must be making the excavation at a loss. 
 
 Stone-paving has been decreasedbelow the estimate. Fairchild 
 & Co. receive 125 cents. The bids on this item varied from 90 
 to 750 cents, the bid of Gumming & Co. being 135. Who can 
 say that it was " beneficial to the contractor " to have this item 
 decreased when other bidders were ready to do it at 90 cents 
 
 Paving in cement has been increased above the estimate. 
 Fairchild & Co. receive 400 cents. The bids on this item 
 varied from 250 to 850 cents ; that of Gumming & Co. being 
 350 cents. Who can say that the increase of this item was 
 " beneficial " to the contractors at 400 cents, when other bid- 
 ders were not willing to do it for double the amount of the 
 compensation which they are to receive?
 
 The concrete masonry has also been increased. Fairchild 
 & Co. receiving 500 cents, the other bidders varying from 298 
 to 800 cents. Four only out of the seventeen bidders were 
 willing to do it for less than 500 cents. Eleven bidders asked 
 from 500 to 800 cents. Which was the remunerative price ? 
 Who can say that it was " beneficial " to Fairchild & Co to do 
 this item at their price ? 
 
 But why in this minute catalogue did the Mayor omit 
 another item, to wit, puddle, which, he says in another place, 
 has been increased beyond the estimate more than 37 per 
 cent ? The bids on this item varied from 20 to 150 cents. 
 Fairchild & Co. bidding the lowest price of all, viz., 20 
 cents ; Gumming & Co. bidding 30 cents. Was this increase 
 beneficial to Fairchild & Co. ? By the test adopted by the 
 Mayor it was very prejudicial to them. Why then did he not 
 mention it ? 
 
 The allegation of the Ma3*or, therefore, that " whenever 
 these changes have been made, they have proved very bene- 
 ficial to the contractors " (admitted by him to be made in total 
 ignorance), is wholly contradicted by the only test by which he 
 seeks to establish the charge. 
 
 Independent of this fallacious test, however, I am entirely 
 satisfied from my own observation and experience, that the 
 prices paid Fairchild & Co. for the excavation and the puddle, 
 the .quantities of which have from necessity been largely in- 
 creased, are not remunerative ; that the other items of increase, 
 to wit, the paving in cement, and the concrete masonry, 
 considering the strict manner in which the contractors are 
 held to the letter of their contract, are paid for at prices which 
 are only fair and by no means extravagant. 
 
 In fact, in the original calculations of the cost of the entire 
 work, made for the use and guidance of the Board before 
 even the proposals were drawn, I set down the probable 
 price for excavation and puddle at a higher figure than those 
 payable under the contract ; and the probable prices for slope 
 wall, if laid up in mortar, and for concrete, at about the same 
 figure as is now payable under the contract. 
 
 At this point may very properly be introduced a statement 
 of what really was the original estimate of the cost of this
 
 25 
 
 Reservoir, in which the Mayor alleges so gross a mistake was 
 made by the Engineer. The Mayor's charge is so worded as 
 to lead you to the belief that my original estimate of the cost, 
 exclusive of the gate-houses, was some $630,000, and that its 
 actual cost will be $100,000 more than that sum. This, as he 
 well knows, was simply the bid or estimate of Fairchild & 
 Co., made in competing for the work. NoV, I am prepared 
 to show you, that my original estimate of the probable cost of 
 the whole work, exclusive of the gate houses, made for the 
 guidance of the City Government, was in round numbers 
 $1,025,000, instead of $632,473 24, which was simply the 
 bid of Fairchild & Co. If you will add what the Mayor 
 is pleased to term my " mistakes " to this sum of $632,473 24, 
 you will still find that the total cost of the work will be at 
 least $100,000 less than my estimate, instead of being over 
 $100,000 more.* The reasons that my estimate will now be 
 found to be ample, are, 1st, That my prices on the several 
 items, making up the total, were higher than those bid by a 
 majority of the competitors ; and, 2d, because to this total, 
 my experience as an Engineer cautioned me to add sufficient 
 to meet all the contingencies which have been already actu- 
 ally developed in the progress of the work, and which I have 
 so minutely described. 
 
 * As it may be inferred from the Mayor's statement that the cost of the new 
 Reservoir will be excessive, it is well to make here a comparison which will be 
 understood at a glance : 
 
 The present Distributing Reservoir cost $434,551 
 
 The present Receiving " " 414,500 
 
 The new Reservoir now under construction, will cost, including Gate- 
 houses, and making full allowance for developments 1,000,000 
 
 The capacity of the new Reservoir is 5.625 (or more than 5i) 
 times greater than that of the present Reservoir, and 40.18 
 (or more that 40) times greater than that of the Distribut- 
 ing Reservoir. In other words, the cost, per gallon of ca- 
 pacity is as follows : 
 
 Distributing Reservoir 2.316 cent?. 
 
 Present Receiving Reservoir 276 of a cent. 
 
 New Reservoir 119 
 
 No arguments as to the relative economy of building large or small Reser- 
 voirs, will weaken the fact here shown ; that, by comparison, the new Reservoir 
 will be finished at an exceedingly reasonable price, to say the least.
 
 From the facts here stated in regard to the extent of area, 
 and the peculiar character of the ground, no one will have 
 been surprised to learn that the actual quantities have differed 
 from the approximate estimate, while many will be surprised 
 only because they differ so little. The only point, then, rests 
 in the allegation pf the Mayor, that these differences or vari- 
 ations have, in every case, proved beneficial to the contractors. 
 I have said enough, I trust, to show that this charge, like its 
 predecessors, is wholly unfounded. 
 
 MISTAKE IN AWARDING THE CONTRACT. 
 
 But, it is said that I made a mistake in awarding the con- 
 tract to Fairchild & Co., as lower bidders than Gumming & 
 Co. 
 
 This is not true. In the first place, the award was not 
 made by me personally, but by the entire Croton Aqueduct 
 Board. In the next place, there can be no "mistake " in an 
 estimate of this kind, where there is not only no assertion or 
 even pretence of perfect exactness, but an actual provision for, 
 and warning against contingent developments. In the third 
 place, the award was perforce made in obedience to the char- 
 ter, which requires work to be let to the lowest bidder. 
 
 The Mayor does not pretend to deny that the bid of Fair- 
 child & Co. was lower than that of Gumming & Co., by 
 $97,33i 32, nor that the bids were tested by the estimate made 
 for the purpose of ascertaining who was the lowest bidder, 
 while it has been already fully shown no closer approximation to 
 the developed facts than that estimate could have been made, 
 without incurring an expense unwarranted by the circum- 
 stances. 
 
 RUMORS. 
 
 Having fully refuted all that is either openly uttered or 
 covertly insinuated in the expressed charges of the Mayor as to 
 the new Reservoir, I beg to call your attention, for a moment, 
 to the extraordinary language with which he concludes this 
 portion of his message.
 
 27 
 
 He says, "In commenting upon this subject, I have ab- 
 stained from giving currency to any of the rumors which have 
 reached me." "With what object, let me ask, was this allega- 
 tion made ? Were the rumors which float in the air of the 
 Mayor's office true, or were they false ? He does not conde- 
 scend to inform you. What was their substance ? He does 
 not state. From whom did they proceed ? and who were en- 
 gaged in their promulgation ? He is silent. Did they come 
 from the vicious and corrupt, whose efforts at extortion I 
 had baffled and defeated ? or from some schemer for my 
 office ? or from the parasites of power, who hoped for favor, 
 by offering up the incense of my slaughtered reputation ? He 
 does not inform you. He merely states that he has " abstained 
 from giving currency to any of the rumors." If he professed 
 to be too honorable to give them currency, why did he not ab- 
 stain from stating the fact, if such a fact there be, of their 
 existence ? Was it intended to set the imagination of men at 
 work, and to allow them to give these rumors their form and 
 feature, each according to his own fertility and caprice ? I 
 have now been engaged more than twenty-five years in the 
 arduous duties of my profession. For eleven years past I have 
 been known to my fellow-citizens in the responsible position I 
 now hold. Both here and in other places, I have successfully 
 prosecuted important public works, costing millions of dollars, 
 and until I read this message of the Mayor, 1 never heard of 
 any remarks prejudicial in the slightest degree to my reputa- 
 tion. For my own part, I do not believe that the Mayor has 
 ever heard a whisper to that effect from lips that were honest ; 
 and I ask you, and all men, who, having character, know its 
 value, what expression in the English language is applicable 
 to one who, in hunting a man down for his office, attempts 
 in this manner to " rumor " away his reputation ? 
 
 PAVING OF 49 TH STREET. 
 
 I ask your attention now to the second charge of the 
 Mayor, viz. : 
 
 That in the work of paving 49th street from 3d to Lexing- 
 ton Avenue, with trap blocks, the Engineer did not exercise 
 proper vigilance ; that the materials employed were not in ac-
 
 28 
 
 cordance with the contract, but that an inferior quality of stone 
 was used, and also that the work was performed in so negligent 
 a manner as to cause it to settle in many cases immediately 
 after its completion ; that the Croton Board had notice of the 
 defective character of the material employed in the work, but 
 notwithstanding, gave a certificate of its completion and ac- 
 ceptance. 
 
 What is the proof to sustain this accusation '. Nothing 
 more than the unsworn statement of nine persons claiming to 
 be owners of property on the line of the street, and interested 
 in defeating the assessment for the work. 
 
 Did the Mayor investigate this charge ? Does he believe 
 it to be true ? On the contrary, in the same breath in which 
 he makes the charge, he expresses entire ignorance of it ; be- 
 cause he says, " either the property owners are utterly mistaken 
 in their emphatic condemnation of the work, or Mr. Craven 
 has been guilty of gross negligence in its supervision and ex- 
 amination." I will now proceed to show the facts of the case. 
 
 I find, upon inquiry of the Water Purveyor, who is charged 
 by law with the superintendence of paving, that the work was 
 commenced on the fifth day of October, 1859 (but six days pre- 
 ceding the date of the alleged notice) ; that immediately after 
 the notice, he inspected the stone brought upon the ground by 
 the contractor ; that he culled out and rejected all the stone 
 which was not in accordance with the contract, and 
 that such stone was then removed from the ground ; 
 that he visited the work daily for the purpose of seeing 
 that it was properly done and in accordance with the 
 contract ; and that after the 25th of October, Mr. Eldridge, 
 who was then appointed General Inspector of Paving Con- 
 tracts, visited the street twice a day for the same purpose. 
 Each of these officers reports further, that, whenever he found 
 any stone not in accordance with the contract, he threw it out 
 and ordered the Inspector on the work to do the same. This 
 was done to such an extent that the contractor and his friends 
 complained to the Water Purveyor against what they termed 
 his persecution. 
 
 The contractor was Mr. W. A. Gumming, one of the most 
 respectable and reliable contractors in the city.
 
 On the 10th day of November, 1859, the Inspector in charge 
 of the work made return under oath to the Board, that it had 
 been completed in conformity to the specifications of the con- 
 tract. The Water Purveyor subsequently certified his approval 
 of the same, and it was thereupon sent* to the Bureau of Asses- 
 sors for their action thereon. 
 
 The remonstrants, if injury had been done to them by the 
 Croton Board, had then an opportunity of appearing before 
 the Assessors, a body entirely distinct and free from the con- 
 trol of the Croton Board. It appears by the papers on file that 
 they did so, that they were heard before the Assessors, and 
 that the Board of Assessors decided that they had failed to make 
 a case which would warrant them in refusing to make an assess- 
 ment. It also appears by the report of the Committee on As- 
 sessments of your own Board, that they did not consider the 
 remonstrances, attached to the assessment list by the Assessors, 
 as required b} T law, sufficient to delay the confirmation of the 
 assessment. The Board of Councilmen concurred with your 
 Board in confirming the assessment. It was reserved for the 
 Mayor to discover that the "Water Purveyor, two Inspectors 
 on the work, three members of the Croton Board, three Asses- 
 sors, the Committees on Assessments of both Boards, and a ma- 
 jority of the Board of Aldermen and Councilmen, were all 
 wrong in regard to this matter, and that the owners of property, 
 assessed for the improvement, were right. One word as to the 
 signatures attached to the remonstrance before the assessors. 
 The name of J. M. Henry appears among the signatures. Mr. 
 Henry, I am informed, is employed in the office of the Asses- 
 sors, and was requested by Mr. Saxton, whose name heads the 
 signatures to one of the remonstrances, to erase his name. Mr. 
 Henry accordingly drew his pen through the name of Mr. 
 Saxton, and to show that it had been stricken out by authority, 
 wrote his own name opposite to the erasure. And -yet Mr. 
 Saxton and Mr. Henry are returned to you by the Mayor as 
 two of the eleven owners of property who remonstrated against 
 the assessment.* 
 
 * It is a little curious that the most prominent citizen on the list of remon- 
 strants, has assured me, since the attempt of the Mayor to remove me, that he 
 took much trouble to obtain an opportunity of signing one the numerous remon- 
 strances against the proposed action of the Mayor.
 
 30 
 
 SEWER IN 40TH ST., 9TH AVE., 39TH ST., ETC. 
 
 1 have now to call your attention to the third charge of the 
 Mayor. He says 
 
 " That an error of eight inches in the maximum depth was 
 made in the grade of a "Sewer now in progress in 40th street, 
 9th avenue, 39th street, and 8th avenue, which error may in- 
 volve the city in litigation and loss, and which throws a serious 
 responsibility on the Engineer of the Board, showing the want 
 of the constant care and entire accuracy demanded of one to 
 whose professional skill is entrusted the construction of import- 
 ant public works." 
 
 The Croton Board, intending to make a contract for this 
 work, directed one of the City Surveyors to prepare a plan and 
 profile of the sewer, by which the specifications for the work 
 could be drawn and the contract let. It must be borne in mind 
 that City Surveyors are appointed by the Common Council, 
 and although the Croton Board has no voice in their recommen- 
 dation or control over their appointment, they yet are obliged 
 to employ them on all work which is to be paid for by assess- 
 ment. The City Surveyor selected for this work was in good 
 standing, and had been employed on similar work in common 
 with the other City Surveyors for many years, to the entire sat- 
 isfaction of the Board. He made the plan and profile, but it 
 appears after the contract had been let and the work was pro- 
 gressing, that he had erred in his minutes of the depth of ex- 
 cavation for the sewer trench. By this error, neither the origi- 
 nal plan, nor line, nor the efficiency of the sewer itself was in 
 any degree altered or impaired. The simple effect was, that at 
 the corner of 9th avenue and 39th street, the contractor, in 
 order to get down to the proper grade, was obliged to excavate 
 eight inches deeper than was indicated by the levels given on 
 the original profile on which the contractors had based their 
 proposals. This additional eight inches of excavation became 
 extra wo?'k, for which the contractor is undoubtedly entitled to 
 compensation. As soon as the error was discovered and re- 
 ported to me, I conferred with the Corporation Counsel, and 
 our Board have, in his opinion, and by his advice, done all that 
 is necessary for the protection both of the contractor and the 
 public.
 
 31 
 
 Although I will not Callow any one to throw upon me the 
 mistakes in levels, however rare, of any of the thirty or more 
 Surveyors, who are appointed by the Common Council, and 
 whom .we are obliged by ordinance to employ, justice to the Sur- 
 veyor in question has led me to make a fuller explanation on 
 this charge than for myself I would have made. 
 
 Rb/TENTION OF CORN WELL AND COHBOY IN THE EMPLOYMENT 
 OF THE DEPARTMENT. 
 
 The fourth charge of the Mayor is as follows : 
 
 That John Cornwell and Willianr Conboy, employes of the 
 department, who had a private job for the excavation of a cel- 
 lar at Yorkville, were accused before the Croton Aqueduct 
 Board in December, 1859, by John Chappel, and three others, 
 to the effect that Cornwell had furnished powder, fuse, and 
 tools belonging to the Department to aid in the performance of 
 this private contract, and had allowed men in the employ of 
 the Department and under his supervision to work upon this 
 cellar, and had fraudulently returned to the Department the 
 time they were thus engaged in this private contract thus 
 causing the men to be paid by the Department for labor per- 
 formed on private work; that notwithstanding the admission 
 of Conboy himself that he borrowed powder, fuse, and tools 
 from Cornwell, both of these persons are yet retained in the 
 service of the Department ; that Mr. Tappen, the then acting 
 President, and myself, the Chief Engineer, ought to have had 
 them indicted for converting the public property to their own 
 use, and had them excluded by their conviction from ever re- 
 ceiving or holding any office under the city charter ; that we 
 have upheld them in robbing the city of public property re- 
 fused to invoke the most decided vindication of the law against 
 them, and, by keeping them in service, have subverted the good 
 faith and honesty of the Department. 
 
 These are very serious charges, alleging very enormous 
 offences, and conveyed in very strong language, suited, if true, 
 to their enormity. 
 
 What are the facts ? Conboy had been a laborer in a gang 
 of which Cornwell was foreman, and got a job, when he was not 
 in our employment, for excavating a small private cellar at York- 
 ville. His fellow-laborers, in the same gang, helped him in 
 the work at such intervals as they were not required by our
 
 32 
 
 Department, which they had a right to do. John Chappel and 
 three others were laborers whom we had discharged, and who, 
 for some reason or other unknown to me, bore very ill-will 
 against Cornwell, whom we had retained. They brought before 
 the Board several accusations against him, to wit : 
 
 1st. That Cornwell was interested in the job with Conboy. 
 
 2d. That Cornwell used the powder, fuse, and tools of the 
 Department in its execution. 
 
 3d. That he returned the time of the fellow-laborers on the 
 job as time expended in the service of the Department, and re- 
 ceived pay accordingly ; and 
 
 4th. That they thereby excavated this cellar at the cost and 
 expense of the city. 
 
 These charges were carefully, patiently, and thoroughly in- 
 vestigated by our full Board, Hon. Myndert Yan Schaick* in 
 the chair. The examination took three or four days, about four 
 hours each day. The testimony was contradictory, and failed ut- 
 terly to prove the slightest fraud, or attempt at fraud, on the part 
 of either Conboy or Cornwell. Judging from the testimony and 
 the manner of the witnesses in giving it, the members of the 
 Board were immediate and unanimous in their conviction that 
 no possible suspicion of dishonesty could attach to the accused. 
 This opinion, drawn from the evidence as heard and listened 
 to, was moreover fully in accordance with the character of 
 Cornwell, who through a steady service in the Department 
 since its creation in 18i9, had proved himself at all times, and 
 under all trials, unquestionably entitled to our unreserved con- 
 fidence. 
 
 Two facts, however, were proved, which we deemed of some 
 importance 
 
 1st. That Cornwell did lend to Conboy, at some unexpected 
 emergency arising in the excavation, one keg of powder (worth 
 about $2 75) ; 150 feet of fuse (worth about $1 75) ; and 5 or 6 
 
 * The Mayor must know that Mr. Tappen, the Aest Commissioner, was not then 
 acting President, as he alleges. The examination was in the early part of De- 
 cember, 1869, and Mr. Van Schaick did not tender his resignation until after 
 Mayor Wood's assumption of office.
 
 picks, the property of the city. It was proved, however, beyond 
 all doubt, that these articles were returned, and that not a penny 
 of loss was sustained by the city, and that nothing was further 
 from the intention of these men than to convert the public 
 property to their own use. The powder agent who supplies 
 contractors from the magazine, only makes his rounds about 
 once a week, and it is customary for contractors and gangs of 
 workmen, who happen to be without powder, when they encoun- 
 ter a wet piece of rock which requires immediate attention, to 
 borrow powder and fuse from each other. 
 
 2d. It was also proved that Cornwell had returned, on the 
 pay roll of the Department, three or four days more time for 
 one of the men than the man had made In the service of the 
 city. In excuse for this mistake, it appeared that he was 
 at that time in charge of two gangs of men, working in 
 different streets, and at considerable distance from each other 
 that this was done to save the Department the expense 
 of an additional foreman that in taking the time of the 
 men on these two gangs he trusted, on the occasion above re- 
 ferred to, partially to a hasty look at the gangs, and partially 
 to the report of the laborer who acted as sub-foreman during 
 his absence. This was deemed gross negligence, and for this, 
 as well as for lending the powder, fuse and tools, he was severely 
 reprimanded ; but, both because of his long tried fidelity, and 
 the entire disproof of the main and very serious charges under 
 which he was tried, it was deemed neither expedient nor justi- 
 fiable to dismiss, or even suspend him from the works. 
 
 On the 25th day of February last, the Mayor sent a note 
 asking for the papers and testimony in the case. They were 
 promptly and cheerfully given. If looked at in the light in 
 which the Mayor has viewed our action, is it not strange that 
 we should have preserved so carefully such a record of it, and 
 have been so willing at all times to submit it to the public for 
 examination and criticism ? After reading them, he expressed 
 surprise that Cornwell should be retained in the Department. 
 Mr. Tappen and I immediately went to him and told him all 
 the circumstances, and how different was the impression of the 
 Board while listening to the evidence and lojking at the per-
 
 34 
 
 sons giving it, from what it might be on merely reading the 
 written testimony ; but that if he still thought, in view of the 
 written testimony, that it was injudicious to keep Corn well, 
 rather than that the good name of the Department should 
 suffer, we would remove him. The Mayor replied, that under 
 the circumstances, he wished us to let Cornwell stay for the 
 present. 
 
 The substance of this conversation I repeated frankly to 
 Cornwell, and advised him to see the Mayor for his more per- 
 fect satisfaction in the matter ; which he said he would do, and 
 if he could not satisfy him he would resign cheerfully rather 
 than give us any annoyance. He called on the Mayor in com- 
 pany Avith Councilman Baulch, when, as I understood from 
 both Cornwell and Baulch, the Mayor said he (Cornwell) had 
 better stay where he was. Since that time the Mayor has regu- 
 larly, every fortnight, approved and countersigned the warrants 
 necessary for the payment of Cornwell and Conboy. 
 
 Against the laborer, Conboy, nothing whatever was proven, 
 and of course nothing whatever was done. 
 
 A simple comparison of the charge of the Mayor in this 
 matter, with the facts above stated, will make further comment 
 on this point unnecessary. 
 
 SERIOUS DISAGREEMENTS AND INSUBORDINATION. 
 
 Having examined the four different accusations, with their 
 several subdivisions, contained in the second message of the 
 Mayor, 1 have now to ask your attention to his first message, 
 in which he urges my removal upon the ground of " serious 
 disagreements and inwbwdination" 
 
 I am at a loss to understand how there can be any disa- 
 greements, between me or the Croton Board and the Mayor, in 
 the discharge of our duties, because, by the laws and the dis- 
 tribution of powers confided to each, there is no subject upon 
 which it is necessary that we should agree. The action and de- 
 cision of the Board on the matters within their jurisdiction are 
 final and conclusive; there cannot, therefore, be any " disa 
 greement " between us ; there may be dissatisfaction. 
 
 Nor can I understand how I can be guilty of "insubordi- 
 nation " to him. I am not " subordinate " to him in any sense
 
 35 
 
 whatever. I am an engineer. He is a layman. I am an offi- 
 cer, employed professionally on the plans and execution of 
 public works requiring skill and science. He is the Mayor of 
 the city, and modestly, but justly, acknowledges his total igno- 
 rance of both. The law has committed, therefore, no such 
 folly as making me, in my official capacity, " subordinate " to 
 him ; and the act of 1849, organizing the Croton Board, and 
 defining the duties of the Chief Engineer, places this fact be- 
 yond a doubt. 
 
 The language and spirit of that act, an appointment for 
 five years, and numerous other items, show the clear intention 
 of the Legislature, that this most important branch of the pub- 
 lic service should be saved, as far as possible, from the baneful 
 effects of the changes of party, and the demands of patronage. 
 The Mayor is authorized and required to see that the laws and 
 ordinances, as adopted, are honestly and faithfully executed by 
 us. And in case of fraud, or neglect on our part, he has the 
 power to ask for onr removal, by and with the concurrence of 
 the Board of Aldermen, for causes to be stated. But he has no 
 power to suspend the operation of a law, or of an ordinance 
 once enacted, nor to interfere in the plans of public works un- 
 der our charge, nor with the appointments or pay of the agents 
 whom we shall select for their execution. 
 
 He has the power, however, and is required to countersign 
 all warrants drawn by the Comptroller for the payment 01 
 money from the public treasury. The Mayor may, of his own 
 mere will, refuse to sign warrants for the payment of workmen 
 legally employed. 
 
 In either case, if the Department is anxious for the dispatch 
 of the work, and is yet unwilling to resort to the slow and com- 
 pulsory process of the Courts, they are obliged to yield to the 
 demands of the Mayor, who thus obtains, by usurpation 
 a power over the Department which the law never intended 
 to give. 
 
 INTERVIEWS WITH THE MAYOK. 
 
 With these preliminary observations, I shall give you a 
 statement of my official intercourse with the Mayor, since the 
 first of January last, and you will then be enabled to judge 
 what are the facts, which, with odd confusion of ideas, he de-
 
 nominates " serious disagreements " and " insubordination,' 7 
 and whether they constitute a cause for my removal. He has 
 not sent to your Board any statement of the facts upon which 
 he relies to uphold these charges, and I might, therefore, dis- 
 miss them with the above remarks ; but I prefer to give the fol- 
 lowing account, for the complete understanding of the whole 
 subject, and to enable you to form your own judgment as to 
 the real motives of his last message. 
 
 The occasions which arose, calling for official intercourse 
 between the Mayor and myself, were of a two-fold character. 
 
 First. The refusal of the Mayor to sign warrants for the 
 payment of expenses in constructing certain public works, au- 
 thorized by the Common Council, at one time on the ground 
 that the ordinances were illegal, and at another time because 
 he did not like our plan of construction. And 
 
 Secondly. An attempt to coerce the Board in the selection 
 of their inspectors of work. 
 
 It is provided by the act entitled " An act to create the 
 Croton Aqueduct Department in the city of New York, passed 
 April 11, 1819," as follows : 
 
 " 4. The Croton Aqueduct Board, in addition to the matters charged upon 
 them by the said amended charter, are hereby charged -with the preservation of 
 the Croton lake and waters, with the preservation of the banks of the Croton 
 river from injury or nuisance, with the execution of such measures as may be 
 necessary to preserve and increase the quantity of water, and keep it pure, with 
 the management, preservation, and repairs of the dam, gates, aqueduct, high 
 bridge, reservoirs, mains, pipes, pipe yard, and property of every description be- 
 longing to the water-works ; and they shall have the construction of such new 
 works, and the purchase and laying down of such mains and pipes as the Com- 
 mon Council may authorize; and also the construction, repairs, and cleansing of 
 all the sewers and underground drains, but subject to the orders and directions 
 of the Common Council, as to the times and places of building new sewers, and 
 to the general plan which has been or may be adopted for the sewerage and drain- 
 age of said city. They shall be responsible for the supply of water, and the good 
 order and security of all the works, from the Croton lake to the city, inclusive ; 
 for the exactness and durability of the structures which may be erected, and of 
 the daily work to'be performed ; and for the sufficiency of the supply in the pipe- 
 yard to meet every casualty ; and for the fidelity, care, and attention of all per- 
 sons employed by the department in watching the works and in making con- 
 structions and repairs; and shall inspect thoroughly the interior of the aqueduct, 
 and make the necessary repairs at least twice in each year." 
 
 * * * ***** 
 
 " 7. * * * They shall appoint and employ all the 
 
 clerks, foremen, mechanics, keepers, watchers, laborers, and other persons whom
 
 37 
 
 they may judge to be necessary for the performance of their duties, under thi* 
 act, except the officers and clerks in the bureau of the Water Register, and shall 
 require such bonds and securities as they may deem proper, from such of said 
 officers and servants as they shall appoint." 
 
 It will thus be seen that, by law, the greatest responsibili- 
 ties are cast upon the Croton Board, and that consequently the 
 plans of wwk, and the selection of agents in their execution, 
 are confided to that Board exclusively. 
 
 It had for a long time been our anxious desire to increase, 
 as a matter of public necessity, the daily flow of water into the 
 city. For this purpose, it was absolutely necessary to enlarge 
 the capacity of the pipes over the High Bridge and between 
 the two Reservoirs. 
 
 To accomplish this object at the High Bridge, without, at 
 the same time during the construction, cutting off the flow of 
 the water through the aqueduct, is a very delicate operation in 
 engineering. Certain portions of the work could be done very 
 easily by contract, but other portions it would be utterly unsafe 
 to commit to any contractor whatever. They should be per- 
 formed by the Board under the direct supervision of the En- 
 gineer and his assistants. 
 
 To ensure this necessary control over the portions referred 
 to, we asked for, and obtained from the Common Council, on 
 the 31st December last, an ordinance (passed by a three-fourths 
 vote, as required by law), permitting this work to be done by 
 the day. This ordinance or resolution was signed by Mayor 
 Tiemann. 
 
 Early in the current year, it became necessary, in conse- 
 quence of a change made in the grade of Eighth Avenue, to 
 lower the main conduit-pipe in that Avenue, to conform to the 
 new and reduced grade. The main through this Avenue sup- 
 plies the daily wants of a large portion of the western part of 
 the city. To strip this pipe, excavate a trench twelve feet 
 deep below it, in some places through solid rock, and to lower 
 the pipe to the bottom, without shutting off or interrupting the 
 entire flow of water through it, for even one minute, was also a 
 work too delicate to commit to the hazards of a contract. There 
 was less danger here, than will be in some points of our work on 
 High Bridge, but still there was sufficient risk, to make it our
 
 duty to ask for permission to do this work also by the day. A 
 resolution to that effect was passed on the 22dday of February, 
 1860. This resolution was identical, as to its legality, with the 
 one passed in reference to the High Bridge. This was signed 
 on the 28th day of February by Mayor Wood. 
 
 On or about the 13th March, 1860, both these works were 
 commenced, and after considerable progress had been made, 
 and the Comptroller had signed the warrants for the payment 
 of the workmen, we were surprised to hear that the Mayor 
 refused to countersign them. 
 
 On the 16th May, the Croton Board, upon my motion, 
 passed the following resolution : 
 
 " Whereas, a question has "arisen as to the legality of the 
 resolution under which this Board is now proceeding with the 
 improvements at the High Bridge, and the lowering the main 
 pipes on the Eighth Avenue by ' days' work,' instead of by 
 contract, 
 
 "fie$olved, That until his Honor the Mayor decides whether 
 he will approve of the prosecution of the work in its present 
 form, all the said work at the High Bridge and Eighth Avenue 
 be suspended." 
 
 On the 22d May, the Board sent the following letter to 
 the Mayor : 
 
 " CROTON AQUEDUCT DEP'T, 
 
 Xew York, May 22, 1860. 
 " To Hox. FERNAXDO WOOD, Mayor, <fce. : 
 
 The lowering of the main Croton-pipe in Eighth Avenue by days' work, in 
 obedience to a resolution of the Common Council, passed February 28, 1860, 
 having been suspended on the 16th inst., in consequence of some doubts ex- 
 pressed by your Honor as to the legality of the resolution referred to, the Cro- 
 ton Aqueduct Board beg leave to make the following statement and inquiry. 
 
 The lowering of the pipe became necessary, as your Honor has already been 
 informed, by the alteration of the grade in the said Avenue. The lineal distance 
 for which the pipe must be lowered is about the third of a mile ; the maximum 
 vertical depth to which it must be depressed to conform to the new grade, is 
 about twelve feet 
 
 The daily supply of the western portion of the city makes it necessary that 
 the flow through this pipe be entirely uninterrupted. To lower this pipe, thirty 
 inches in diameter, when full of water, even one foot below its original bed, 
 without breaking a joint, or without other accident, could not with any 
 safety be done by contract. To lower it the entire distance required, (with- 
 out drawing off the water,) by contract, would involve a risk amounting 
 almost to a certainty of an accident, against the disastrous consequences of
 
 which, no amount of security received from the contractor could be set off as 
 a compensation. It was for this reason alone, that the Croton Aqueduct 
 Board asked that such work should be under the 'absolute control of the 
 Engineer supervising it, so that he could at any moment either decrease or 
 increase the extent of his operations, or stop the work altogether, as the exigen- 
 cies of the moment might make necessary, without being influenced, as would be 
 a contractor, by the desire, for pecuniary reasons, to drive the work to the 
 utmost verge of safety. 
 
 It was for these reasons alone that the Croton Board asked for the authority 
 to do the work otherwise than by contract. 
 
 When our operations were suspended, the pipe had already been stripped of 
 its covering, a large portion of the new bed on the lower grade prepared by 
 excavation, <fec., and the pipe supported above it by the screws and other appur- 
 tenances necessary for the lowering. The process of lowering had also been 
 commenced. The pipe now stands on temporary supports, at some distance 
 above the surface of the Avenue ; and although every precaution and care have 
 been taken to render it secure and prevent any accident, it is by no means in a 
 position of absolute safety. 
 
 We would further beg leave to say, that in the contract made by the Street 
 Commissioner for grading said Avenue, a specified time was reserved, during 
 which this Department should have a right to the possession of this portion of 
 the Avenue, for the purpose of lowering the pipe. No more of that time now 
 remains to us than is necessary for the work we have to perform. 
 
 Under these circumstances, we have deemed it our duty to make this state- 
 ment, and to ask whether in your opinion the necessity of the case requires 
 that the work in question should be resumed, and whether in the event of its 
 resumption, you will sign the warrants for the money required in its prosecution^ 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 (For the Board.) THOS. STEPHENS, President." 
 
 On the 23d May, a letter was received from the Major in 
 reference to the work on the 8th Avenue, as follows, 
 
 MAYOR'S OFFICE, 
 
 New York, May 23, 1860. 
 " THOMAS STEPHENS, ESQ , PRES'T CROTOX AQUEDUCT DEP'T. 
 
 Sre, In reply to the communication from the Croton Aqueduct Department 
 of the 22d in st., I beg leave respectfully to say, that for the reasons stated as 
 well as that in my judgment the proposed lowering of the main Croton pipe in 
 Eighth Avenue by days' work, does not conflict with the city charter I have no 
 objection to the renewal of that work forthwith. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 FERNANDO WOOD, Mayor." 
 
 On the 31st May the Board again addressed to the Mayor 
 another urgent request to countersign the warrants for the 
 High Bridge, as follows,
 
 40 
 
 CROTOX AQUM>CCT DKP'T, 
 
 May 81, 1860. 
 " To His HONOR, FERNANDO WOOD, Mayor, <kc. : 
 
 SIR, The work which was in progress for the improvement of the High 
 Bridge was suspended at the same time the operations in lowering the main 
 pipe in 8th Avenue were suspended, and for the same reason, viz., the question 
 raised as to the legality of the resolution under which we were acting. 
 
 This resolution was passed by the last Common Council, on a representation 
 by this Board of the great risk which would be incurred in doing the necessary 
 work by contract. The great mass of the materials to be supplied, and a large 
 portion of the mechanical part of the work can be done by contract ; but a part 
 of it cannot be so done, without danger as imminent as that set forth in our com- 
 munication to you as to the work on 8th Avenue, dated May 22d. Should an 
 accident occur on High Bridge, the supply of water would be cut off, not solely 
 from a portion of our streets, but from the entire city. 
 
 Under these circumstances we beg leave to set before you this urgent expres- 
 sion of opinion that, so far as the safety of the city requires it, this work should 
 be done by the day. 
 
 This embraces but a very small portion of the entire work, and we beg to ask 
 whether, in view of the necessity, which urged our Board to ask for the resolution 
 above referred to, you will countersign the requisitions drawn for such expenses 
 as may be incurred in prosecuting otherwise than by contract, such portions of 
 the work as, in the judgment of this Board, it is utterly unsafe to allow to be 
 doae by contract Very respectfully, 
 
 Your ob't servants, dec. " 
 
 It will thus be seen that down to the date of this letter, the 
 Mayor had undertaken to determine (as in the case of Corn- 
 well and Conboy), whom we should retain in our employment, 
 and whom we should dismiss, and (as in the case of the High 
 Bridge and that of the 8th Avenue) what work we should do 
 and what work we should not do ; although both involved the 
 same points of legality. All these questions were, as I have 
 shown, placed, by the law, exclusively within the jurisdiction 
 of our Board. We were, however, compelled to submit, be- 
 cause, without money to pay the men, no work could be done. 
 
 But the Mayor made further demands ; he notified the Board 
 that he required that all Inspectors appointed by us should be 
 sworn before him at his office. This course was unusual, had 
 never before been adopted, and was not required by the Act of 
 1849; but wishing to interpose no objection, so far as the 
 mere ministerial administration of the oath was concerned, we 
 directed the Inspectors to attend upon him for that purpose.
 
 41 
 
 About this time the last week in May the rumor pre- 
 vailed in the city and in the public prints that the Mayor in- 
 tended to remove all the Heads of Departments, myself in- 
 cluded. 
 
 When I heard the rumors I called upon him, and for rea- 
 sons which will suggest themselves to your minds, I beg leave 
 to state our conversations somewhat minutely. 
 
 I told him frankly, that perhaps iny calling might be con- 
 sidered rather abrupt under the circumstances, but as I was 
 generally in the habit of going at my object in a straightfor- 
 ward way, I could not help doing so in this case. First telling 
 him what I had heard, I said that, as I presumed the only good 
 grounds for removing an officer were either the want of ability 
 or fidelity, and as I had been nattered, by the general voice of 
 the community, into the belief that the first charge would not 
 probably be the one, and as I was conscious that the second 
 could not possibly be brought against me, I presumed he must 
 be under some misapprehension or misinformation in regard to 
 facts, and I therefore called to ask him if such were the case, 
 and to say that I was ready to answer and give explanations 
 upon any points required. 
 
 He said that he had heard of nothing and knew nothing 
 against me,* and had not yet told any one he intended to re- 
 move me. I told him that my object was not to ascertain what 
 he had told any one, but what he intended to do. He then 
 said, in so many words, that he had not arrived at his present 
 position without a severe struggle, and without incurring many 
 obligations ; and that his object in removing heads of Departments 
 was to get control of the Departments, so that he could put in 
 those who would co-operate icith him, and also could pay off his 
 obligations. 
 
 Some other conversation ensued, which was mere amplifica- 
 tion of this. As I was going out, the Mayor told me that he 
 had not yet made up his mind what he would do, but that he 
 would not act at all in my case, until he had seen me again. 
 
 * Please to observe that this interview was on or about the 26th of May 
 that he was in possession of the facts concerning the Reservoir on the 3d of May ; 
 and of the testimony taken in reference to John Cornwell on the 25th February.
 
 42 
 
 A few days after this he sent for me. When I came to his 
 office, he told me it was said that an arrangement had been 
 made by me with the Board of Aldermen, by which I was 
 guaranteed my place, on condition that they should have all 
 the patronage. I replied that it was out of my power to pre- 
 vent such calumny ; and that no friend of mine would believe 
 me capable of doing anything of the kind. 
 
 He said it was an Alderman who was friendly to me that had 
 made the statement " that I did not want the patronage, and 
 had said I wished it were in my power to get clear of it." I an- 
 swered, that so far as patronage^?' se was concerned, it was very 
 true that I did not want it, for even if I had friends to provide for, 
 all personal feeling would be entirely secondary to my duty to 
 the public as Engineer, which required me to select foremen 
 for their merits alone ; that the pressure of politicians upon 
 me in behalf of their friends was so great for every place, how- 
 ever insignificant, that the selection of inspectors was one of 
 the most wearing and unsatisfactory labors of my office ; and 
 that, if I could do so conscientiously, I would willingly let Alder- 
 men or any other person select for me ; but that, while I was 
 willing and anxious to accommodate the Common Council by 
 the employment of their friends to the utmost of my power, 
 my regard for my professional reputation, and for my duty, 
 would always forbid my yielding to any one uncontrolled 
 power to appoint inspectors over work for which I was solely 
 responsible. 
 
 That I never had, and never should, forget myself so far 
 as to make any such agreement with any body of men, or with 
 any single man that strong as was my desire to retain my po- 
 sition until the Reservoir was finished, (it being a work which 
 could not but prove a great credit, professionally and publicly, 
 to all who were engaged upon it,) the desire was not so strong 
 as to make ine forget my duty as a man and an officer, and 
 that I would not hold my place at the expense of any such 
 breach of trust as that implied in his remarks. The conver- 
 sation then ended, and I withdrew. 
 
 A few days after this interview, I was informed that the 
 Mayor refused to swear in an inspector whom the Croton 
 Board had appointed to supervise the construction of a sewer
 
 43 
 
 in the 6th Avenue, between 50th and 51st streets, by con- 
 tract. 
 
 This refusal made it quite evident that the order of the 
 Mayor before mentioned, requiring all Inspectors to be sworn 
 before him, was intended to include something more than the 
 mere ministerial administration of the oath ; yet we submitted. 
 
 On the 2d of June, 1860, the subject of this refusal, and the 
 continued suspension of the work at the High Bridge, came 
 under the consideration of the Croton Aqueduct Board ; which, 
 on my motion, adopted the two following resolutions : 
 
 (Extract from minutes Croton Board.) 
 
 " Resolved, That J. J. Noble be suspended until the Mayor shall have time to 
 investigate certain charges alleged against him. 
 
 " Resolved, That a communication be sent to the Mayor, stating the necessity 
 for going on with the work at High Bridge, and asking whether he will counter- 
 sign the warrants therefor." 
 
 On the ninth day of June, the Mayor sent to our Board the 
 following letter, exculpating the Inspector : 
 
 MAYOR'S OFFICE, 
 New York, June 9, 1860. 
 " I am satisfied that the charges against J. J. Noble are unfounded. 
 
 FERNANDO WOOD." 
 
 At the time this letter was received, I was absent, owing 
 to illness, but I am informed by my colleagues that Noble was 
 sent back again to the sewer on which he was first appointed ; 
 but that the Mayor refusing to recognize him on that sewer, he 
 was again withdrawn. 
 
 On the 20th June, the Board again addressed another let- 
 ter to the Mayor in regard to the High Bridge, as follows, 
 
 CROTON AQUEDUCT DEPARTMENT. 
 
 June 20th, I860. 
 " To His HONOR FERNANDO WOOD, Mayor, <fec. : 
 
 Sir, The Croton Aqueduct Board beg leave respectfully to call your atten- 
 tion to their communication of May 31st, i-elative to the proposed improvement 
 of High Bridge. 
 
 Copies of opinions of the Corporation Counsel, given in reply to a question 
 submitted by one of the Committees of the Board of Aldermen, and also to a 
 question submitted by this Board, are herewith furnished ; the points involved 
 being similar to those raised in the matter above referred to. 
 
 The work of enlargement on High Bridge was authorized to be done by days < 
 work on the 31st day of December, 1859.
 
 44 
 
 ^ The work preparatory to the construction of a new pipe was commenced on 
 the 13th day of March, 1860. The work was suspended, at the request of the 
 Mayor and by order of the Croton Aqueduct Board, on the 16th May, 1860. 
 The gravel covering of the Bridge and pipes had at that time been removed, and 
 the dry wall around the Gate-house on the Manhattan side had been taken up, 
 preparatory to making a connection with the. Gate-house. 
 
 The Bridge is now, and has been since operations on it were suspended, in 
 this exposed condition, and it is most important- that some definite conclusion in 
 regard to it should be arrived at, without further delay. 
 
 If the work is to be abandoned, the covering mass and material which has 
 been removed from the pipes and masonry should be replaced as a protection 
 If it is to be prosecuted, no time is to be lost The delay already experienced 
 will make it necessary to cover with a temporary roof, extending the whole 
 length of the Bridge, work, which must now be unavoidably left unfinished. 
 Further delay will render it impossible to get our pipe-work in such a state of 
 forwardness as to be available during the coming winter. During the cold 
 weather of last winter, the water in the lower Reservoir was reduced to so low 
 an ebb, as to create serious apprehensions of the result of any large fire which 
 might have occurred at the time. During the coming season the increased pop- 
 ulation of the city will superinduce an increased consumption o f water, and the 
 difficulties and risks heretofore encountered will be proportionably magnified, 
 unless the proposed improvements be completed. These improvements are the 
 enlargement at the High Bridge, and the additional connection by a four-foot 
 pipe between the Receiving and Distributing Reservoirs. Both these works are 
 now suspended, and we beg leave to report that some action should be taken at 
 once, if the surplus water now running waste at the north end of the High 
 Bridge, is to be made available for the comfort and safety of our citizens and 
 their property. 
 
 The greater part of the work at both the points above named, can be done 
 by contract; but inasmuch as certain parts of it cannot with safety be done 
 otherwise than by days' work, application was made to the Common Council, 
 which resulted in the ordinances above referred to. Should you decide thai, 
 under the circumstances, you will sign the warrants necessary for the payments 
 on the work, we can go on, and yet be prepared for the coming winter. If not, 
 and we are thrown upon the delays and dangers of the contract system, the dif- 
 ficulties may be very serious. The Board feel satisfied that a personal inspection 
 of the site of the proposed work, would aid in the removal of the objections 
 expressed by your Honor, and they will be happy, if opportunity be afforded 
 them, to accompany your Honor to the same, at any time you will be pleased to 
 name as consistent with your other engagements. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 Your obed't servants, 
 
 THOS. STEPHENS, 
 THOS. B. TAPPEX, 
 A. W. CRAVEN. 
 
 Croton Aqueduct Board."
 
 45 
 
 On the 28th June, having received no reply from the 
 Mayor, I called upon him at his office, when the following con- 
 versation occurred : 
 
 , I asked him if he had yet made up his mind whether he 
 would countersign the warrants for the payments on the work, 
 and told him that, as had been fully set forth in pur two com- 
 munications to him, dated May 31 and June 20th, the necessity 
 for some action on the subject was absolute and immediate. 
 
 He answered that he had made up his mind not to sign the 
 warrants. I asked him if he would notify our Board in writing 
 of his determination, and he said lie would do so the next day. 
 I then observed that he was assuming the responsibility of de- 
 laying a work, the immediate progress of which was most im- 
 portant to the city, both as to comfort and to safety. He said 
 he should be governed by his own judgment in that respect, 
 and added that his reason for opposing the work was that he 
 did not like the plan. He did not state in what respect, nor did 
 I ask him. I answered that with all due deference to him, that 
 the plan was a matter committed by the Legislature to the judg- 
 ment of the Croton Aqueduct Board. He asked if I meant to 
 say that he had no right to any opinion, or no right to super- 
 vise the Departments. I answered that as chief magistrate he 
 had not only a right, but that it was his duty to inquire into 
 the manner of conducting business in all the Departments, and 
 to check any dishonesty or impropriety of conduct, if he found 
 it ; but that in all matters which, by the charter, were exclusively 
 placed under the control of the different departments, as to spe- 
 cifications and plans, he most surely could claim no prohibit- 
 ory voice ; and particularly in a matter of engineering science 
 connected with the Croton Aqueduct, he was not the officer 
 legally appointed to decide ; and that he could not properly 
 make his opinion a good ground for stopping a work of such 
 pressing importance, and in regard to the plans of which, the 
 proper Department had fully decided. He said he should un- 
 dertake it. I then repeated my request for his decision in 
 writing, and he repeated his promise to let us have it without 
 delay.* 
 
 *He has not done so to this day.
 
 46 
 
 I then spoke to him about the Inspector on the sewer 
 in 6th avenue, whom he had refused to recognize because of 
 certain charges alleged against him by the contractor on said 
 sewer, which charges he, the Mayor, had, in writing, notified 
 our Board were unfounded. He said he would recognize him 
 on any other sewer than the one for which he had been appoint- 
 ed. I then urged upon him, that if a contractor could select 
 his own Inspector, and oe upheld by the Mayor in doing so, 
 there would be little use in appointing Inspectors at all ; that 
 such a course would establish a precedent entirely subversive 
 of all power to have public work done with any degree of hon- 
 esty, or fidelity to the city. As he would not be changed by 
 any arguments, I withdrew. 
 
 On the 6th of July, I offered, at the meeting of the Croton 
 Board, the following preamble and resolution : 
 
 " Whereas, On the 3d of May last, an Inspector was selected by this Board to 
 superintend the sewer about to be constructed in Sixth Avenue between Fiftieth 
 and Fifty -first Streets ; and 
 
 Whereas, His Honor the Mayor (who had already claimed that all inspectors 
 under this Department should be sworn in by him) refused to swear in said In 
 spector, in consequence of certain charges which he stated had been alleged 
 against him ; and 
 
 Whereas, On motion of A. W. Craven, Chief Engineer, said Inspector was sus- 
 pended from the work, in order to give his Honor the Mayor an opportunity of 
 investigating the said charges, and the Mayor was advised of said suspension; and 
 
 WJtereas, By a letter dated June 9th, the Mayor informed this Board that 
 the charges against said Inspector were disproven, but notwithstanding said let- 
 ter and said exculpation, his Honor still refused to swear him in, giving to said 
 Inspector, as a reason for such refusal, that he had promised the contractor on 
 said work not to do so ; 
 
 And Whereas, acquiescence in such a reason for the dismissal of any Inspector, 
 would lead to a total subversion of the ability of this Board to have any of the 
 work committed to its charge performed honestly, and according to the contract 
 made in behalf of the parties to be assessed ; therefore 
 
 Resolved, That said Inspector be re-appointed on said sewer in Sixth Avenue, 
 between Fiftieth and Fifty-first Street, according to the original selection of this 
 Board ; said appointment being by virtue of the authority given by the charter 
 to this Department, to appoint Inspectors on all work for the faithful performance 
 of which this Department is by the same charter alone held responsible. 
 
 On the llth July he sent his first message to the Board of 
 Aldermen, removing me from office for " serious disagree- 
 ments" and ' insubordination."
 
 47 
 
 On the 18th July he sent a second message, removing me 
 for additional reasons, which I have stated and examined in the 
 first part of this answer. 
 
 And yon, and my fellow citizens at large, will probably be 
 surprised to learn, that though I have been at all times ready 
 and willing to make the statement and explanations I have 
 now presented to you, and although the alleged reasons of the 
 Mayor contain the most serious charges against my character, 
 both personal and professional, yet that the Mayor never allu- 
 ded to them in any of my interviews with him, nor did I ever 
 hear of them until I read Ms charges in the newspapers which 
 carried them into all parts of the United States. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 I dismiss this subject to your final determination, with a 
 brief statement of the conclusions clearly deducible from the 
 facts. 
 
 1st. It is not true that I have made any " changes " what- 
 ever in " the plan " of the Eeservoir, either " extensive " or 
 " peculiar," or otherwise. No work has been done, or is con- 
 templated upon the Reservoir except such as is specifically men- 
 tioned and provided for in the contract, and at pieces therein 
 limited. 
 
 2d. It is true that there are variations in the quantities of 
 work and materials, as originally estimated, and as actually to 
 be done. 
 
 3d. It is not true that these variations are " remarkable," 
 except in one sense, that, considering the vastness of the area, 
 and the impossibility of making an exact and subterranean 
 estimate, they are " remarkable " in presenting comparatively 
 so slight a difference. 
 
 The area is 106. acres, presenting an irregular surface of 
 rocks and morass, the rocky hillocks rising in some places 
 thirty-five feet above the swamps in the same area. 
 
 The depth of our excavation exceeded, in some places, 
 forty feet.
 
 48 
 
 The estimate was of necessity made before the surface was 
 broken for the work, and the quantities, and particularly the 
 qualities of the various earths and rocks to be found beneath 
 the surface were, as every engineer knows, and as I have ex- 
 plained to you, matters more or less of uncertainty. 
 
 4th. It is true that for these variations, requiring additional 
 work and materials, the contractors will be entitled to some 
 $100,000 beyond their bid of $632,743, which was based on 
 the quantities and qualities stated in the estimate ; but it is 
 not true that the cost to the city will be increased that amount 
 beyond my estimate of the cost, made for the use of the Gov- 
 ernment. Such estimate was (exclusive of the gate-houses) 
 $1,025,000. The Eeservoir will be built for $150,000 less, at 
 least ; probably much lower. 
 
 5th. It is not true that in "every case" in which these 
 variations have occurred, "they have proved very beneficial to 
 the contractors." On the contrary, several of them are done 
 at prices which indicate a loss, and the others are done at 
 prices barely remunerative, and which a majority of the com- 
 petitors were not willing to do for fifty per cent, advance. 
 
 6th. It is not true that I made any " mistake " in the award 
 of the contract. 
 
 I. / did not make the award : it was made by Messrs. Van 
 Schaick, De Forrest, myself (as the Croton Board), and the 
 Hon. A. C. Flagg, the Comptroller, unanimously. Fairchild 
 & Co., to whom the a*vard was made, were the lowest bidders. 
 
 II. Even had I alone made the award, it was made stinctty 
 according to the requirements of the charter; there was no 
 mistake in any one point of the letting . 
 
 I may be excused from saying here, that notwithstanding 
 the difficulty attendant upon explanations on professional sub- 
 jects, I have clearly shown that the charges of the Mayor which 
 were set forth with such minute detail of figures and items, are 
 utterly unfounded when examined in the light of intelligence
 
 49 
 
 and truth. In the whole conduct of the work on the Reservoir, 
 from the first examination of its site until the present moment, 
 that course lias been adopted, and those precautions taken, 
 which the experienced and skillful men in my profession would, 
 under similar circumstances, suggest and advise ; and 1 hope 
 YOU will be as much surprised as my professional brethren are, 
 that the very facts which I would invoke as evidence of capac- 
 ity, integrity, and judgment, are perversely distorted so as to 
 assume, to the eye of those who do not understand the subject, 
 the aspect of folly, ignorance, or something worse. 
 
 In providing, by numerous specifications, for contingencies 
 dependent upon the developments of our operations, and in 
 availing myself of those provisions, I have done only what was 
 absolutely required by my duty as an officer, to ensure the 
 perfection of the Reservoir. Had I done otherwise, I could 
 not have, as now, the right to hope that with this great public 
 work my name may hereafter be honorably associated. 
 
 7th. It is not true that the paving in Forty-ninth street was 
 executed without " proper vigilance " on my part. The "Water 
 Purveyor, charged by. law with such work, examined and 
 passed it. The Croton Board, the Board of Assessors, the 
 Board of Aldermen, and the Board of Council men confirmed 
 it. Against the unanimous action of these five separate bodies, 
 there is no evidence but the unsworn statement of nine prop- 
 erty-holders, interested to defeat the assessment for the work. 
 
 8th. It is true that an error of eight inches, in the maximum, 
 was made in the grade of a sewer in Fortieth street ; but it is 
 not true that the error was made by me, or that I am respon- 
 sible for it, or that the city will suffer any loss by it. The er- 
 ror was made by a city surveyor, appointed by the Common 
 Council, and will simply involve the additional charge by the 
 contractor for extra excavation, averaging four inches in 
 depth, for a, limited distance. 
 
 9th. It is not true that any of the men in our department 
 have been guilty of the fraud of converting the public property 
 to their own use, or that we have retained any such men in 
 our employment. 
 
 4
 
 50 
 
 Some discharged laborers got up a prosecution against 
 Cornwell, a foreman of a gang (employed by us for eleven 
 years with entire satisfaction), charging him with gross offences. 
 We examined witnesses patiently for four days, and the entire 
 Board, Messrs. Yan Schaick, Tappen, and myself, unanimously 
 dismissed the charge. We were the proper tribunal before 
 which to try the case, and we did try it thoroughly and honestly. 
 This the Mayor has in effect admitted ; for since the explana- 
 tions given him, he has signed the warrants for the payment of 
 Cornwell and Conboy semi-monthly, up to the present time. 
 
 So much for the second message. Now for the first. 
 
 10th. It is not true that there have been any < ; disagree- 
 ments," serious or otherwise, between the Mayor and myself. 
 Such a state of facts is simply impossible ; because, by law, in 
 the discharge of our respective duties, there is no one subject 
 upon which it is necessary that we should agree. 
 
 llth. It is not true that I have been guilty of " insubordi- 
 nation" to him. I am an Engineer, charged with the respon- 
 sibility of the plan and execution of public work requiring skill 
 and science. He is a layman, and the law is not guilty of the 
 absurdity of making me " subordinate " to him in the discharge 
 of my duty. On the contrary, the act of 1819, organizing the 
 Department, imposed upon me a personal responsibility, and 
 makes my decision, within the sphere of my jurisdiction, final 
 and exclusive. 
 
 12th. But it is true that after his repeated attempts to usurp 
 the power of the Department, and to make it the slave of his 
 will, I have raised those objections which I was legally entitled 
 to interpose, and which are demanded of me by every consid- 
 eration of fidelity, to the city. 
 
 By abusing the power confided to him of countersigning 
 the warrants of the Comptroller for the pay of our men ; grant- 
 ing or refusing his signature at pleasure ; he has undertaken 
 to say whom we shall retain in our employment, and whom we 
 shall not whom we shall select as Inspectors, and whom we shall 
 not and what wor'Jc, authorized lj law and the ordinances, we 
 shall execute or omit.
 
 51 
 
 He has arrested the execution of two very important public 
 works, in the very height of their progress ; and, by his action 
 on one of them, defeated or delayed the long cherished desire 
 of the Department to increase the supply of water. One of 
 these works, that on Eighth avenue, was in course of execu- 
 tion under an ordinance of the' Common Council, signed ly 
 himself; and the other, that on the High Bridge, under an 
 ordinance signed by his predecessor. Both of these were sus- 
 pended upon his asserted doubts of their legality. He with- 
 draws his objection to the first and least important of the two, 
 and grants us his permission to proceed. 
 
 He refuses his permission to the latter, involving the same 
 point of legality, and starts an objection to the plan of the 
 work a matter wholly within the province of our Board, and 
 wholly upon my responsibility. 
 
 Fur the sake of not having any important public work de- 
 layed, I have never, for one moment, stood upon the question 
 of subordination ; but have yielded in every point until it 
 came to a question involving my fidelity as an officer. He 
 refused to countersign the warrant for the pay of an In- 
 spector whom we had appointed upon a sewer, upon the 
 ground that he had promised not to do so, at the request 
 of the contractor whose work the Inspector was to super- 
 vise expressing his willingness to recognize such Inspector 
 upon any other sewer. I immediately introduced resolutions 
 into our Board, pledging my colleagues to resist these usurpa- 
 tions ; and within five days afterward he sent to the Board of 
 Aldermen his first message, proposing to remove me for 
 11 serious disagreements and insubordination." 
 
 Respectfully submitted. 
 
 A. W. CRAVEN, 
 Chief Engineer Croton Aqueduct Department.
 
 52 
 
 City and County of New York, ss : 
 
 Alfred W. Craven, of said City, being duly sworn, says 
 that tlie foregoing answer is true to the knowledge of this de- 
 ponent, excepting that part of it which refers to the instrumen- 
 tal examinations of the assistant Engineers of this deponent, 
 and as to those matters, deponent believes it to be true. 
 
 A. W. CRAVEN. 
 
 Sworn to before me, this let. ) 
 day of September, 1860. \ 
 
 EDWARDS PIEEREPONT, 
 
 Justice Superior Court.
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 Santa Barbara 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW. 
 
 Series 9482
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 AA 000118485 2