THE CITY RECORD VOL. LXXI NUMBER 21435

NEW YORK, MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

PRICE 10 CENTS

VICTORY

JUNITEDUY ATES

ARONDS

AND

AMPS

L Published daily, at 9 a. m., except Sundays and legal holidays. Subscription: $20 a year; $10 six months; $5 three months. Daily issue,

10 cents a copy (by mail, 15 cents). SUPPLEMENTS: Official Canvass of Votes, $1 (by mail, $1.15); List of Registered Voters,

25 cents each assembly district (by mail, 30 cents). OTHER PUBLICATIONS ON SALE: Assessed Valuation of Real Estate, prices vary;

Building Laws (in four volumes), complete, $4 ($4.10 by mail); separate volumes, each containing a certain part of the building laws, $1 (by mail, $1.10). Cumulative Supplement to the New York City Charter and the Administrative Code, to July 1, 1941, $1 (by mail, $1.10); also Annual Supplements to the New York City Charter and the Administrative Code, from July 1, 1941 to July 1, 1942, and from July 1, 1942 to July 1, 1943 (two volumes), 50 cents each (by mail, 60 cents); Detailed List of Exempt Properties, $2 (by mail, $2.10); Electrical Code, 30 cents (by mail, 35 cents); Fire Department Specifications, 15 cents (by mail, 18 cents); Land Value Maps, complete for the City in one volume, $2 (by mail, $2.15); New York City Charter, 25 cents (by mail, 29 cents); Index to New York City Charter, 25 cents (by mail, 29 cents); Official Directory, 50 cents (by mail, 55 cents). Annual Compilation of the Rules and Regulations of the New York City Agencies, 1942 (from Dec. 1, 1941 through Nov. 30, 1942)', $1 (by mail, $1.10). Cumulative Compilation of Rules and Regulations of New York City Agencies, through Nov, 30, 1941, $2 (by mail, $2.10); Sanitary Code of The City of New York, 75 cents (by mail, 85 cents).

Order must be accompanied by currency, money order or check drawn to the order of "Supervisor of THS CITY Racoan."

ADVERTISING: Copy must be received at least TWO (2) days before the date fixed for the first insertion; when proof is required for correction before publication, copy must be received THREE (3) days before the date fixed for the first insertion.

Entered as Second-class Matter, Post Office at New York City.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Board Meetings ..................... 4694 Bronx, President Borough of The—

Proposals ........................ 4695 City Planning Commission—Proposals 4697 Comptroller, Office of the—

Interest on City Bonds and Stock.. 4697 Vouchers Received December 24,

1943 ...........................4693 Council, The—

Journal of Proceedings of Stated Meeting Held December 23, 1943 4679

Journal of Proceedings of Recessed Special Meeting Held December 23, 1943 ........................ 4692

Education, Board of—Proposals...... 4697 Estimate, Board of—Notices of Pub-

lic Hearings — Public Improvement Matters 4697

Estimate, Board of—Bureau of Real Estate—

Corporation Sales of Certain Real Estate 4695

Requests for Offers to Sell Real Property to The City of New York 4696

Hospitals, Department of—Proposals .. 4695 Marine and Aviation, Department of—

Proposals 4697 Mayor, Office of the—Notice of Hear-

ing on Local Law ................. 4679 Municipal Civil Service Commission—

Notice to Applicants .............. 4679 Notices of Examinations ........... 4697 Proposed Authorization to Fill Va-

cancies ......................... 4697

Official Directory ................... 4694 Police Department—

Owners Wanted for Unclaimed Property ....................... 4694

Special Regulations for Vehicular Traffic ......................... 4694

Public Works, Department of— Proposals ..... ............ 4694 Proposed Approval of Subcontractors 4694

Purchase, Department of— Proposals ........................4695 Sale of Privileges ................. 4695 Sale of Timber Piles, Etc.......... 4695 Sale of Used X-Ray Films......... 4695

Regulation Adopted by Board of Esti-mate on May 21, 1942 ............. 4698

Richmond, President Borough of—Proposals ........................ 4695

Supreme Court, First Department—Application to Condemn........... 4698 Filing Final Report ................ 4698 Filing Tentative Decree—Notice to

File Objections ................. 4698 Supreme Court, Second Department—

Application to Condemn........... 4698 Filing Tentative Decree—Notice to

File Objections ................. 4698 Transportation, Board of—

Proposals ......... ......... 4695 Proposals—Notice to Bidders ...... 4695 Proposed Approval of Subcontractors 4695 Sale of Ferrous Scrap Material.... 4695

OFFICE OF THE MAYOR

Hearing on Local Law

PURSUANT TO STATUTORY REQUIREMENT, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Local Law numbered and titled as hereinafter specified has been passed by the

Council, and that a PUBLIC HEARING upon such bill will be held at the MAYOR'S OFFICE, EXECUTIVE CHAMBER, CITY HALL, BOROUGH OF MANHAT-TAN, NEW YORK CITY, on FRIDAY, DECEMBER 31, 1943, at 10.30 A. M., viz.:

Int. No. 332, No. 396-411—A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to the procurement or sale of tickets, reservations or passenger accommodations issued by any railroad, parlor or sleeping car owner or operator, steamship company, air line or bus 'ine and limiting the prices at which such tickets, reservations or accommodations may be sold.

Dated, City Hall, New York, December 23, 1943. d24,30 FIORELLO H. LA GUARDIA, Mayor.

THE COUNCIL

STATED MEETING

Thursday, December 23, 1943, 1.30 o'Clock P. M. The Council met in the Council Chambers, City Hall. The President called the meeting to order and directed the Clerk to call the roll.

Present Newbold Morris, President of the Council

Councilmen Joseph T. Sharkey, S. Samuel DiFalco Gertrude W. Klein

Vice-Chairman Anthony 1. DiGiovanna William M. McCarthy Doris I. Byrne George E. Donovan Salvatore Ninfo Peter V. Cacchione Genevieve B. Earle John P. Nugent William A. Carroll Louis P. Goldberg James A. Phillips Rita Casey Meyer Goldberg Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. John M. Christensen Walter R. Hart Hugh Quinn Louis Cohen Stanley M. Isaacs Frederick Schick William N. Conrad Joseph E. Kinsley Edward Vogel

The President announced the presence of a quorum. The Invocation was delivered by Rabbi Samuel 3. Levinson, of Temple Beth Emeth,

R3 Marlhorough Road, Brooklyn, N. Y. INVOCATION

God of our Fathers, Thou knowest our thoughts and hearest our prayers. Gratefully we accept whatever blessings Thou dost mete out; in humility we resign ourselves when by They Will our wishes are denied. Suppliant we stand before Thee, united in a single

W l 1

MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

Applications are now being received by the Municipal Civil Service Commis-sion for the following positions :

DENTAL HYGIENIST PROMOTION TO:

CIVIL SERVICE EXAMINER (RAILROAD), MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

ELEVATOR MECHANIC, NEW YORK CITY TUNNEL AUTHORITY

LAW ASSISTANT, GRADE 4, BUREAU OF FRANCHISES, BOARD OF ESTIMATE

Detailed information regarding above applications may be found on page 4697.

Applications are being received continuously for the following license examina-tions : Master and Special Electrician; Master Plumber; Master Rigger; Motion Picture Operator; Portable Engineer (any motive power except steam) ; Portable Engineer (steam) ; Refrigerating Machine Operator (ten ton capacity) ; Refrig-erating Machine Operator (unlimited capacity) ; Special Rigger; Stationary Engineer, First, Second and Third Grades; Stationary Fireman; Structural Welder; Oil Burning Equipment Installation.

License applications and detailed information may be obtained at the Bureau of Information of the Municipal Civil Service Commission, 299 Broadway, Manhattan, N. Y. 7.

prayer for the common good. Grant, 0 God, blessings manifold unto our Nation; increasing vision to our President and to all those whom we have set in authority to guide the Ship of State; courage and fortitude to the Citizenship of our land; Thy protecting wings over our armed forces wherever they may serve; victory to our Nation and its allies and an enduring Peace!

Be with this body, 0 Councillor Supreme, that it may with wisdom and in harmony perform the tasks imposed upon it by the will of the people of our beloved City; that its acts may redound to their happiness and thus be acceptable to Thee.

We meet today, Almighty God, in the midst of a Holiday season, with cheer in the present and hope for the year to come. The lights of the Maccabean Festival proclaim the victory of right over might. The lights of the Yuletide shine forth their message of good will. May the glimmering candlelights of these glorious festivals of Rededication and Christmas blend their brilliant rays and burst into a flame of fire that shall illumine the whole earth; a melting fire that shall weld all mankind into a common brotherhood, through Thy Fatherhood. May that Era of Right of Peace and Goodwill come speedily.

May the meditations and thoughts of our heart and mind, 0 God, be at one with our Season's greetings: a joyous Chanukah, A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Amen!

Mr. Vogel moved that the Invocation be spread in full upon the Minutes of the Meeting. Seconded by Mr. Hart and adopted.

On motion of Mr. DiGiovanna, seconded by Mr. DiFalco, the Minutes of the Meeting of December 14, 1943, were adopted as printed.

REPORTS OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES G. 0. No. 154—M-146

Report of the Special Committee to Examine Into the Affairs and Conduct of the Commissioner of City Civil Service and His Department.

The Special Committee to Examine into the Affairs and Conduct of the Commissioner of City Civil Service and His Department respectfully recommends the acceptance and adoption by the Council of the annexed Report of Emil K. Ellis, Esq., Counsel to said Committee, which Report is entitled "Supplemental and Final Report of Emil K. Ellis to the Special Committee of the Council of The City of New York to investigate the affairs and conduct of the MunicipalCivil ServiceCommission of The City of New York and Hon. Paul J. Kern, its former President, pursuant to section 43 of the Charter of The City of New York."

WILLIAM M. McCARTHY, LOUIS COHEN, FREDERICK SCHICK, JOHN M. CHRISTENSEN, ANTHONY J. DiGIOVANNA, Special Committee to Examine into the Affairs and Conduct of the Commissioner bf City Civil Service and His Department. SUPPLEMENTAL AND FINAL REPORT OF EMIL K. ELLIS TO THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF THE

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK TO INVESTIGATE THE AFFAIRS AND CONDUCT OF THE MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK AND HON. PAUL J. KERN, ITS FORMER PRESIDENT, PURSUANT TO SECTION 43 OF THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK. This is a supplemental and final report of the undersigned as counsel to the Special

Committee appointed by the Council to investigate the affairs and conduct of the Municipal Civil Service Commission and Paul J. Kern, pursuant to section 43 of the Charter.

On December 30, 1942, the Council adopted a report of the undersigned covering the history of the investigation from May 1940 to December 1942. At the time of the adoption of that report there were pending two important litigations affecting the investigatorial powers of the Council.

The first of these was a proceeding brought by the Mayor to quash a subpoena served upon him on January 9, 1941, by the Special Committee in connection with the personnel of the InformationCenter. The Mayor contended that theCouncil had no power to subpoena him ; that he was immune from subpoena in the same manner as the Governor of the State and the President of the United States, claiming that the pattern of the government of this City followed the Federal plan of government, of three separate independent branches, to wit, executive, legislative and judicial.

The undersigned contended on behalf of the Special Committee that the Charter of the City did not set up tri-partite coordinate branches of government independent of each other; that while the Mayor was the chief executive officer of the City, he shared many executive duties with the Comptroller, the President of the Council and the presidents of the five boroughs.

It was further contended by the undersigned that section .43 of the Charter did nit exempt the Mayor or any other officer of the City from subpoena by the Council. '

On March 22, 1941, Mr. Justice Philip J. McCook denied the Mayor's application and upheld the validity of the subpoena. The Mayor appealed from that decision to the Appel-late Division, which unanimously affirmed the decision of Mr. Justice McCook (262 A. D. 708, 27 N. Y S. (2d) 992). The Mayor then appealed from that decision to the Court of Appeals. The Mayor appeared personally at the argument of the appeal in the Court of Appeals and argued in his own behalf. The undersigned presented the argument of the Special Committee.

On March 19, 1942, the Court of Appeals upheld the order of the Appellate Division in an opinion by Judge Edmund H. Lewis (288 N. Y. 1). Chief Judge Lehman wrote a dissenting opinion concurred in by Judge Rippey.

The court held that section 43 of the Charter which conferred the power upon the Council to investigate any matters relating to the property, affairs or government of the City was broader than the analogous section of the prior Charter and that neither the Mayor nor any other City officer is beyond the scope of its investigatorial powers.

The court further held that the Charter of the City does not establish separate inde-pendent branches of the government ; that the powers of the office of Mayor are not exclusively executive and that the principle of separation of powers applies only to sovereign governments an4 not to the government of cities.

The second of the litigations referred to concerned the power of the Council to incur expenses in the conduct of such an investigation without prior appropriation by the Board of Estimate.

A suit was brought against the City by Arthur C. Smith, stenographer employed by the Special Committee appointed by the Council to investigate emergency unemployment

THE CITY RECORD 155

OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK Published Under Authority of Section 872-a of the New York City Charter

STEPHEN G. KELLEY, SUPIRVISOR

WILLIAM VIERTEL, EDITOR

2213 Municipal Building, Manhattan, N. Y. 7. WO rth 2-1800

4680 THE CITY RECORD MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

relief, The Board of Estimate did not make any appropriation for the expenses of the investigation. Smith sued the City which defended on the ground that the Council was an agency of the City within section 891 of the (Barter forbidding any a;;ncy from incurring

a liability or an expense in excess of the amount appropriated therefor ; that the Board of Estimate had the sole appropriating power and that any contract made by the Special Committee to engage assistants in the conduct of such investigation was ultra wires and void.

Mr. Smith obtained summary judgment w hich was affirmed by the Appellate Division. An appeal was taken by the City to the Court of Appeals. Upon application to the Court of Appeals, the undersigned was allowed to file a brief as amicus curiae.

On January 21, 1943, the Court of Appeals held (289 N. Y. 517) that the Council does not act as a departmental agency of the City when it exercises its legislative powers under section 43 and that the Committee has the power to engage such assistants as it reason-ably requires without any necessity for an appropriation by the Board of Estimate.

THE RULES In the report by the undersigned adopted by the Council on December 20, 1942, it was

pointed out that the Rules of Civil Service which have the effect of law and upon which the proper administration of Civil Service depends, were in a loose and chaotic state.

Mr. Kern testified that the rules were in a "hopeless morass" and in a "chaotic state." He further testified that the rules had been revised and had been submitted to the Mayor some time in 1938, but that the Mayor had been unable to approve them because he had been "very busy."

On November 27, 1940, Mr. Kern testified: "There is no way of telling whether that rule is actually in effect because we

adopted a complete set of new rules last summer, about August. These rules are in horrible shape as you undoubtedly know from working with them."

He further testified that the absence of proper rules "hampers in many respects the efficient administration of the office," was "wasteful" and "frequently leads to litigation." The Mayor's approval is required before submission to and approval of the rules by the State Civil Service Commission.

Recently, the undersigned made an inquiry of the Municipal Civil Service Commission as to whether the rules had as yet been signed by the Mayor. The undersigned was informed that the rules had been further revised and are awaiting approval by the Mayor.

In view of the fact that the present condition of the rules causes inefficiency, waste, uncertainty and litigation, it cannot he too strongly emphasized that these rules he passed on and approved without further delay.

In an effort to facilitate the adoption of proper rules, the undersigned made detailed recommendations in his original report concerning the proposed new rule, which will be found on pages "228" to "232" inclusive of the report.

The chaotic condition of Civil Service administration in the absence of such rules. can be best characterized by quoting from the testimony of Mr. Kern during the investigation.

"Q. Now, in view of the fact that the revised rules have not yet been adopted by the Mayor, what are the rules that are presently in force in addition to those set forth in the manual of the Corporation Counsel ? A. If anybody knew the answer to that question we would not have to have a new codification of these rules and a new set of rules. Nobody knows what rules are in effect" (private hearing, June 11, 1941, p. 304). It is strongly urged therefore that the Council request the Mayor to pass upon and

approve the proposed new rules without further delay. A delay of five years is, to say the least, unreasonable, notwithstanding the fact that undoubtedly the Mayor has been very busy on other important matters.

THE REMOVAL OF COMMISSIONERS KERN AND SAYRE BY TIIE MAYOR

Since the last report of the undersigned, the Mayor suspended Commissioners Kern and, Sayre and on February 9, 1942 held a public hearing on charges made against them. On February 16, 1942, the Mayor removed Commissioners Kern and Sayre from office.

It is interesting to note that in the original report of the undersigned it was stated that Mr. Kern had been disorderly at public hearings of the Committee, had made intemperate outbursts, and otherwise attempted to disturb the orderly conduct of the hearings. It was further pointed out that even after affirmance by the Court of Appeals of the order directing his imprisonment unless lie testified, he had appeared at a hearing and mocked the Committee by insisting upon writing out the answers to questions in longhand before answering the questions, a procedure which was subsequently denounced by Mr. Justice Carroll G. Walter in a proceeding thereafter brought against Mr. Kern by the Special Committee. It is interesting, therefore, to note that in the affidavit of the Mayor, sworn to on April 13, 1942, and submitted in answer to the proceeding brought by Commissioners Kern and Sayre 'for reinstatement, the Mayor stated

"Despite my warning, there followed a course of personal conduct by Mr. Kern in connection with the councilmanic investigation which, apart from the merit or lack of merit of the charges against him, caused me great chagrin and regret." In the original report of the undersigned it was also stated that Mr. Kern did not

possess the maturity and objective judgment required in the position of President of the Commission, and that his volatile temperament, vindictiveness and lack of restraint rendered him unsuited for that position. In the affidavit of the Mayor referred to, the Mayor said:

"I was mindful, however, that the administration of the Commission had been marred by acts of irresponsibility and lack of judgment which I attributed to Mr. Kern's youth and immaturity. Before re-appointing him I warned him that such conduct has not tended to instill public confidence in the administration of the merit system and exacted from him a promise that in the future he would act like a respon-sible public official." During the course of the investigation charges were made by the Special Committee

that the Mayor had improperly interfered with the administration of civil service. In an affidavit submitted to the court in the proceeding for reinstatement, Mr. Kern charged that the Mayor had "frequently ordered the Civil Service Commission to perform illegal, improper and unscrupulous acts," citing various instances of alleged interference. Mr. Kern further stated that the Mayor had ordered that "there will be no change in the Housing Authority personnel in any manner, shape or form" until he made specific recommendations. The Mayor denied Mr. Kern's charges of interference. Considerable comment was made in the original report of the undersigned as to the interference of the Mayor in the matter of the personnel in the Housing Authority.

The basis, however, of the removal of Commissioners Kern and Sayre was the claim that they had knowingly and deliberately made a false and defamatory statement concerning the Corporation Counsel of the City and that "public confidence in the fair and impartial administration of the merit system could not be maintained if Messrs. Kern and Sayre were continued in office." In the original report of the undersigned it was stated :

"The bad examples set by the Commission itself and other practices described have had an injurious effect on the administration of Civil Service, have been costly to the City and have undermined confidence in the merit system." Sufficient justification for the original resolution of this investigation appears from a

statement made in the affidavit of the Mayor, previously referred to, as follows: "During the time that Messrs. Kern and Sayre served in that office, I received

literally hundreds of complaints from civil service employees, civil service eligibles and the general public." In the original report the undersigned referred to the practice of Afr. Kern in threat-

ening to withhold certification of the payrolls of entire departments. In the affidavit of the Mayor it was stated:

"I received complaints from time to time that Messrs. Kern and Sayre were abusing their discretion by threatening to withhold certification of the routine payrolls of entire departments merely because of minor controversies with the heads of such departments, thus subjecting many civil service employees not involved in the contro-versy to great personal embarrassment, as they depend upon prompt receipt of pay checks to meet personal and family needs. In connection with one such controversy I decided to give them a dose of their own medicine, so that they would realize by personal experience how much embarrassment could be caused In such arbitrary and unfair conduct. Accordingly I withheld their own pay checks until they came to me and complained and wanted to know why their checks were being held up. I said to them in handing them their checks 'I am merely- giving you homeopathic treat-ment. I wanted you to know how it feels to have your pay check hell up.'

At page 168 of the original report of the undersigned appears the following: "The power of the Commission to refuse to certify payrolls was utilized as a

weapon of oppression against Commissioner Rheinstein, which resulted in annoyance, hindrance and discouragement both to Mr. Rheinstein and the personnel of the Housing Authority. The possession of the drastic power to stop payrolls of employees who have rendered faithful and conscientious service to the City requires the utmost caution and integrity in its exercise. In this instance not only was such caution and integrity ignored, but the power was utilized for a wholly extraneous and personal purpose as part of Mr. Kern's punitive policy toward Mr. Rheinstein."

It is unnecessary to cite additional instances in which both the Mayor and Mr. Kern :onfirmed many charges made by the Special Committee and referred to in the original report. Suffice it to say that not only does the justification for the institution of this investigation appear clearly from the record of the proceedings in the matter of Kern against LaGuardia, but that many of the findings and conclusions made in the original report to the Special Committee have been substantiated by both the Mayor and Mr. Kern.

Since the last report was made the case of Harming against Kern, referred to in the original report at pages 123 to 153 inclusive, was decided by the Supreme Court. Mr. justice Aaron Steuer wrote an opinion confirming the findings of the Special Committee that the examination for Borough Superintendent was improperly and illegally conducted, and that the facts showed a "lack of good faith." In the original report, at page 142, it was stated that there was an unmistakable inference of a "leak" in Mr. Kern's predicting the names of the successful candidates in advance of the final rating. The report commented on Mr. Kern's remarkable ability to "predict" the outcome of the examination. Mr. Justice Steuer, in his opinion, said:

"In response to his importunities at a date which was impossible to fix accurately but at least seventeen days prior to the publication of the list, the president of the Commission telephoned him (Rheinstein) and told him that these names would certainly pass and that he could make a provisional appointment subject to agreement with the Commissioner of Buildings. The president was strikingly accurate in his prediction. At the time it was made no ratings were known and only the written examination results had been tabulated.

"There are many facts which make this explanation difficult to credit but if it is assumed to be true and it may be, the situation is not healthy. * * * To sum up, the Commission showed great concern for the * * * necessity of preserving the Civil Service system to be followed by everyone except themselves. In every true sense these facts show a lack of good faith." A series of bills embodying recommendations for changes in the law and rules affecting

civil service administration has been proposed by the undersigned. Some of these bills have been introduced in the Council. Others will be introduced in the State Legislature at its coming session. It is the anticipation and hope of the undersigned that the adoption of those bills will materially tend to improve the administration of civil service, maintain confidence in the merit system and result in substantial savings to the City.

One of the bills proposed by the undersigned and recently introduced in the Council requires a fingerprint investigation of all employees of the City before actual assumption of duty. This practice has not been followed with regard to temporary employees. It was pointed out in the original report that on one occasion an attendant who had been assigned to a recreation center had previously been convicted of a sex crime. Since the last report the undersigned investigated the case of a subway cleaner who had previously served a prison term for larceny and who had subsequently been appointed without a fingerprint investigation. He was subsequently arrested for picking the pockets of a sailor who was a passenger on a subway train. The evil and danger of the omission to obtain fingerprint investigations prior to appointment is too obvious to require extended comment. It should be a comparatively simple and prompt process to obtain Police Department investigation of fingerprints prior to appointment.

In conclusion, the undersigned wishes to thank the members of the Special Committee for their cooperation and assistance in the conduct of the investigation. The undersigned also respectfully refers the Council and its standing committee on civil service to the conclusions and recommendations made in the original report. It is to be hoped that the Council, through its standing committees, will take steps to ascertain if the conditions described in the original report have been remedied, and if any of the suggested changes in administrative procedure have been adopted. The conditions discussed in the original report seriously affect the whole structure of civil service in this City and strike at the very foundation of the merit system. Constant and vigilant attention to the administration of civil service is a vital duty of this honorable body to the end that the morale of the civil servants of the City may be improved and confidence in the impartial and effective administration of civil service fully restored.

Respectfully submitted, EMIL K. ELLIS, Counsel. Laid over.

G. 0. No. 155-M-147 Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Any and All Matters Relating

to the Property, Affairs or Government of the City or of Any County Within the City.

The Special Committee to Investigate any and all Matters Relating to the Property, Affairs or Government of the City or of any County Within the City, respectfully recom-mends the adoption of the annexed Report.

WALTER R. HART, ADAM CLAYTON POWELL (whose signature was affixed to that phase of the report affecting the Sanitation Department only), LOUIS COHEN, JOHN P. NUGENT, WM. N. CONRAD, FREDERICK SCHICK, JOHN M. CHRISTENSEN, Special Committee to Investigate any and all Matters Relating to the Property, Affairs or Government of the City, or of any County Within the City. REPORT OF THE SPECIAL COMMITEE TO INVESTIGATE ANY AND ALL MATTERS RELATING TO

THE PROPERTY, AFFAIRS OR GOVERNMENT OF THE CITY OR OF ANY COUNTY WITHIN THE CITY.

To the Council of The City of New York: Your Committee, appointed pursuant to resolutions adopted on the 16th and 24th days

of June, 1943, and directed to Investigate any and all matters relating to the property, affairs or government of the City or of any county within the City, respectfully submits the following report:

The members of the committee were appointed as follows: WALTER R. HART, LOUIS COHEN, ADAM CLAYTON POWELL, JR.,

FREDERICK SCHICK, JOHN M. CHRISTENSEN, WILLIAM N. CONRAD, JOHN P. NUGENT; Ex-officio; JOSEPH T. SHARKEY, Vice-Chairman; MRS. GENEVIEVE B. EARLE, Minority Leader.

The Committee organized on June 16, 1943, by electing Mr. Hart as its Chairman and Mr. Cohen as its Vice-Chairman and authorized the Chairman to act as counsel to the Committee and Mr. Cohen to function as Acting Chairman.

The Committee adopted rules permitting the Chairman or any other member of the Committee designated by the Chairman to act as a sub-Committee for the purpose of holding private hearings.

On August 12, 1943, the Board of Estimate appropriated the sum of $40,000 for the expenses of this committee.

On August 1, 1943, the Committee leased headquarters at 70 Wall Street, in the Borough of Manhattan, New Ycrk City, and has continued to conduct its affairs at said office. The $40,000 appropriation included rent, electric, telephone, stenographer's minutes, Office supplies, subpoena fees and other contingencies in addition to the salaries of stenogra-phers, clerks, investigators, accountants and associate counsel to the Committee.

Of this sum, there has been expended approximately $30,000, leaving a balance remain-ing in the City treasury of approximately $10,000. An itemization of the expenditures of the Committee is hereto annexed and marked Exhibit "A."

The following constitute the staff and personnel of the Committee: Associate Counsel : Abraham J. Multer, Chief Assistant Counsel ; Samuel T. Baker,

Saul Steinlauf, Michael A. Buonora. Investigators: William F. Seery, Chief Investigators; Nathan Lubin, Alvin F. Klein,

Joseph Stern.

Accountants : Maurice I. Rappaport, Myer Bernstein. Chief Clerk, Edythe K. Weinstein, Two Stenographers. Two Clerks. The Committee desires to express its sincere appreciation of the wholehearted coopera-

tion given to it by its counsel and other employees. They worked energetically and on many occasions, until the early hours of the morning.

SCHEDULE "A"

Itcnni7ation of Expenditures of the Commit tee Salaries-Tcluporary Employees-

Title Period of Service Amount

Assistant Counsel ...................... . . July 1, 1943 to Dec. 31, 1943 $3,750 00 Assistant Counsel ......................... Aug. 16, 1943 to Dec. 31, 1943 1,874 97 :\ssistant Counsel ........................ Sept. 1, 1943 to Dec. 31, 1943 1,666 64 Chief Investigator ....................... Aug. 2, 1943 to Dec. 31, 1943 2,897 78 Attorney (Investigator) ................. July 1, 1943 to Dec. 31, 1943 2,499 96

MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943 THE CITY RECORD 4681

Title Period of Service Amour.

Investigator ............................. Sept. 16, 1943 to Dec. 31, 1943 1,020 8 Investigator ............................. Sept. 22, 1943 to Dec. 31, 1943 962 4 Investigator ............................. Sept. 1, 1943 to Dec. 31, 1943 1,000 0 Accountant .............................. July 15, 1943 to Dec. 31, 1943 2,311 7 Accountant .............................. Sept. 27, 1943 to Dec. 31, 1943 1,305 4 Accountant .............................. Aug. 2, 1943 to Sept. 15, 1943 489 2 Chief Clerk ............................. July 1, 1943 to Dec. 31, 1943 1,999 9 Clerk ................................... Aug. 3, 1943 to Sept. 15, 1943 239 2 Clerk ................................... Aug. 16, 1943 to Aug. 23, 1943 33 8 Clerk ................................... Aug. 4, 1943 to Dec. 31, 1943 933 8 Clerk ..... ..............................Aug. 9, 1943 to Dec. 31, 1943 906 9, Stenographer ............................ Sept. 16, 1943 to Dec. 16, 1943 499 9~ Stenographer ............................ Sept. 16, 1943 to Dec. 16, 1943 499 91

Total paid as salaries to employees .....................:.... $24,892 8( Stenographer Fees (including minutes)-

For reporting services from June 18, 1943 to December 31, 1943.......... $2,687 0( Rent-

For premises occupied by committee at 70 Wall Street, New York City, from August 1, 1943 to December 31, 1943 ............................ $1,500 Of

Office Supplies- Total expended ....................................................... $248 6(

Contingencies General- Office electric ......................................................... $148 2S Petty cash (postage, carfares, outside telephone calls, supper money for

overtime work, etc.) ................................................... 280 8f Mimeographing, photostating, photo-offset service ........................ 133 2C Service of subpoenas, witnesses' fees ..................................... 56 6S Servicing of office equipment, towels, etc ................................. 43 47

Total expended ........................................... *$662 51 Telephone-

Service supplied at committee offiices .................................... **$313 69

difficulty of eliciting information from a witness concerning his superior under conditions where the witness knows that he would have to report to his superior the nature of the testimohy given.

As each witness reported back to his superior, the superior, in turn, reported to the Mayor, and, in many instances, while this Committees' investigation was still in progress, the Mayor issued press releases advising the public (and incidentally the persons being investigated) of the matters being investigated at private hearings of this Committee.

All of these acts on the part of the Mayor were designed to frustrate the work of this Committee.

After public hearings were held by this 'Committee and in some instances while private hearings concerning certain matters were still being held, the Mayor would call upon the Commissioner of Investigation to conduct an investigation into the same matters.

Despite these tactics on the part of the Administration and the refusal of he Admin-istration to permit a portion of the moneys appropriated for the work of the Cotn-mittee to be used for the hiring of accountants on a fee basis, this Committee, during its existence, conducted its investigations into various departments of The City of New York. Of necessity, these investigations only scratched the surface but revealed waste, extravagance, conversion of City property, irregularities;" inefficiency and violations of the Charter by and with the approval of the various heads of the departments, including the Mayor himself.

The departments investigated and the findings of the Committee are hereinafter set forth.

DEPARTMIENT OF EDUCATION

The Committee started an investigation of the affairs of the Board of Education. Numerous articles had appeared in the daily press concerning the Mayor's exercise of domination and control over the educational system in this City.

Due to the fact that the National Education Association almost simultaneously announced that it was going to investigate this matter, the Committee did not continue with its investigation.

The Committee, however, did call before it certain members of 'the Board of Education.

George H. Chatfield, called as a witness, testified that he was a member of the Board of Education. That although he lived in Spuyten Duyvil, he was appointed a member, of the Board for the Borough of Queens. It is provided by law that a member of the Board must live in the Borough for which he is appointed.

This legal requirement was overcome after Mr. Chatfield had a conversation with the Mayor. Mr. Chatfield testified as follows:

"Q. You gave your address as the Hotel Whitman in Jamaica. How long have you resided there?. A. Since the 4th of April.

Q. When were you appointed as a member of the Board of Education? A. I would say the 4th or the 5th. I think it is the 5th, but I wouldn't swear to it.

Q. And prior to that, were you a resident of Queens County? A. No. Q. Did you move to Queens County for the purpose of becoming eligible for

this position? A. Yes. Q. Had you consulted with the Mayor prior to that time? A. Certainly. Q. Had the Mayor advised you, in order to receive the appointment, you must

be-? A. A resident of Queens,-yes.

Q. You know the reason why members are required to be appointed from the various boroughs is to have a Board which is composed of members who are familiar with the problems of the people and the educational system in the various boroughs by virtue of their residence? A. Well, there must be some reason for it.

Q. Well, where have you resided prior to April 4th? A. I resided in Spuyten Duyvil." That this appointee was dominated and controlled by the Mayor, not only with

respect to his selection of a residence, but also with respect to his decisions on matters pending before the Board of Education, is apparent from his testimony.

At the time the Board was considering the ouster of Theodore Fred Kuper, Law Secretary to the Board of Education, Chatfield discussed the mater with the Mayor as appears from his following testimony:

"Q. And you talked to the Mayor about this particular matter, have you not? A. Yes.

Q. And the Mayor expressed his opinion, did he not? A. I guess he has. Q. And the Mayor expressed his opinion that the position should be abolished,

is that not so? A. He had already abolished it. Q. When you spoke to the Mayor about Kuper's job-- A. (Interrupting)

I have seen the Mayor a number of times on educational business, and he brought up the question of Kuper.

Total expended against appropriation ........................ $30,304 6(

* This figure does not include final electric bill or bill for the cost of mimeographing and printing this report, which cannot be anticipated at this time.

** This figure does not include final telephone bills which have not as yet beer rendered by the telephone company.

It has heretofore been noted that the expenses of this Committee are slightly it excess of $30,000.

It is pointed out that due to the action of this Committee, there has been or will be returned to the Treasury of the City:

1. The sum of $196,000 from the Welfare Relief Fund of the Department of Sanitation. The Committee's report on this subject shows that the amount which should be

recovered in this matter is in excess of $3,000,000.

This money was paid as a result of the investigation by this Committee. The testimony of Henry Varay, the accountant in charge of the books of the Welfare Fund, is to the effect that there was no item on the books of the Welfare Fund showing a liability to the City for the City property which was misappropriated or the City labor used on Camp Sancta.

We also have the testimony of the Comptroller, the Acting Corporation Counsel and Commissioner Carey that the resolution providing for the repayment of this money was drafted after a conference between the Mayor, the Comptroller, the Acting Cor-poration 'Counsel and Commissioner 'Carey. This conference was hurriedly called the day after Commissioner Carey was questioned by this Committee.

2. There should also be recovered from Wilson & Company payments made by the City in excess of the ceiling prices for the purchase of beef under a so-called "custom slaughtering plan." These over-ceiling payments amounted to approxi-mately $80,000 up to September, 1943.

3. There should be recovered from A. Carobine, Inc., the monies paid to that concern as "commission" for the purchase of vegetables for the City. The payment of these commissions finds no sanction in law.

4. Action should be started to recover from William H. Anderson, so-called "expert appraiser" hired by the City, to determine the amount due to the City as a result of his fraudulently padding his payrolls. Anderson received from the City over a period of seven years the sum of $231,191. In addition to these recoveries and prospective recoveries of money by the City,

the Committee has caused to be stopped the release of infectious prostitutes from the Kingston Avenue Hospital. This fact was testified to by Commissioner Stebbins at a public hearing.

As a result of the investigation by this Committee, no public official has been removed from office. This, however, should not be construed as a reflection upon the Committee. The Committee has the power to investigate and bring out the facts. The Mayor alone has the power to remove. At least two heads of departments have admit-tedly violated provisions of the City Charter for which they are subject to removal; one of them openly boasting that "the Charter should be made to fit the man"; the other, proclaiming at a public hearing, "I handle billions of dollars ; I can't be bothered with a picayune thing'' like the use of a City automobile.

In addition thereto, it was established to the satisfaction of the Mayor that prac-tically every Food Inspector, including the Chief Food Inspector of the Comptroller's Office, was a "petty chiseler." Although the Mayor recommended summary action be taken against these "small fry" and specified that they should be removed from office or placed in less important positions, with respect to the two heads of departments, he simply ordered the usual investigation be made by his Commissioner of Investigation. Even in the case of the "small fry" Inspectors, the Comptroller refused to take action because of the "labor shortage."

Included in those condemned by the Mayor as "petty chiselers" as a result of the revelations by thisCommittee, was Chief Food Buyer George J. Basso of the Depart-ment of Purchase, and Chief Food Inspector Edward J. Hetherington of the Comp-troller's Office.

It is again emphasized that this report is made at the conclusion of five months of investigation with an expenditure of approximately $30,000.

No legislative or other investigation operated within such a short period of time or with such limited funds. A large part of the time of this Committee was consumed by the obstructive tactics of the Mayor and his subordinates, including counter-charges and counter-investigations.

A comparison of time and money spent is afforded by the following: Councilmanic Investigating Committee: Time consumed, five (5) months; amount

expended, approximately $30,000. Hiram C. Todd Investigations: Time consumed, five (5) years; amount expended,

$527,764.46. John Harlan .Amen Investigation: Time consumed, approximately 3/ years; amount

expended, $1,119,546.77. COOPERATION OF THE MAYOR

Due to the fact that the appropriation for this Committee was not made until August 12, 1943, it was actively engaged in the conduct of this investigation for a period of less than five months.

Immediately upon the appointment of the Committee, the Mayor issued a statement to the press to the effect that he would `cooperate" to the fullest extent.

On the same day, orders were sent to every Police Precinct throughout the City requiri.~g every member of the Police Department who was subpoenaed' by this Com-mittee to report to his superior the nature of the questions asked and the answers given.

W'e have the testimony of the Comptroller and the heads of other departments that the Mayor had instructed all heads of departments to immediately report to him in the event they were subpoenaed. Each head of a department who testified before the Committee stated that lie had issued orders to all employees in his department who were called before this Committee to report hack the nature of the questions asked and the answers given.

It became increasingly evident as the private hearings progressed that the witnesses

called before the Committee were mindful of the fact that they would have to report back, to their superiors the nature of their testimony. This Council can appreciate the

Q. When you say that he brought up the question of Kuper, just what did he say with respect to Kuper ? A. I don't remember all the details.

Q. Substantially? A. Well, substantially, he thought Mr. Kuper should not continue to be a law secretary.

Q. Did he give any reason for it? A. I don't think he likes the man. I don't know what else.

Q. Did that influence your vote? A. I can't,- I don't think that that really influenced my vote. I have been trying to go over this question in my own mind, and I think that I would have, in view of the circumstances here, the position was abolished. That is clear, isn't it?

Q, Suppose the Mayor had said that he was in favor of continuing the position, would your vote have been influenced? A. Maybe I would have voted against its continuance, just the same. It is a question of what you think." Joseph Diehl Kackenthal, another member of the Board of Education, was questioned

by the Committee. He testified that he believed Mr. Kuper's position was necessary for the proper conduct of the affairs of the Department. That Kuper had performed his duties conscientiously and had demonstrated ability in the performance of his duties. He further testified, "I think that the position should, on no account, be abolished. And so far as I have any personal knowledge, there is no reason why he should be removed

from it." Fackenthal, likewise, testified that in the event of a dispute between the Mayor and

the Board of Education, the Board would be without legal representation if Kuper's position were abolished. A short time thereafter, the Board voted to abolish Kuper's position.

In view of the fact that the affairs of the Board of Education have been discussed at a Public Hearing held by the National Education Association, the Committee recom-mends that the Council await and study the report of that Body when made public.

COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE

Violations of Law in Connection with the Fixing of Fees of Real Estate Experts in Condemnation Proceedings.

The law permits the City to take private land for public purposes under the theory of "Eminent Domain". However, the City must pay the owners the fair and reasonable value of the property so taken. "Condemnation Proceedings" is the legal term for the manner by which the land is taken and its value determined. During the course of the condemnation proceedings, proof of the value of the land and improvement thereon is

presented to the court by both the City and the owner. Property may be taken by the City for two purposes: 1. Capital projects, for the physical betterment of improvement of the governmental

services. In this category, are firehouses, hospitals, and other City buildings. 2. Assessable improvements, for the public betterment or improvement of the City

generally and particularly for the owners of land immediately adjacent to the improve-

ment, In this class, we have street openings, parks, bridges and tunnels within the City, and sewers.

Payments for Capital Projects are made from the City Treasury directly, whereas, the cost of the other class of proceedings, including the land as well as the cost of proceeding, is charged or assessed to the owners of the land lying in the area theoretically benefited by the improvement.

In all of these proceedings, the City hires real estate experts who testify in court as to the value of the land condemned as well as the value of the improvements and

buildings upon such land, so that the cost of same can be fixed by the court. These experts are not salaried employees, but are paid on a fee basis. They submit

bills for their time, materials, payroll and other items which comprise the essential

4682 THE CITY RECORD MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

"Q. At any rate, you have been designated and set aside for the purpose of making a pre-audit, isn't that so? A. I would say yes.

Q. In cases where it is submitted to the court and the court fixes the reason-ableness of the fee, then the action of your department is entirely perfunctory, is it not? A. Well, I have considered that it might be, at times.

Q. In other words, it is an idle gesture? A. An idle gesture." Dougherty testified at the private hearing that he made a complaint to his superiors

concerning this matter. He stated, "I conferred with Mr. Smith at that time stating that the procedure was not according to the Charter * * * " Also, "I think it was on three different occasions where I wrote memorandums to Mr. Smith stating that I thought the proceedings were wrong" but Col. McDermott said, "it wouldn't be good form or politic on the part of our department" to insist upon a pre-audit as required by the Charter.

Thus we have the situation of appraisers' bills being submitted to the Court by the Corporation Counsel without a pre-audit as required by the Charter.

As will hereinafter be demonstrated, the bills for appraisers' services run into hundreds of thousands of dollars each year.

The testimony of Dougherty was corroborated by Harold F. Traband, Chief Engineer in the Comptroller's office. He, likewise, testified that it was the duty of the Comptroller's office to make a pre-audit in Capital Project proceedings. That he, likewise, had com-plained to his superiors concerning the submission of appraisers' bills to the Court before the Comptroller had made a, pre-audit. His testimony follows :

"Q. As a matter of fact you have complained about this situation, haven't you? A. Verbally, yes.

Q. What was your complaint? A. Well, our complaint is that after the court fixes the charge on the bill, and then we audit it, it seems as if perhaps he has exceeded his authority." He further testified that in the cases where the Comptroller's office does examine

the bills of the experts, they do not place them under oath because "We have never taken the attitude that these men were not giving us the proper information. We had no reason to believe they were telling us an untruth."

In other words, the experts who presented the bills were not required by the Comptroller's office to swear that the bills were true and accurate, Nor were the bills presented accompanied by an affidavit in spite of the fact that the Administrative Code requires that "proof by affidavit shall also be given of the dates of rendering service." On this point, Traband testified as follows:

"Q. Did you ever get an affidavit of the dates of rendering services? A. I don't believe my men have." An examination of hundreds of hills of appraisers reveals the startling fact that very

few of them give "the dates of rendering services" as required by law. Nevertheless, they were passed upon and approved by both the Corporation Counsel and the Comptroller.

Edward J. Smith, Chief Auditor of Accounts of the Comptroller's Office, testifiedf as follows:

d "Q. Are these bills pre-audited, as you term it, prior to the taxation of costs? ). A. They are required to be pre-audited prior to the taxation of costs by the court,

but in the past seven years or so when such bills are presented to us they bear a 0. pre-approval by the Supreme Court Judge before whom the proceeding was tried." m * * * 1- "Q. As a matter of fact, you have objected to that procedure, haven't you? S. A. Well, I have pointed out that the approval by the judge of these bills in advance

of our pre-audit was not strictly in accordance with law * * *" h 'e "Q. However, you will agree, won't you, that the Comptroller's Office, with h expert auditors some of whom have been doing this work for many years, is in a ;- better position to give guidance to the court than the court is to give guidance to

the Comptroller? A. I would rather have it that way. y Q. That is the law, isn't it? A. That is the law. V Q• And the law is being violated. A. That is right."

The total amount of fees paid to "experts" by the City from 1935 to 1942 was in ll excess of $1,946,050.95 as appears from Schedule "B" annexed. n LAW DEPARTMENT - Violations of Law in Fixing Fees of Appraisers in Condemnation Proceedings. i It has heretofore been stated that Associate Assistant Corporation Counsel, Antonio I Calitri, was in charge of the audit of bills of appraisers in condemnation proceedings.

It is provided by section B15-27.0 of the Administrative Code that proof by affidavit shall be given of the dates of rendering services by the real estate experts. An examina-tion of these bills by the Committee reveals the fact that a very small percentage of the experts employed by the City complied with this provision of law. Many of the bills

I merely set forth a general statement of services alleged to have been rendered without specific dates or without specifying the work done on any particular date. This was in

I violation of the above provision of the Administrative Code. t It can readily be seen that it would be impossible to audit these bills without knowing r the dates and the amount of time claimed to have been spent by the experts on behalf of

the City. The only explanation that Calitri offered was that he had examined the

I worksheets submitted by the different experts.

Calitri's testimony reads as follows: "Q. One of the elements which you take into consideration in fixing the bill

of an expert is his expense and overhead which he has? Isn't that so? A. That is right.

Q. And in his expense and overhead is included his staff of employees, and so forth? A. That is considered.

"Q. Yes. After the time sheets were brought in, you examined them for the purpose of ascertaining what people were working for Anderson on that particular proceeding, and what he was paying them? Isn't that so? A. That is right.

Q. You were asked this question before the Committee, were you not: "Q. Did you ever make any check to 'see whether or not any of the persons

mentioned on any of these time sheets brought in by any of the experts were actually receiving compensation?

"A. After all, if he brings in his time sheets, you are not going to say, 'I don't believe you.'"

Q. Was that your answer? A. If it is in there, I must have said that, yes."

"Q. All right. So when Anderson brought in his time sheets showing the various men he employed, you were not going to say, "I don't believe you Is that right? A. All right, that is right.

"Q. But if the time sheets were incorrect, then the fee would't be reasonable? Isn't that so? A. Well, if the time sheets were incorrect, his fee would not be reasonable."

"Q. And the City would consequently be defrauded of money to the extent that the time sheets were incorrect? A. Well, yes, I guess so." Calitri's testimony in answer to the question as to whether he checked to see

whether the expert really employed the persons specified in his bills and for whose services he was charging the City, is hereinabove set forth as follows:

"A. After all, if he brings in his time sheets you are not going to say, 'I don't believe you."' The Council is again reminded of the fact that hundreds of thousands of dollars

are paid out to appraisers each year. If the one charged with the examination of their bills, does not require compliance with the provisions of the law to the effect that all bills must contain an itemization of the work doneon specific dates and is so sensitive of the feelings of those who present the bills that they do not want to check for fear that they might -hurt someone's feelings, fraud can easily be practiced.

The Committee, due to limitations of time could not make a thorough exploration of this field.

It does appear, however, that the appraiser who received the greatest number of assignments and the largest 'sums out of the City Treasury, was William H. Anderson. From 1935-1942, he received the sum of $231,191 for "expert" services rendered to the City.

On July 29, 1943, Calitri, testifying at a private hearing before this Committee, stated that Anderson "was an outstanding expert, a reputable and honest man." At the very moment that Calitri was testifying, the same Anderson was being sentenced in the Federal Court in Brooklyn to one year and one day in the Federal Penitentiary. He had pleaded guilty to an indictment for income tax evasion. The indictment was filed on the 18th day of February, 1943. So lax was the Law Department that on March 13, 1943, less than a month after his indictment, Anderson was again appointed by the Corporation Counsel as an expert in connection with a condemnation proceeding involv-ing property for a school site.

The records of the Federal Court show that Anderson's tax frauds related solely to his fees earned as an expert for The City of New York. The frauds consisted of carrying on his payroll the names of 12 persons who were never employed by him. Some of these persons were non-existent; others were mere school boys. The probation report of the Federal Court discloses the fact that Anderson stated that the reason why he padded his payrolls was to justify the bills which he submitted to the City for appraisals.

At the public hearing, Arthur D. McEntee testified that he was an accountant in charge of Anderson's books. That he had been indicted with Anderson. That he had assisted Anderson in the padding of the payrolls. Anderson's reasoning for padding the payrolls also appear from McEntee's testimony.

"Q. What did he tell you in connection with the payroll? A. That he had built it up for the purpose of making it appear greater, in order to justify his work as an appraiser."

"Q. What did he tell you the reason for padding his payroll was? A. One reason, he said, was in order to make his overhead appear greater than it really was, in order to justify his charges taxed in appraisals.

Q. Appraisals for whom? A. The City of New York." It will be remembered that Calitri testified that he did not check Anderson's pay-

rolls (or any other experts) because he was not going to say to them, "I don't believe you." Had Calitri checked Anderson's records and not been so sensitive about the feelings of the experts employed by the City, these padded payrolls would have been discovered and the City would not have been defrauded.

The Law Department, at great expense, has accumulated records of sales of real estate in various sections of the City. It is provided in the rules of the Corporation Counsel's Office, that no expert shall charge for gathering sales data. The reason for this rule is apparent. The Law Department supplies the expert with the sales data and therefore, that charge for gathering sales data would be improper. Nevertheless, there are scores of instances where charges have been made by experts for "gathering sales data" and the bills have been paid by the City.

In a large number of the cases where experts are employed, their testimony simply consists of giving an opinion as to the value of the property condemned, In most of these cases, the expert bases his op}'nion upon sales of similar property in the same neighborhood. In these cases, no work is done by the "expert" except to obtain the sales data from the Law Department and testify therefrom in court.

It is submitted that the services of an outside expert in these proceedings are un-necessary. The average Deputy Assessor of Taxes regularly employed by the City on a yearly salary, could be called in to give this testimony.

elements of the value of their services. The approximate number of experts so employ by the City for the period running from 1935 to the end of 1942 was ninety-three (93

The pertinent section of the Administrative Code which is applicable to these pr ceedings is entitled, "Taxation of Costs, Charges and Expenses," known as B15-27. This section of the Administrative Code sets forth the law under which the Corporati( Counsel's Office and the Comptroller's Office are to be guided in ascertaining the reaso, ableness of the bills rendered by these experts and the manner of the auditing of these bill

It reads as follows: B15-27.0. Taxation of Costs, Charges and Expenses— "a. The bill of the reasonable and necessary cost, charges- and expenses whic

by law are required to be taxed shall not be paid or allowed until they shall ha` been taxed by the court after notice given as in this section provided. Upon suc taxation, due proof of the nature and extent of the services rendered and the di bursements charged shall be furnished, and no unnecessary costs or charges shall I allowed. All items in the bill shall be stated in detail and shall be accompanied I such proof of the reasonableness thereof and the necessities therefor, as is no, required by law and the practice of the court upon taxation of costs and disburs( ments in other special proceedings or actions in such court. Proof by affidavit sha also be given of the dates of rendering services. No such claim for compensation, i the case of a Capital Project proceeding, shall be allowed or paid unless it be aecon panied by a certificate of the Comptroller setting forth that the same has bee audited and examined, and further certifying the results of such audit and examina tion. In case of an assessable improvement proceeding, the Corporation Couns( shall present to the justice or referee, by whom the bill shall be taxed, upon suc taxation, his certificate in writing that the items of the bill have been audited an examined by him, and also setting forth the result of such audit and examinatiol Such certificates shall be presumptive evidence of the correctness, reasonableness an necessity of such bill.

b. In the case of an assessable improvement proceeding, the bill shall be file in the office of the Clerk of the County in which the order granting the applicatio to condemn was entered at least ten days before the same shall be presented fo taxation. A notice by advertisement shall be published for ten days in THE CiT• RECORD, and a copy of such notice served upon the Corporation Counsel, of the time and place of taxing such costs, charges and expenses, which shall be thereupon taxer by a Justice of the Supreme Court, or a referee under his special order. On th taxation of the final bill of costs there may be a retaxation of any bill previousl; taxed in the same proceeding, if sufficient reason therefore be made to appear.

c. In the case of a Capital Project Proceeding, the Corporation Counsel shal be given five days' notice of the taxation of the bill of costs, charges and expenses

d. Property owners appearing in the proceedings shall not be entitled to recove, counsel fees, costs, disbursements for allowance." It will be noted that the law requires a pre-audit by the Comptroller's office in the

case of Capital Project proceedings. This means that the Comptroller is required by lay to audit the bills of these appraisers before submission to the court. The purpose o this is to guide the Supreme Court Justice in fixing the fees of these experts.

For the past seven years, this provision of law has been disregarded. Associate Assistant Corporation Counsel Antonio Calitri, in disregard of the aforesaid provision: of the Charter, took it upon himself to present these bills to the Supreme Court for approval before they had been pre-audited by the Comptroller's office.

This appears from the testimony of Thomas J. Dougherty, Auditor of Accounts ir the office of the Comptroller of The City of New York. Dougherty testified that he has been in the Comptroller's office for thirty-nine years.

He further testified that under the aforesaid provisions of law, it was the duty of the Comptroller's office to pre-audit these bills of appraisers before submission to the court. That the purpose of the pre-audit was to guide the court in fixing the fees of these experts.

He further testified, "We are supposed to make an investigation as to the reason-ableness of the bill, and determine the just amount".

The following questions were asked of Dougherty and the following answers given "Q. As a matter of fact, your audit is for the guidance of the court in 'fixing

the reasonableness of the fee, is it not? A. So I interpret the Charter. Q. Is it for the information of the Supreme Court Justice, who couldn't go

around and do all the things you have to do? A. That is my interpretation. Q. And that is why they have a Comptroller's office, in order to determine upon

such a pre-audit of the bill whether it is reasonable and just, and then certify to the court that the bill in a certain amount is reasonable or unreasonable, as the case may be? A. I believe that was the intention of the Legislature at the time they enacted the law.

Q. That is what it says, isn't it? A. Yes. Q. In 1937 and since 1937 did you testify before the Committee that Mr.

Calitri of the New York office of the Corporation Counsel has taken it upon himself to take these bills over to the court before they come to the Comptroller's office? A. Only in the Second Department."

"Q. Is it not a fact that since 1937 the Corporation Counsel's office has pre-sented bills to the Supreme Court in capital cases before they come to your office for a pre-audit? A. Yes, * * *"

Q. And is it not a fact that the bills have gone to your office with the approval of the court, rather than bills going from your office to the court with the approval of your office? A. That has been the procedure that has taken place since that period, on these bills that emanate from Brooklyn."

MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943 THE CITY RECORD 4683

Since these disclosures, no action has been reported on the part of the Law (2) That he stop the practice of submitting appraisers bills to the court before the Department or the Comptroller's Office, which would indicate that the abuses herein- Comptroller pre-audits same. before referred to, have been corrected; nor has there been any report of the Comp- (3) That he instruct his subordinates to be less sensitive about the feelings of those troller or the Law Department indicating that action has been taken against Anderson submitting bills to the City, and instruct such subordinates to require full compliance to recover monies paid to him by the City on the basis of his padded payrolls. with the law.

In view of the fact that Anderson received $231,191 from the City during the (4) That the Comptroller's Office refuse to pass upon any bills which have been period he was padding his payroll, it is believed that the amount which might be approved by the court without a pre-audit by the Comptroller. recovered by the City, would be in excess of the $30,000 spent by this Committee dur- ing its entire investigation.

(51 That both the Law Department and the Comptroller's Office take testimony

The Committee recommends : under oath, of the experts submitting bills to the City, as to the accuracy of the items

(1) That the Corporation Counsel instruct his subordinates to comply with the set forth therein. provisions of the Administrative Code and require itemization of all bills submitted by (6) That the Corporation Counsel take action to recover any monies due to the experts to the City. City from William H. Anderson as a result of the padding of payrolls by said Anderson.

SCHEDULE B-PARTIAL SCHEDULES OF FEES PAID To CITY EXPERTS FROM 1935 TO 1942, INCLUSIVE

Individual Expert 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 Totals

2 William E. Anderson ................. $3,753 00 $36,266 50 $27,711 00 $40,947 00 $73,350 00 $15,552 00 $12,837 50 $20,774 00 $231,191 00 3 Henry Brady ........................ 3,000 00 39,183 12 19,775 00 12,050 00 15,525 00 21,100 00 15,265 00 20,850 00 146,748 12

86 Ira L. Terry ........................ 43,094 83 48,150 92 40,882 60 1,417 12 ..... .. 43,627 00

........

........ ..... .. 9,925 00 7,450 00

133,545 47 115,137 00 20 Edward M. Twohig ........ . ...... ........ 3,400 00 31,755 00 18,980 00

00 00 I Edward A. Arnold ................... 19,140 00 22,285 00 ... I .... 24,350 16,350 10,050 00 1,100 00 15,850 00 109,125 00 4 Charles Buckbee ..................... 3,890 00 150 00 14,400 00 13,350 00 11,800 00 23,700 00 10,200 00 8,350 00 85,840 00

16 Charles Partridge ................... 6,474 99 18,657 50 11,440 00 7,375 00 3,250 00 1,500 00 17,000 00 15,100 00 80,797 49 57 F. Lester Courts ..................... .. . 14,817 98 20,775 30 8,127 91

50 ..... .. 29,815 46 3,234 54 ..... .. 76,771 19

7 Samuel H. Cohen .................... I....... ........ 2,250 00 10,120 17,177 50 12,980 13 13,909 20 6,817 70 63,255 04 9 Francis Frank ....................... .. .... ........ 19,300 00 ........ 12,875 00 23,700 00 55,875 00

17 James C. Sheridan ................... 150 00 37,625 00 12,540 00 ........ ........ ....• .. ........ ........ 50,315 00 8 Raymond F. Druhan ................. 350 00 21,430 00 21,400 00 4,300 00 .. ...

... I .... 1,200 00 2,050 00

....... 5,375 00

..... .. 8,700 00

48,680 00 44,358 50 14 William B. Morrissey ................ 1,852 39: 20,881 11 5,500 00 ......

52 Albert W. Reimels .................... .. .. .... 38,702 20 90 71 5.200 00

...... 12,780 00

.. 19,705 00

.. .. . 175 00

5,435 63 ........

44,228 54 42,510 00 30 Henry Waltemade ................... 150 00 1,500 00 3,000 00 42,125 00 74 James B. Fisher ..................... .. 2,500 00 ........ 16,175 00 6,000 00 1,050 00 11,200 00 5,200 00

48 Louis J. Land ....................... 500 00 3,250 00 7,615 00 10,400 00 3,392 50 2,972 07 4,837 00 7,600 00 40,566 57 78 Robert E. Hower .................... 1,800 00 5,300 00 4,870 00 8,175 00 6,550 00 3,500 00 7,000 00 1,000 00 38,1 95 00 46 William B. Kennedy, Jr ............... ...... ........ ....... ........ 9,732 00 23,500 00 33.232 00 26 John H. Morris ...................... 500 00 ........ 6,000 00 5,750 00 16,560 00 ........ 1,650 00 567 55 31.027 55 34 Alfred N. Warwick .................. 7,098 58 9,765 99 9,197 73 1,540 57 1,331 56 ........ .... .... 28,934 43 12 Louis E. Isnardi ..................... ........ ........ 1,636 38 6,736 92 1.378 54 6,500 00 6,250 00 5,100 00 27,601 84

5 Herbert Callman ..................... ........ ........ ........ ........ 6,950 00 10,400 00 8,175 00 1,950 00 27.475 00 73 Robert W. Firth ..................... ........ ......., . ••• •• 10,050 00 11,955 74 5,250 00 ........ 27,255 74 10 Edward A. Gehan ................... I....... ........ 3,700 00 5,500 00 2,500 00 13,075 00 ........ ........ 24.775 00 65 Joseph F. Kennelly ................... ........ ........ ........ 21,500 00 ....... ....... ....... .... 21.500 00 77 Guida & Sons Bldg. Corp ............. ........ ........ ....... 975 00 3,575 00 9,250 00 5,240 00 19.00 00 87 Moran, Proctor & Freeman........... ........ ........ ........ 7,200 00 11,600 00 ........ 18.800 00 13 Jacque H. Morris .................... ........ ........ 9,518 35 5,900 00 15.418 35 11 Albert B. Hager ..................... ........ ........ ........ 13,500 00 ....... ........ 1,000 00 .. 14.500 00 47 Michael Grimaldi ........ . .... . . ... ........ ........ 19 94 1,250 00 ........ 7,000 00 3,560 00 11.829 94 53 Fred B. Snow ....................... ........ ........ ........ 4,000 00 2,000 00 a ....... 5,500 00 ....... 11.5nf1 00 81 Joseph A. Ledogar ................... ........ ........ ........ ........ 4,500 00 6,700 00 11.200 00

15 Josenh N. Neef ...................... , ....... ........ 4,365 00 .. • . 1,350 00 800 00 1,000 00 3,500 00 11.015 00 21 William Vosborough 2,825 00 .. • • • • • • 2,000 00 .... .. 2,400 00 3,775 00 11.000 00 40 Joseph W. Catherine ................. 850 00 ...... ....••.. .•.•. .• 1,200 00 ........ 8,500 00 10.550 00

6 James B. Clark ...................... ........ ........ 980 00 ........ 9,000 00 ........ 9,980 00 71 Coverdale & Cowpitts .. ...... ........ ........ ........ ..... ........ 4,186 11 5,308 50

694 51 • 9,404 61

9,298 84 54 Stone & Webster Engineering Co...... ........ ........ ........ 4,315 40 ..... .. ... .. 5,188 93 55 Edward De V. Tompkins ............. .... I ... ........ ........ 5,750 00 1,100 00 350 00 850 00 ........ 8.050 00

50 Charles A. O'Malley ................. ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ 3,450 00 4,000 00 ........ 7.450 00 29 George Remsen ...' ................... ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ 7,253 15 ....... 7.25.3 15 80 Samuel Jackson ...................... ........ ........ 5,282 84 1,845 00 7.191 R4 37 Joseph G. Bassman ..........I........ ........ ..... .. ........ 3,400 0,0 550 00 2,675 00 ....... 6.625 00 36 John L. Buckley ..................... 250 00 470 00 250 00 160 00 ........ 1,465 00 1,655 00 1,435 00 5.6RS 00 56 R. E. Devivo ........................ ........ ........ 1,750 00 2,750 00 900 00 ..... .. ... .. ........ 5 Anti 00 70 Irving Lee Bloch .................... ........ 1,600 00 ... 2,975 00 ........ 100 00

........ 500 00

..... . ........ ....I...

5,175 00 5,211 50 23 T. B. Lineburgh .... ................ ........ .. 3,450 00 1,761 50 ........

45 William R. Grace .................... 664 23 184 85 514 72 ... I .... 3,046 69 ........ 4,410 49

33 Carl H. Stengel ..................... ........ ........ 4,150 00 ..... .. ........ ... .. ........ ........ 4,150 00 68 M. L. Buell . ..................... ........ ...... . 2,300 00 300 00 1,200 00 ...... 3.900 00

58 Walter E. Corwin .................... ........ ......... ........ 3,700 00 ........ ........ ........ 3.700 00

62 George L. Freeman .................. ........ ........ 1,764 87 1,428 56 .. .. ........ . ..... .. ........ 3,193 43

32 Frank S. Parker ..................... ........ ........ ........ 150 00 ........ 3,000 00 ........ 3,150 00 31 J. C. Breckenridge ................... ........ ........ ........ 3,125 00 ...... ........ ...... ........ 3,1?. 00 93 A. V. Whitson ... ................... ....... ........ 3,036 00 ........ ........ ....... 3.016 00

83 Joseph H. O'Neill 3,000 00 3.000 00

51 Thomas F. Peterson .................. ........ ........ ........ ........ 2,041 00 ........ 500 00 ........ 2.541 00

91 Lincoln Iseide .................. ........ ........ ........ 2.500 00 ..... ........ ........ ........ 2.500 00

63 Est. of Victor Gellineau .............. ........ ........ 2,500 00 ........ .. ........ 2.500 00

49 Madigan & Hvlan .................... ........ ........ ........ ........ .. . ........ 2,000 00 ........ 2.000 00

24 25

Earl B. Lovell .................. Frederick R. Morris .................

........

........ ........ ........

........

........ ........ ........

1,825 00 1,500 00

........ ........ ........

........

........ 1,825 00 1.500 00

27 Samuel L. Norman ................ ........ ........ ... I .... ........ ........ 1,250 00 ........ 1.2M 00

82 Arthur Chas. Mandel ................ ........ ... .. ........ ........ ... ........ 1,000 00 ........ 1,000 00

69 Stenhen P. Belcher ................... ........ 705 00 75 00 ........ 25 00 ........ ........ ..

........ .......

808 0 800 00 39

41 Cvril H. Burdett ..................... John R. Crews .......................

........

........ ........ ........

........

........ ........ ......

800 00 ....

........

........ 800 00 ....... 800 00

90 John J. Rafferty ..................... ........ ........ ........ 165 32 600 00 1....... ........ ........ 765 32 89 Charles M. Mapes ................... ........ ........ ........ ........ 745 00 ........

........ ........ ........

..... 630 00

745 M 630 00 76

79 Leo Ganz ............. Abraham M. Greenblath ..............

.. 300 00

........

........ ........ ........

........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ 300 0

88 Henry C. Lamb ...................... ........ ........ ........ 300 00 ........ ........ ........

........ ........

... .. 300 00

300 00 300 00

75 85

Irving Frankel . ..................... Mortimer Steinfels . .................

........

........ ........ ....... ........

........ ........ .. . ........ ........ 250 00 250 00

92 Charles V. Stamford ................. ........ ........ ........ ........ 250 00 ........ ..

..... 200 00

........

........ 2c0 M 200 00 44

22 Philip Freshman ..................... Frank Fassler ......................

........ ........

........ ........

........ ........

........

.. ........ ........ 200 00 ........ ........ 200 00

64 Carter B. Harris ..................... ........ ........ ........ 150 00 ........ ...... ........ ......

ISO 00 130 00 43

35 Edwin B. Fisher ..................... Thomas H. Wiggins .................

........ ........

........ ........

........ ........

........ ........

........ ..... ..

130 00 ........

.. .. .. 25 00 25 00 50 00

60 Elsie Eaves ......................... ........ ........ ........ ........ 25 00 ........ ........ ........ 25 00

Yearly Totals ................ 92,303 79 $289,452 35 $310,547 71 $277,981 23 $313,294 10 $203,500 40 $230,363 47 $228,607 90

'.,p.Grand Total ............................................. (1.946.050 95

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS to his home and thereafter drive the car hack to the garage in Brooklyn. Some of these The Budget of this department discloses that there are seventy-seven (77) chauffeurs officials lived in outlying sections of the City.

employed in the Municipal Garage Service, over fifty (50) of whom receive $2,400 pei At the time this Committee subpoenaed chauffeurs of the Department. Commissioner year. The cost of this Municipal Garage Service is $225,060 for wages alone. Irving V. A. Huie, of the Department of Public Works, issued a statement to the press

Up to January 1, 1942, the records disclose that individual cars and chauffeurs were deploring the fact that "the Councilmanic Committee is wasting the time of these assigned to the Commissioners, Deputies and others in their departments. An examination chauffeurs who are being paid by the City." of the records concerning the use of these cars reveals that for the most part they were Uoon examination of Huie at a public hearing, the following facts were revealed: used in the following manner: The chauffeurs left the garage in Brooklyn in the That he is in charge of the Municinal Taxi Service. That he resides, with his family, morning, drove to the homes of the City officials in various Boroughs, picked them up in Douglaston, Long Island. That he had issued an order requiring the chauffeurs to and drove them to the Municipal Building. The chauffeurs then drove the cars back to report on the dins the destination of each nerson using a City automobile. the garage in Brooklyn where they remained "on call." Huie's cthauffeur testified that on Huie's slips all that was entered concerning the

Sometimes they received no call until the end of the day, at which time, a call came destination were the words "official business." in to return to the Municipal Building and take the official to his home. After this the Commissioner Huie further testified that a City-owned automobile onerated by a chauffeur returned to the Brooklyn garage. Some of the officials relieved the monotony City chauffeur called for him each morning at Douglaston, Long Island, picked him tip of the chauffeur "on call' by calling him at noontime to return from the garage in and drove him to the Municipal Building. The chauffeur then waited around all day at Brooklyn to the Municipal Building in Manhattan and drive the official to a restaurant the Brooklyn garage, called at the Municipal Building, and drove Commissioner Huie within walking distance of the Municipal Building. The chauffeur would wait until his back to Douglaston. superior had had his lunch, drive him back to the Municipal Building and then return Mr. Huie identified slips at the public hearing indicating that, on occasions, his to the garage in Brooklyn where he again remained `on call" until the end of the day, chauffeur returned to Douglaston during the day and took Mrs. Huie and some friends at which time lie again would have to return to the Municipal Building, drive the official from Long Island to department stores in Manhattan on shopping trips.

0

4684 THE CITY RECORD MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

On other occasions, the chauffeur would take Mr. Huie to Madison Square Garden remain with the City car on the street while Mr. Huie was attending the boxing bouts and, thereafter, would drive the Commissioner to his home in Douglaston, Long Island returning to Brooklyn in the early hours of the morning.

J. Frank Johnson, Director of the Bureau of Construction and Maintenance of tht Department of Public Works, testified that up to 1942, he had a car assigned to him His chauffeur's sole duties consisted of picking him up at the Staten Island Ferry, taking him to the Municipal Building, going back to the garage in Brooklyn and, then, in thf evening, the chauffeur would pick up Johnson at the Municipal Building and again driv( him to the Staten Island Ferry.

On at least two occasions, the chauffeur drove Johnson to the North Hills Goli Course and a roadhouse on Long Island.

Recommendations: In view of the fact that since the public hearing held by this Committee, the Mayor issued a statement to the effect that he was appointing a Com-mitee to make a survey to determine the proper use of City automobiles, his Committee makes no recommendations but advises the Council to await the results of the survey by the Mayor's Committee. At that time, if deemed advisable, the Council can enact such legislation or adopt such resolutions as it may deem appropriate.

CITY TREASURER Almerindo Portfolio is the Treasurer of The City of New York. When questioned

at a private hearing as to whether or not he ever used a City car for other than City business, he made an unqualified denial.

Upon the public hearing, he was asked the following questions and gave the following answers:

"Q. I am asking you a simple question. Did you ever use that car for purposes other than City business? A. The records, whatever the records show, that is my answer.

Q. You mean that you don't remember a thing about it? A. No, I do not." The evidence adduced at this hearing disclosed the fact that Portfolio had used a

City car and chauffeur to make the following trips: 1. Westchester Biltmore Club, Rye, New York. 2. Lake Carmel, New York. 3. Englewood, New Jersey. 4. Stamford, Conn. 5. Lake Carmel, New York. 6. Lake Carmel, New York. 7. Englewood, New Jersey, 8. Greenwich, Conn. 9. Great Neck, Long Island. The trips to Lake Carmel, Englewood, New Jersey, and the Westchester Biltmore

Club were trips to golf courses. The trips to Connecticut andGreat Neck were visits by Portfolio to the homes of personal friends.

Portfolio's attitude toward the misuse of City property is evidenced by his answers to questions concerning the aforesaid use of City cars. He was asked the following questions and gave the following answers:

"Q. Your memory isn't that good that you can't remember? A. My memory is that good, that I concentrated on the billions, and not on an insignificant, picayune thing like that. You see . . .

Q. Is it a picayune thing? A. The billions I concentrated on, not a car." At the conclusion of this hearing, the Mayor ordered his Commissioner of Investiga-

tion to inquire into Mr. Portfolio's use of City automobiles after May, 1942. Thereafter, the following letter was received by the Chairman of your Committee from the Com-

missioner of Investigation. ` The City of New York, Department of Investigation, 2 Lafayette Street,

New York 7, N. Y., August 31, 1943. WILLIAM B. HERLANDS, Commissioner, Honorable WALTER R. HART, Chairman, Special Investigating Committee, 70 Wall

Street, New York, N. Y.: Dear Sir—An inquiry concerning the use of a city automobile by City Treasurer

Almerindo Portfolio has been undertaken by me in accordance with the Mayor's directive of August 25, 1943 (a copy of which is enclosed). If you desire a steno-graphic transcript of the public hearing held by me on Thursday, August 26th, and will so advise me, I shall be glad to forward it to you.

In preparing for the next hearing, I should appreciate receiving from your Committee photostatic copies of any official records (such as the "pink slips"'of the Department of Public Works garage) indicating that Mr. Portfolio used a City car at any time to go to a race track.

Very truly yours, WILLIAM B. HERLANDS, Commissioner. City of New York, Office of the Mayor, August 25, 1943.

Honorable WILLIAM B. HERLANDS, Commissioner of Investigations, 2 Lafayette Street, New York, N. Y.:

My Dear Commissioner—It is my policy that the people of this City are always entitled to a full and complete statement from public officials concerning their public and private lives. On the other hand, public officials must have an opportunity to make a full and complete statement and must be protected from misrepresentation or left at the mercy of inferences and innuendoes.

Therefore, please proceed at once to make a complete and thorough investigation concerning the use of a City automobile by City Treasurer Almerindo Portfolio.

The matter is very simple. The inference is left that Mr. Portfolio as late as last Saturday attended the horse races in a City car. My information is taken from news items in the daily papers. For instance, in the "New York Times" of yesterday, the question "Mr. Portfolio, did you go to the races ?" Answer : "Never . . . ." Question: "Never?" Answer: "Oh, yes, I went with my friend, Joe DiGiorgio, who bought a horse." Then the New York Times continues, and the newspapers are my only source of information at this time, "Mr. Cohen leaned over to ask the horse's name. Mr. Hart tried to shush this turn of the quiz, but Mr. Portfolio identified the horse as Mettlesome. The horse won last Saturday at Belmont track, but this was not mentioned at the hearing." Then the testimony continues. Question : "Did you go to the track in a City car?" Answer: "I can't remember. There you have the slips. Why ask me? Whatever is in the slip is right." There, according to newspaper reports, the questioning on race tracks ends.

I am not satisfied with Mr. Portfolio's replies. The answer to the question "Were you ever at a race track in a City car?", expected from officials in my administration is either yes or no.

You will agree with me that anyone reading the reports of the hearings as contained in the newspaper and the headlines, is under the impression that Mr. Portfolio went to the races in a City car as late as Saturday and certainly since OPA regulations have gone into effect.

I also want you to ascertain if Mr. Portfolio used a City car to go to any golf course after May, 1942, and the use after that date to December, 1942, and thereafter. In May, 1942, I issued orders on the restricted use of cars, which is before OPA regula-tions, as I saw what was coming. After that date, on several occasions further restric-tions were ordered by me and on December 17, 1942, my final order, now in effect, was issued, with very rigid and extreme restrictions.

It is not difficult for any lawyer to partially examine and then drop the subject in order to leave an inference contrary to facts, especially if the witness is not permitted to reply or make statements and there is no opportunity for cross-examination. Sincere investigations are never conducted along such lines.

If I may suggest, although I leave the matter entirely to your own discretion, I believe this hearing should be public. An opportunity should be given for cross-examina-tion and of course you will bring before you any employees or officials of the City or anyone who may give any pertinent information concerning the incident.

I will greatly appreciate it if you will attend to this matter at once and report to me at your earliest convenience. I want the true facts. I want to get the inferences cleared either one way or the other before deciding on Mr. Portfolio's future usefulness as a public official in my administration.

I am referring the broader question of the reasonable and accepted uses of cars, as well as custom, to another source for a complete survey and study of the subject.

As to the Hetherington case, since Hetherington is under the sole jurisdiction of the City Comptroller, I believe it would be well to await the action of the Comptroller.

Very truly yours, F. H. LA GUARDIA, Mayor.

The Chairman replied as follows: "The Council of The City of New York Special Investigating Committee, 70 Wall

Street, New York 5, N. Y., September 8, 1943. Honorable WILLIAM B. HERLANDS, Department of Investigation, 2 Lafayette Street,

New York 7, New York: Dear Sir—I have received your letter in which you ask me for photostatic copies

of any official records "indicating that Mr. Portfolio used a City car" to go to a race track. While I have no such slips in my possession, the evasive manner in which Mr. Portfolio answered questions concerning the use of a City car would justify the inference drawn by the representatives of the press that he did use a City car to go to the race track.

After testifying that he could not remember whether he had ever used a City car and chauffeur for purposes other than City business, the following questions were asked and the following answers given:

"Q. Now, Mr. Portfolio, do you go to the race track often? A. No, sir. Q. How often do you go to the race track? A. Never. Q. What is that? A. No, sir, never."

* * * "Q. But you do go to the races? A. Yes. Q. When were you there last? A. I don't remember, whenever Mr.

DiGiorgio's horse ran, several months ago." A man who handles "billions of dollars" should certainly remember in the first

instance that he had gone to the race track. At your hearing, I note that he admitted that he had gone to the race track on three occasions.

I have numerous records in my possession which show that City Treasurer Portfolio used a City car and chauffeur to go to golf courses outside the City, in New York State and also outside the State, to Englewood, New Jersey. I shall be very pleased to send you photostatic copies of these slips in time for "the next hearing" which you state you intend to hold in this matter.

One of these trips was made as late as April 15, 1942. I have just finished, reading the minutes of your so-called "public hearing." It

is entitled, "In the matter of an investigation into the official conduct of Almerindo Portfolio, City Treasurer." I am at a loss to understand why the line of demarca-tion was drawn so as to inquire only into violations of law committed by Mr. Port-folio after May, 1942.

May I remind you that Edward J. Hetherington, Chief Food Inspector of the Comptroller's Office, was penalized for a single similar violation which took place as far back as 1940. -

In addition thereto, Hetherington testified frankly before this Committee. Portfolio, in a private hearing, denied that he used the City's car and chauffeur for pleasure trips and in public hearings, was evasive to the extent that each time he was asked the question, his reply was, "I can't remember trivial things like the use of a car. I handle billions of dollars."

All of the acts committed by Portfolio occurred since the enactment of the Charter which makes it a misdemeanor for any City officer to "convert any of the public property to his own use." Portfolio not only converted the car to his owq use but actually stole City gasoline.

Under the Penal Law, the unauthorized use of this car constituted grand larceny. The theft of the gasoline constituted petit larceny.

The Charter also makes it a misdemeanor for any City officer to detail cr cause any employee of the City to "do or perform any service or work outside of his public office, work or employment." (Sec. 896 and 898). These chauffeurs, receiv-ing salaries of $2,400 a year from the City, were caused to "work outside of their public office, work or employment" when they drove Portfolio to golf courses in New Jersey and to parts of New York State outside the City. One one occasion at least, the chauffeur was ordered to and did return after the week-end to pick Mr. Portfolio up and bring him back to the City.

I am going to take Mr. Portfolio's statement that he handles "billions of dollars of the City's money" at its face value. I am going to assume that his position is one of trust, confidence and responsibility. I do not believe it should be held by one who violates the provisions of the Penal Law and the City Charter and then comes before you and says, "I did not think I was doing anything wrong." Ignor-ance of the law excuses no one, especially not a man who handles billions of dollars.

His statement, "I used the car nine times for out of the City trips, twice in Carmel and seven times to suburbs, I cjid not think I was doing anything wrong," shows that 'he is unfit to hold public office. Since when are Stamford, Connecticut, and Greenwich, Connecticut, where Portfolio went to visit friends using a City car and chauffeur, "suburbs" of New York City. Since when are Englewood, New Jersey, and any of the other places to which Portfolio took trips "suburbs" of New York City.

The answers elicited by you at your "hearing" concerning Mr. Portfolio's trips to the race track certainly do not inure to his benefit. The fact remains that while pleasure driving was banned, Mr. Portfolio and his friend Di Giorgio drove to the race track on three occasions in an automobile. That they claim it was Di Giorgio's automobile is not a mitigating circumstance. The Mayor has repeatedly instructed the Police to be on the watch for "saboteurs" who use automobiles to go to the race tracks. Portfolio admits that on three occasions, he and Di Giorgio used an automobile for that purpose.

The Mayor has publicly stated on several occasions that if anyone connected with his administration were seen at any race track, his connection with the adminis-tration would he terminated.

The Mayor instructed you to conduct an investigation in order that he may determine "Mr. Portfolio's future usefulness as a public official." I do not know What the Mayor means by the use of the words "future usefulness."

For the reasons hereinbefore set forth, it is my belief that Mr. Portfolio should be removed from the office of City Treasurer.

Respectfully yours, I WALTER R. HART, Chairman. It is interesting to note that although this information was supplied to the Com-

missioner of Investigation on September 8, 1943, no report has been made public by him concerning this matter.

Mr. Portfolio, in spite of his admitted violations of the Charter, is still the City Treasurer.

Recommendations : In view of the provisions of the Charter cited in the letter of the Chairman to Commissioner Herlands, dated September 8, 1943, and the testimony of City Treasurer Portfolio that he has violated such provisions of the Charter, it is recommended that he be removed from office and required, as in the case of Hetherington, to make suitable reimbursement to the City for his unlawful use of City property.

THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK On June 18, 1943, the Committee instituted an investigation into the affairs of this

department by questioning Commissioner William F. Carey at his private office in the Hotel Biltmore, New York City.

The officials of the Sanitation Department are as follows: William F. Carey, Commissioner of Sanitation ; Michael Carey, Deputy Commis-

sioner; John B. Morton, Deputy Commissioner; William J. Powell, Assistant to Com-missioner; Matthew J. Diserio, Assistant to Commissioner; Edward C. Nugent, Assistant to Commissioner; Edmond A. Donnelly, Assistant to Commissioner; Elsie Miller, Secretary to Commissioner.

Carey was appointed by the Honorable Fiorello H. La Guardia on the 27th day of May, 1936.

At a public hearing held by the Committee on the 15th day of October, 1943, Com-missioner Carey testified that at the time of his appointment, he informed the Mayor that he intended to continue to engage in the conduct of his private business after his appointment and that the Mayor did not object.

Carey's Prrri ate Businesses Carey testified before this Committee, at both private and public hearings, that

during the time he was Commissioner, he was connected with the following corporations: Carey, Baxter & Kennedy, Inc., President. Salary of $12,000 per year. Southern Phosphate Corp., Chairman of Board of Directors. Lone Star Cement Corporation. Director. Salary of $20,000 per year. W. F. Carey of Brazil, Operating Head. Simms-Carey Railway and Canal Co., President. Curtiss-Wright Corp., Director. ChicagoGreat Western Railway, Director. Lehigh Valley Coal & Navigation Co., Director.

MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943 THE CITY RECORD 4685

Dominion Gas & Electric Co., Director. General Water, Gas and Electric Co., Director. International Utilities Corp., Chairman of the Board of Directors. William F. Carey, Consulting Engineer, Hotel Biltmore, New York City. In connection with these enterprises, it developed that Elsie Miller, who was Carey's

secretary prior to the appointment to the Commissioner at an annual salary of $3,240. During the time that she held this position, she continued to act as Secretary for the Carey, Baxter & Kennedy Corporation at an annual salary of $1,500. She performed some of the work for the Carey, Baxter & Kennedy Corporation in the Department of Sanitation offices and Carey used the Sanitation Department offices for the transaction of the private business of each of the corporations referred to above.

It was further testified that Deputy Commissioner John B. Morton, subsequent to his appointment, continued to act as Vice-President and Director of the Carey, Baxter & Kennedy Corporation at a salary of $7,500 per year, in addition to which he received a substantial bonus. His salary from the City was $6,000.

Miss Miller testified that Carey's relationship with all of these companies was that of "contact man."

Charter Provisions It is provided by section 881 of the New York City Charter that every head of a

department "shall devote his entire time to his duties and shall not engage in any other occupation, profession or employment."

Under section 896 of the Charter, it is provided that a violation of any section of same shall constitute a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall forfeit his office or employment.

At the public hearing, Carey conceded that he had violated this provision of the Charter but stated that he had done so with the permission of the Mayor.

Under section 2 of the Penal Law, it is provided that one who aids or abets another or who is in any manner concerned in the commission of a crime is guilty as a principal.

If Carey's testimony be true, then both he and the Mayor have violated not only the above provisions of the Charter but, under the provisions of the Penal Law, both are guilty as principals.

It is likewise provided by section 898 of the Charter "that no officer or employee of the City shall detail or cause any officer or employee of the City to do or perform any service or work outside of his public office, work or employment."

By causing, Deputy Commissioner Morton and Secretary Miller to perform work for his private corporations, Carey likewise violated this section of the Charter.

At the public hearing held by Commissioner Herlands, Carey is reported to have said, "The Charter should be made to fit the man." It is the sense of this Committee that this is an erroneous philosophy. The Charter, like all other law, is applicable to all mer, alike, even Commissioner Carey and the Mayor of the City. When the Charter provides that any person violating it shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to removal from office, it does not mean "any person except Commissioner Carey ot` the Mayor."

On the 28th day of May, 1938, the Mayor issued an order prohibiting all employees of the City from engaging in any other business. This order was made part of the record at the request of the Minority Leader who is, ex officio; a member of this Committee.

Commissioner Carey, Elsie Miller, Secretary to the Commissioner, and Deputy Commissioner John B. Morton are each guilty of a violation of this order, according to their own testimony.

Albert J. Lizee Albert J. Lizee, a non-resident of this City, was appointed by Commissioner Carey

as a Deputy Commissioner on the 1st day of April, 1940. He was formerly employed by one of Carey's corporations in South America, and resided in Rio, Brazil. At the time of his appointment, Michael Carey, a brother of Commissioner Carey, was serving, under a provisional appointment. as Land Fill Superintendent,

On January 23, 1940, a Civil Service Examination was held for the position of Land Fill Superintendent. Among those who took this examination were Michael Carey, who then held the position, and Albert J. Lizee. Lizee passed and Michael Carey "flunked" the examination. Thereafter, Lizee resigned as Deputy Commissioner and was appointed Land Fill Superintendent and Michael Carey, who had "flunked" the examination for Land Fill Superintendent, was appointed Deputy Commissioner in Lizee's place.

Here we have an anomalous situation where the man who "flunked" an examination becomes the superior of the man who passed it.

Welfare Fund of the Department of Sanitation. In February, 1938, Commissioner Carey and other administrative officials of the

Department created a Welfare Fund and set themselves up as trustees. The avowed pur-pose of such fund was to "extend financial assistance to the families of the employees upon death and to the employees as a result of injury or financial distress."

Prior to the creation of this fund, there had been accumulated in various savings banks in the names of these officials as individuals, the sum of $72,000. These monies represented the net proceeds of the sale of baseball tickets to the general public. This $72.000 was transferred to the Welfare Fund upon creation thereof, together with an additional sum of $34,000, representing the net proceeds for the sale of tickets for the years 1937 and 1938, making a total of approximately $106,000.

From 19.38 to and including 1943, the amount of tickets sold to the general public approximated $1,000,000. Of this sum less than ten per cent thereof, or approximately $85,000, was expended for the purposes intended, to wit, the relief of distress among members of the Department.

As a matter of fact, the official minutes of the Welfare Fund disclose that, while requests for small sums to pay doctors' bills and rent were denied, larger sums were awarded to narticular favorites in the Denartn,ent. 1,291 applications for relief. aggre-gating $85,000, were granted. This indicates that the average application would be for an amount approximating $70. The fact of the matter is that the average "award" was considerably less than $70. This is due to the fact that excessive awards were made, as hereinbefore stated, to favorites, political or otherwise.

The Case of Janes F. Kiernan. Kiernan had been a Democratic member of the Board of Aldermen. For many

years he was a stalwart of the Democratic Party in the Coney Island section of Brooklyn. During the campaign of 1937, after he had ceased to he Alderman, he threw in his lot with the present administration and campaigned actively for the present Mayor. As a reward therefor he was given an appointment as a provisional employee in the Depart-ment of Sanitation.

Carey did not know how Kiernan happened to he appointed. It does appear, how-ever, that on December 29, 1939, a meeting was held in Carey's office for the purpose of considering an application of Kiernan for a loan of $3.652. At that meeting it was stated that the Mayor had forwarded this matter to Commissioner Carey for considera-tion. The corporation minutes state:

"Kiernan tried all resources to borrow this money, but was unsuccessful, and finally appealed to the Mayor's Office." Although only four trustees were present at this meeting, and the By-laws required

a quorum of five, an "award" of $3,652 was made to Kiernan at that meeting. Under questioning before this Committee, Mr. I.angdon, Administrator of the

Sanitation Department and Treasurer of the Welfare Fund, testified that the purposes of the fund did not include loans and that requests for loans, even in the sum of $25 for doctor hills, etc., were turned down. It is pitiful that regular employees of the Depart-ment who have held their positions for many years should be denied relief and a pro-visional employee, appointed to satisfy a political obligation, should have his application granted.

The matter of this loan was brought to the attention of the Board of Directors of this fund in January, 1940, and thereafter Kiernan returned the monies to the Welfare Fund.

Over the past six years, there were assigned from their regular duties 13 employees of the Sanitation Department, who devoted their full time to the investigations of the applications for relief. The aggregate salaries naid to these individuals out of the City Treasury during that time was in excess of $20,000.

The Sale of Baseball Tickets to the Public. As hereinbefore stated, the monies which went into the Welfare Fund accrued

from the sale of baseball tickets to the general public. Approximately $1.000,000 worth of tickets were sold to the general rublic in the past seven years. These tickets were sold by employees of the Sanitation Department to storekeepers in their stores, to house-holders in their homes, to business people in their offices and, in many instances, to passersby on the street.

Information furnished by the Department to this Committee reveals the astounding fact that approximately 215 employees were taken from their regular work and assigned to full time duty in connection with the sale of these tickets for a period of six weeks each year. The aggregate salary paid to these employees out of the City Treasury each year was $48,445, or approximately $300,000 for the entire period.

In addition thereto, 3,597 employees each devoted at least two hours per day during their working hours to the sale of these tickets. The salaries received out of the City Treasury by these men for the time spent, aggregated $337,218.75 for one year, or an aggregate amount for the entire period of $2,360,531.25.

Thus, it appears that there was paid out of the City Treasury during these years, the grand sum of $2,660,531.25. In other words, The City of New York paid out of its treasury the sum of $2,660,531.25 to employees for the time spent in selling approxi-mately 1,000,000 tickets for baseball games. Therefore, for each dollar received by the Welfare Fund from the sale of tickets, $2.67 was paid out of the City Treasury to City employees who were engaged in the sale of these tickets on City time.

The attention of the Council is directed to the fact that the so-called "Welfare Fund" is a private corporation and is in no manner an agency or department of The City of New York.

The testimony further discloses that 21 "employees" of the Department were excused from their regular duties and devoted their full time between March 15th and October 7th of each year to practicing and playing baseball. At the end of the October period, each of these employees is given a one month vacation to recuperate. The total salaries paid to these employees out of the City Treasury aggregated $162,720.60, for which the City received no benefit.

The Morale of the Department. The argument has been advanced that these illegal expenditures of City money out

of the City Treasury are justified because they boosted the morale of the Sanitation Department. Employees of the Department, when questioned by representatives of the Committee, have stated to the contrary.

The morale of the Department is extremely low. The men complain that they are underpaid, and this complaint .was corroborated by the testimony of the Commissioner himself. They further claim that it is embarrassing for them to engage in the sale of baseball tickets. They have been instructed to approach people in their homes and places of business and virtually solicit alms.

The record shows that on occasions 200,000 tickets are sold for a baseball game to be held in the Yankee Stadium, the seating capacity of which is approximately 60,000. The record also discloses that an average of 12 per cent of the tickets purchased are actually used. In other words, 88 per cent of the people who purchased these tickets never used the tickets but merely donated the dollar as a charitable contribution. The Commissioner himself admitted that, as to the people who did not attend the game, the payment for the ticket is in the form of a donation.

Employees of the Department feel that they would rather have decent wages and not be compelled to solicit charitable contributions, especially in view of the fact that no benefit accrues to them therefrom.

Investigation by this Committee reveals the further fact that the morale of the men in the Department is not benefited by the handing out of sinecures to the baseball players who receive special assignments as clerks, etc., while the majority of the men are engaged in handling garbage or removing snow.

Nor is the morale of the men benefited by the manipulations of the Welfare Fund, the Directors of which deny applications for relief by regular men in small sums and grant relief in a large sum to a provisional employee for political reasons, at the special request of the Mayor.

Their morale is further shattered as a result of the knowledge that the Welfare Fund has shown favoritism in favor of certain baseball players' applications for relief. This is exemplified by a reading of the minutes of the Welfare Fund, dated December 12, 1940, at which meeting an application in the sum of $230 was favorably passed upon because the applicant, Edward R. Canales, was a baseball player. The purpose of this money was to send his family to Florida.

At that meeting, Deputy Commissioner Powell stated that the Board had turned down similar requests, but "in view of the fact that Mr. Canales is on the baseball team, they are trying to find a way out".

Other loans in substantial amounts were made to baseball players at meetings where the Directors denied the applications of regular members of the Department who were seeking smaller amounts.

It can readily he seen that the morale of the men is not benefited because of the additional work thrust upon them, due to the shortage of hell) in the Department, which is accentuated by the assignment of large numbers of employees to the sale of these tickets, leaving the burden of performing the work of the men so assigned upon the other men.

High Finance The Commissioner testified that the employees of the Department were underpaid

and had great difficulty in making both ends meet. Nevertheless, in December, 1941, he floated a bond issue of $250,000 and subscriptions

were solicited from the drivers, sweepers and other employees. Testimony before the Committee reveals that many of these men subscribed at the

requests of their superintendents because of fear of reprisals. Bonds in the face value of $219,770 were fully paid for. A copy of one of these

debentures is annexed hereto and marked Exhibit "1". Many employees subscribed for bonds but were unable to keep up their subscriptions and the amount paid by them is subject to forfeiture.

It will he noted, that on the back of the debenture is printed the following: "Counter-signed for Identification: Title Guarantee and Trust Company, Countersigning Agent, By . . . . .................. I Authorized Signature"

Many of the employees questioned by the Committee assumed that the Title Guarantee and Trust Company was guaranteeing the payment of these debentures. In fact, the Committee has been informed by Mr. James P. Walsh of the Transfer Department of the Title Guarantee and Trust Company, that on occasions men from the Department of Sanitation have called at the Title Guarantee and Trust Company and requested that their bonds he redeemed.

The fact of the matter is that in spite of the misleading inscription on the face of the bowls, the Title Guarantee and Trust Company, by its terms, assumes no obligation. It merely collected $1,000 from the Welfare Fund for the use of its name.

If the City has title to Camp Sanita. as testified to by Commissioner Carey, then the only remaining assets of the Welfare Fund is cash to the extent of approximately $25,000, against which there is an obligation to the City, according to the Herlands Report, of a balance of $140,000 and, according to this Committee's report, of approxi-mately $3,260,000.

Carey stated before the Committee that lie expected to raise the money to redeem these bonds from the further sale of baseball tickets to the public. That this is impos-sible is too apparent for consent.

In fact, Henry Varay. the accountant for the Welfare Fund, testified before the Conrmittee that if the Welfare Fund continued to be run as it had been, there would be very little chance of these bonds being paid.

Although Carey posed as a samaritan because of the fact that he and his family had loaned $65,000 to Camp Sanita (at 3 per cent interest), the fact remains that he repaid himself, with interest, as soon as the money came in from the sale of baseball tickets. The employees of his Department have not been so fortunate.

Let the Liquor Flora Freely Each year Commissioner Carey "throws a party" at the Concourse Plaza Hotel, the

Bronx. To this party are invited public officials. politicians, the personal friends of the Commissioner and Deputy Commissioners. This party has cost approximately $1,200 each year, a substantial portion of which sum is expended for liquor. The rank and file of the Department are not privileged to attend. It is possible, however, that their morale might he boosted by the knowledge that noliticians and friends of the Commissioner are dinine at the expense of the Welfare Relief Fund.

Upon subpoenaing the records of the Concourse Plaza Hotel, we find a letter on the stationery of the Sanitation Department signed by Assistant Commissioner Edward C. Nugent, dated August 20, 1942, addressed to the manager of the Concourse Plaza Hotel, in which he says

"Please submit two or three menus. the range of prices, cost of Manhattan and Martini cocktails per gallon, scotch and rye whiskey per bottle, also club soda and Ringer ale." A memorandum in the files of the hotel from the manager to the staff of the hotel,

giving instructions for the dinner reads, in part, as follows:

4686 THE CITY RECORD MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

"Should the cocktails begin to run low, we will continue to make up as many gallons as are necessary.... It is quite important that our waiters keep pushing out these cocktails as fast as possible. Have some ferns on the table." While it is easy to see how the morale of those who attended these dinners was

uplifted by "pushing out these cocktails as fast as possible" at the expense of the Welfare Relief Fund, it is difficult to see how the morale of the rank and file of the Department, who were not present, could possibly he benefited.

The Committee is happy to note that this year, after our inquiry into this matter, the dinner was not held.

A dinner, however, was held in the restaurant of the Sanitation Department on January 19, 1943, the expenses of which were paid out of the Welfare Fund. At this dinner an oil painting of Commissioner Carey, also paid for out of the Welfare Fund, was presented to him by the Honorable Fiorello H. La Guardia, Mayor of the City This certainly must have been a great morale booster for the employees of the Depart-ment. Cost of picture to the Welfare Fund, $368.

Sanita Lodge, Huntington, New York In 1939, Commissioner Carey and the other trustees of the Welfare Fund entered

into an agreement to purchase the Kahn Estate at Cold Spring Harbor, in the town of Huntington, Long Island. They immediately took possession of this property and expended $63,216 to furnish and equip same.

These monies were expended in spite of the fact that the Commissioner knew that there were zoning restrictions in force which might prevent the use of this property for the purpose intended. The fact of the matter is that shortly after this money was expended, the courts decided that the proposed use of the property was in violation of the legal zoning ordinances.

The greater part of the furniture purchased out of funds from the Welfare Depart- ment was thereupon removed to Santini's Warehouse, in The Bronx, and the balance stored in the Department of Sanitation Garage at Zerega Avenue, in The Bronx, where it now remains. Storage charges of $1,080 per year are still being paid to Sanitini's Warehouse.

Sanita Hills, Holmes, New York In February, 1941, the Commissioner and his associates entered into a lease arrange-

ment for the occupation of the property known as the Duel! Estate, located at Holmes, New York, as a summer camp for the employees of the Department. On December 4, 1941, the Welfare Fund acquired title to this property at a purchase price of $65,000, paying $35,000 in cash and taking said property subject to a mortgage of $30,000.

On the 3d day of December, 1941, the Welfare Fund entered into a trust agree-ment with the City, wherein the legal title of this property was transferred to the City, in trust for the Welfare Fund. Title absolute to this property is not now, nor was it ever vested in The City of New York.

Commissioner Carey's testimony before the Commissioner of Investigation to the effect that the Welfare Fund had made a "gift" of this property to the City, is absolutely untrue,

Under paragraph "Eleventh" of said agreement, it is provided that all the Welfare Fund has to do in order to get the property back is to default in its obligatipns under said agreement.

It is provided in said paragraph that, if either party defaults in the performance of any of the conditions, "thereupon all right, title and interest in and to the Premises shall vest irrevocably and absolutely in Welfare Fund, to have and to hold the same absolutely and forever as its sole property."

Commissioner Carey testified that the sole purpose of the transfer of title to the City was to obtain WPA funds. He explained that the Welfare Fund, being a private corporation, could not get such funds but that a Municipality could.

At a meeting of the Welfare Fund, held on October 31, 1941, when objection was raised to the transfer to the City, Carey stated :

"the possession (of Sanita) would be just exactly the same as if we owned it in our name. It is for the Sanitation employees only

"If the City is to take title, we could proceed with the WPA. By doing this, we lose nothing because we don't want to sell the property as it will be used exclusively for the purpose we purchased it, and if the City has title to the property, we can get the WPA which would otherwise be denied

"This is not to be public property " "If the City hasn't the title to the property we cannot get the benefit of the

WPA which is tremendously desirable, because with the WPA vie got a tremendous amount of wok which doesn't cost anything Carey further stated:

"The benefit from the use of free labor might be worth a million dollars to us." In other words, it appeared that this property was turned over to the City for the

purpose of misleading the Federal authorities and causing them to believe that the City actually was sponsoring this project for a public purpose, whereas in fact the beneficial interest at all times remained in the Welfare Fund, a private corporation, and the property was not to be used for a public purpose.

On examination before this Committee, Carey testified as follows: "Q. Why was this property deeded over to the City? A. Because I wanted to get a WPA project, if I could. Q. Why couldn't you obtain a WPA project without turning it over to the

City? A. Because the WPA, as I understand it, is only empowered to use their

forces on city, state or municipality." Although this property was not acquired by the City until December, 1941, the

Mayor of the City made an application for WPA funds on October 6, 1941. Numerous misstatements and false answers are contained in this application:

1. Although the use of the property was limited to certain employees of the Sanitation Department, the Mayor represented that it was to be a public project.

2. The Mayor represented that the City had absolute title to the property. Question 7 on said application reads, as follows:

"If the property to be improved is subject to a mortgage, deed of trust, or other condition, identify the nature of the encumbrance The answer to this item was not filled in by the Mayor, leaving the impression

that there was no deed of trust but that the City had title absolute. At the time this application was filed, neither the City nor the Welfare Fund owned the property. It was being used under a rental agreement by the Welfare Fund, which did not, acquire title until December 4, 1941.

Under date of October 6, 1941, the Mayor certified that: "This proposal will constitute a useful public project, that the facilities con-

structed or pursued thereunder will be maintained and operated by the sponsor in the public interest." As hereinbefore pointed out, this project was not operated by the Sponsor (City of

New York), nor was it a "Public Project." Conversion of City Property

Under date of July 17, 1940, Commissioner Carey wrote a letter on the Department of Sanitation stationery, requesting the assignment of approximately 200 cars, formerly used on elevated structures to the Department of Sanitation. Thereafter, by resolution of the Board of Estimate, on December 11, 1941, these cars were assigned to the Department of Sanitation. These cars were never used by the Department of Sanitation, but 94 of them dismantled and, with the aid of WPA labor, converted into "pulmanettes or cabins for use at Sanita."

About this time, the Federal Government stepped in and prevented the transfer of further cars.

The records of the Board of Transportation show that the 94 cars sent to Sanita were models manufactured between 1901 and 1907. No payment was made to the City for these cars.

The records of the Department of Transportation reveal that 224 cars were sold to various units of the United States Government for prices ranging from $400 to $600 for trailer cars and $1,200 for motor cars (of the cars sent to Sanita, 20 were trailer cars and 74 motor cars). The majority of the models purchased by the United States Government for the prices hereinbefore set forth were manufactured between 1886 and 1890, and were mostly of wooden construction.

It thus appears that, based upon the prices paid by the Federal Government, the 94 cars acquired by this private corporation could have netted the City an amount in excess of $100,000, if they too could have been sold.

In addition thereto, the cost of the WPA labor expended in converting these cars into pulmanettes, was in excess of $100,000. These monies were originally allocated by

the WPA "for improvement of public buildings, in New York County," such as hospitals, schools, etc. The City, therefore, lost the benefit of this $100,000 worth of WPA labor.

Construction of Canip Sanita After these City-owned cars had been misappropriated and converted into "pull-

manettes" with WPA funds intended for improvement of public buildings, they were shipped to Holmes, New York, and the construction of "Camp Sanita" was under way.

In the construction of this camp, employees of the Sanitation Department, machinery, equipment, gasoline and other materials, all the property of The City of New York, were indiscriminately used from February, 1941, until the present date.

It will be noted that, although the Welfare Fund did not acquire title until December of 1941, the misappropriations of the City's property and the wrongful use of the labor of City employees, commenced in February, 1941.

On June 18, 1943, Commissioner Carey was questioned at his private office at the Hotel Biltmore concerning this misuse of the City's property and the use of City employees for this private project. Up to this time, neither the books, nor the records, nor the annual report of the Welfare Fund, reflected any monies due to the City for the use of its property or employees.

Immediately after the Commissioner was questioned, he hurried to the office of the Mayor, where a conference was held. At this conference was Acting Corporation Counsel Schaeffer, Comptroller McGoldrick, President Newbold Morris, of the City Council, Commissioner Herlands, and "two or three people from the Corporation Counsel." Carey testified to these facts at a private hearing held on July 9, 1943.

Carey testified that the Mayor was "peeved a little, you might say," when he learned of the misuse of City property and employees. But, despite that fact, he is still using City employees in conjunction with Camp Sanita, under an agreement with the Mayor "to pay currently for everything we use from the day I talked to him."

After the meeting in the Mayor's office, a resolution was hurriedly drawn by the Corporation Counsel, and a special meeting of the trustees of the Welfare Fund was called for the purpose of adopting the resolution which provided that the sum of $112,000 should be paid to the City by the Welfare Fund.

The Chairman appeared before the Board of Estimate and objected to the adoption of the resolution, and stated that the investigation of this matter, even though not complete, discloses that sums far in excess of this sum were due from the Welfare Fund to the City. Nevertheless, a majority of the members of the Board of Estimate voted to adopt the resolution. The amount of $112,000 was fixed as a result of an "investiga-tion" conducted by the Commissioner of Investigation. On September 19, 1943, the Commissioner of Investigation found that there was due to the City the sum of $256,275.40, but this amount was cut to •$196,073.62, upon the recommendation of the Comptroller and the Mayor. Thereupon an amended resolution was adopted by the Board of Estimate, wherein they agreed to accept $196,073.62 in full payment of all indebtedness from the Welfare Fund.

Although 20 investigators and accountants attached to the Department of Investiga-tion spent eight weeks arriving at these figures, the evidence adduced by this Committee establishes that the total amount due to the City from the Welfare Fund is $3,315,791.75. Annexed hereto and in tabulated form, marked Exhibit "2," is an itemized statement establishing this fact.

As appears from said exhibit, the main difference between the amount arrived at by the Department of Investigation and this Committee, are as follows:

1. Time spent by City employees in selection of site for Camp Sanita. It will be noted that the Commissioner of Investigation charged. $3,809.39, and the Mayor and the Comptroller directed that nothing be charged. This Committee arrived at a figure of $4,752.77.*

2. Legal Survey. The Commissioner of Investigation charges $47.39. This was cancelled by order of the Mayor and Comptroller. The Committee finds that there is $2,221.17 due to the City for this item. This charge is for the services of Eugene B. Sullivan, Law Assistant of the Department of Sanitation. The Commissioner of Inves-tigation found that Mr. Sullivan spent three days' time upon the work of the Welfare Fund. From the minutes of the Welfare Fund under date of October 24, 1940, t is Committee found that Sullivan spent four weeks in hearings at Glen Cove, Long Isla d, and that he also attended numerous meetings of the Board of Directors, conferences on resolutions, engaged in drafting amendments to the Charter of the Welfare Fund, and debentures, and also directed the acquisition of and transfer of real estate. Three months' time was consumed by Sullivan in 1940, and an average of three weeks' time for each of the subsequent years, 1941 to 1943, making a total of 21 weeks. Sullivan was paid during this time out of the City Treasury at the rate of $5,500 per .year. The City, therefore, paid him $2,221.17 for the 21 weeks while he was not engaged in City work.

4. This item consists of the time charged for administrative officials, together with their cars and chauffeurs, while not engaged in City work. The Commissioner of Investi-gation found that there was due to the City for this item, $21,091.65. The Mayor and the Comptroller reduced this item to $11,595.65 (without explanation). This Committee finds that there is due to the City $26,516.31. The difference in the amount arrived at by the Commissioner of Investigation and this Committee is accounted for by the fact that the former charges 64 days against William F. Carey, whereas the records reveal that Carey spent 95 days at Sanita.

In the case of Albert Lizee, 97 days were charged by the former ; the records reveal that 217 days were spent by Lizee at Sanita.

In the case of John H. Thode, he testified before this Committee that he spent 55 days at Sanita in addition to time charged by the Department of Investigation.

6. Labor. The labor referred to in this item is the labor performed by City employees on City time, at or in connection with Sanita, for which they were paid out of the City Treasury. The Department of Investigation charges $142,694.25. This Committee finds that the charge should be $214,041.38.**

12. Investigators' time. This refers to the salaries paid out of the City Treasury to employees of the Department of Sanitation who did no work for the City but were engaged full time in investigating applications for awards made to the Welfare Fund. No charge was made for this item by the Department of Investigation. The Committee finds that the charge should be $20,458.24.**

14. Supplemental charges, June 20, 1943 to September 19, 1943. This item covers all charges between the dates specified. It will be remembered that Carey testified that, under an agreement with the Mayor, he was to continue to use City property and labor and was to pay for it "currently." This he failed to do. The Committee finds the charges for this item to be $33,852. No charge has been made by the Department of Investigation.

15. "EL" cars. An explanation of this item appears hereinbefore under the title, "Conversion of City Property." It represents the amount due to the City for 94 L cars transferred to the Department of Sanitation but delivered to Sanita. The charge is made. on the basis of the prices received for older cars from the Federal Government. The Committee finds that the charge under this item should be $73,293.73. Although no charge was made by the Department of Investigation for this item, the records of that office show that the Examiner was of the opinion that some charge should be made.

16. Baseball (sale of tickets). This item has been previously discussed herein. It represents the amount of monies paid out of the -City Treasury to employees of the Sanitation Department who were excused from City work either full time or part time, for the purpose of selling tickets. These amounts were fixed as a result of information contained in letters received from Edward C. Nugent, the testimony of Nugent, and the testimony of Commissioner William J. Powell.

It is significant to note that the investigators of this Committee found a charge for this item in the work sheets of the Department of Investigation's accountants, but this charge was ignored in his report to the Board of Estimate. (The charge in the Depart-ment of Investigation's work-sheets was approximately $6,500.) There are no work sheets as to how this $6,500 figure was arrived at by the Department of Investigation, but in "somebody's" handwriting appeared the words, "don't include in schedule."

17. Baseball players. This charge represents the salaries paid to the employees of the Department of Sanitation out of the City Treasury for periods when they per-formed no work for the City. It has heretofore been pointed out that twenty-one employees were excused from their regular work each year from March 15th to October 9th, inclusive, in each year, for the purpose of practicing or playing baseball. The total salaries for these men paid out of the City Treasury for the period during which no work was done for the City is $162,720.60. No charge was made by the Department of Investigation to cover this item.

* The work sheets of the accountants for this Committee are available for inspection. ** The work sheets and testimony taken at private hearings are available for inspection.

MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943 THE CITY RECORD 4687

18. Administrative Officials, attending of Trustee and Board of Directors meeting of the Ifelfare Fund. A charge of $5,702.66 should be made for this item.*

19. Department of Investigation accountant's time. As hereinbefore pointed out, 20 accountants and investigators of the Department of Investigation were engaged in determining the amount due from Sanita to the City. (Testimony of Powell, private hearing.) This investigation covered a period of approximately eight weeks. The Committee finds that a charge of $9,869.20 should be made for the services of these accountants and investigators. 1 Ve feel this should be levied because their assignment was necessary due to the misappropriation of City property and the misuse of City labor by Commissioner Carey.

The total charges, as found by this Committee, are $3,315,791.75, as against $256,275.40 by the Department of Investigation, which was reduced to $196,073.62 by the Mayor andComptroller.

In addition thereto, we find that there is a contingent liability on the part of the City for WPA labor granted to theCity but used by the private corporation, amounting to $345,310.92, making total charges of $3,661,102.67. The WPA figures are arrived at as follows:

1. Letter from WPA, Washington, D. C., dated September 17, 1943, showing that the sum of $100,827.92 was spent in converting the I. cars into pulmanettes.

2. Application to Works Projects Administration, dated December 17, 1941, show-ing "total cost of project," $244,483. This application was submitted in the name of the "Mayor, City of New York," as "official sponsor."

Monies Expended By and On Behalf of the Welfare Fund to September 30, 1943 The following monies were expended for all purposes by or on behalf of the Wel-

fare Fund for the period ending September 30, 1943: Received from baseball proceeds (net) ................................$800,312 52 Received from WPA .. ........ ... ............ ...... ........ 345,310 92

Conversion of City materials and diversion of labor of City employees.... 3,315,791 75

Sale of Debentures fo Sanitation Department employees ............... 184,800 25

Total .................................................... $4,646,215 44

The Use of Sanita Testimony taken and records produced before the Committee show that there are

12,000 employees in the Department of Sanitation. During the year 1943, 350 Depart-ment employees and their families availed themselves of the use of Sanita for a period of two weeks each.

The average family of four paid $20 per week for the use of a pulmanette. Those desiring to purchase their meals paid $1.80 per day per person. It would, therefore, cost this average family of four for rent and meals $70.40 per week.

The average wage of the Department of Sanitation employee is $37 per week, out of which little or nothing can be saved. A large number of employees of the Depart-ment, when questioned by the Committee, stated that Sanita was an expensive luxury far beyond the reach of the rank and file of the members of the Department. That many of them, because of their low wages, are in debt and consider themselves extremely fortunate if they can furnish their families with the bare necessities of life.

Many of the more fortunate employees said that they could take their families to farms up-State and in New Jersey at a cost of $15 per week for adults and a lesser price for children but could not afford to pay approximately $70 per week, i.e., the cost at Sanita, for two adults and two children.

If, however, the employees could afford to go to Sanita, on the basis of 350 families per year and each took his regular turn, it would take 34 years before each of the 12,000 families had had its two weeks' vacation at Sanita. This, of course, does not include the families of he higher officials of the Sanitation Department and their relatives and friends who avail themselves of the privileges of Sanita.

The record before this Committee discloses the fact that Commissioner Carey occupies the only cottage on the premises, for which he pays the sum of $60 per month, as against $20 per week paid by the sweeper for converted "El" cars. This cottage is elaborately furnished with distinctive furniture and consists of four rooms and bath as against the one-room pulmanettes.

The f ollowinq is a list of Commissioner Carey's friends and relatives who have used Sanita during the past few years:

1. Mr. and Mrs. Radnor A. Hummel and child, Director of the Southern Phosphate Corporation and Vice-President of the Lone Star Cement Corporation, who were guests at Sanita for the years 1941, 1942 and 1943. (Mr. Carey is also a director of these corporations.)

2. William E.Conroy, Vice-President of Carey, Baxter & Kennedy, Inc., 1942 and 1943.

3. Mr. Weigle (business associate of Commissioner Carey). 4. Mr. Meiley (business associate of Commissioner Carey). 5. Mr. and Mrs. Welch and their two children (friends of Commissioner Carey). 6. J. W. Connelly (friend of Commissioner Carey). 7. Leonora Nova and her mother and family, 1942 and 1943 (Carey's business

secretary) . 8. Thomas F. Carey and John J. Sullivan (Commissioner Carey's nephew and the

nephew's friend), 1941-1942. 9. Mrs McGrath and daughter (sister and niece of Commissioner Carey). 10. Mrs. Daly and daughter (sister and niece of Commissioner Carey), four weeks

in June, 1943. 11. William E. Carey (nephew). 12. Mr. and Mrs. Bierwith (niece and nephew of Commissioner Carey). 13. Mr. and Mrs. Dorr. In addition thereto Deputy Commissioner Michael Carey, who spent 167 days at

Sanita for which he was paid out of the City Treasury, also spent vacations at Sanita during the years 1942 and 1943.

Matthew 'Napear, who was Secretary to the Department, spent three weeks vacation at Sanita during the past summer accompanied by Mrs. Napear while this investigation was going on, but was warned by Commissioner Carey not to go there again, according to the testimony of Mr. Thornburg, the Manager.

Although Thornburg testified that no one above a sweeper or driver is eligible to use Sanita, the record discloses that City Superintendent John Garbarini, his wife and two guests were at Sanity during the past summer.

In addition to the foregoing the record discloses that many families other than those of employees of the Department spent their vacations at Sanita during the past two years

The testimony adduced before the Committee reveals that Camp Sanita is run at a loss of approximately $65,000 per year exclusive of depreciation. In other words, for each of the 350 families which went to Sanita this summer, there was a loss of approxi-mately $200. This loss accrued whether they were the families of employees of the Department of Sanitation or the families of relatives or friends of the Commissioner.

It is difficult to see how the morale of the employees of the Department can be improved by the creation of a four and one-half million dollar monstrosity from which they derive absolutely no benefit.

Malfeasance in Office. It has heretofore been pointed out that numerous employees were assigned to perform

work outside their regular City employment either by order of or with the knowledge and consent of Commissioner Carey.

This is specifically prohibited by section 898 of the New York City Charter which reads as follows:

"No officer or employee of the city or of any of the counties within its limits shall detail or cause any officer or employee of the city or of any of such counties to do or perform any service or work outside of his public office, work or employ-ment ; and any violation' of this section shall constitute a misdemeanor." In detailing City employees to work on a private project, Carey violated this

provision of the Charter. Each of these employees signed the payroll and the heads of the Department certified

that for the periods in question, the employee was engaged in his regular work for the City. Each party concerned in these transactions obtained money by means of false representation and is guilty of larceny.

The conversion of public property for use at Sanita constitutes a misdemeanor under section 896 of the Charter and provides for a forfeiture of office.

By section 901 of the Charter, the head of the Department who certified these payrolls is, likewise, guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to removal from office.

It developed in the private hearings that a number of the men who were working

* The work sheets and extracts from minutes of the Welfare Fund are available for inspection.

at Sanita were paid out of the "Snow Payroll Fund" of the City although they did no snow removal or any other work for the City during that period. In several of these cases, these men were paid out of the snow removal fund for work done at Sanita in the month of June, 1942. The Council is asked to take legislative notice of the fact that there was no snow in New York City in June, 1942,

EXHIBIT 2 Memo by: Messrs. Bernstein & Rappaport, Oct. 22, 1943. To: Walter R. Hart. Subject matter: Charges against Sanita Hills. Master file: Department of Sanitation. The appended schedule will reflect the various items constituting the charge against

the Welfare Relief Fund of the Department of Sanitation of The City of New York, Inc. by The City of New York, and in support of which we offer the following explanations :

(1) Selection of Site ($4,752.77). This represents the cost of time of officials in visiting various sites for the purpose of determining the final selection for Sanita Hills. Each of the officials submitted answers to a questionnaire whereby they indicated the time spent on such purpose. Our adjusted charge is based upon such questionnaire, together with correction in the time for use of car and chauffeur.

(2) Legal Survey ($2,221.17). The original charge was three days time for Mr. Eugene B. Sullivan, Law Assistant. Upon investigation we find, among other things, that in the minutes of the Corporation under date of October 24, 1940 (page 7), he spent the past four weeks going to Glen Cove, L. I. (Bodnar Case-Department of Labor) ; also, he attended numerous meetings of the Board of Directors, attended conferences on resolutions, amendments to Charter and debentures, and also directing the acquiring of, and transferring of, real estate.

In our opinion, three months time was consumed in 1940 and an average of three weeks time for each of the subsequent years, 1941 to 1943, making a total charge of 21 weeks.

(3) Department of Public Works ($442.85). Represents charges for architects and draftsmen services in planning Pullmanettes. The Department of Public Works keeps an excellent record of all time consumed on all projects. This Department rendered a bill for the amount of $442.85, representing the actual time consumed by their employees; therefore, this was allowed.

(4) Administrative Officials ($26,516.31). This item consists of the time charged for Administrative Officials together with their cars and chauffeurs which was totalled at $21,091.65, but of this, only $11,596.65 was allowed. Upon investigation, we find that the full-time was not originally stated. In the case of Wm. F. Carey, 64 days were charged when the correct' number of days was 95. In the case of Albert J. Lizee, 97 days were charged when it should be 217. In the case of John H. Thode, we find 55 days additional time. Therefore, this total charge has been increased to $26,516.31.

(5) Engineering Inspection ($5,932.15). This represents the time of employees in the Engineering & Inspection Divisions. In the case of John Garbarini, we found two additional days. Hence, the correction of our charges to $5,932.15.

(6) Labor ($214,041.38). The charge for the various men used at Sanita Hills, as per examination made by the Department of Investigation, was $142,694.25. The follow-ing facts must be noted in order to understand the many difficulties encountered.

(1) Many records for 1941 and 1942 were missing. (2) Available records did not show exactly what men were at Sanita or what time. (3) Subterfuges were exercised in the records. Sanita work was recorded at times

as "Pier" or "B" or 158th Street or Training School or under the code number of 6198. . The facts that were first gathered and assembled by the Department of Investigation

were obtained only by cross-reference with each subdivision of the Department of Sanitation.

Our investigation shows this to be incomplete. Additional charges were brought to light by searching expanse vouchers and individual testimony of employees, as per following:

(1) Onoferio DiSario, additional time of 357 days. A total of 507 days instead of 150 days as charged. A net change of almost 240 per cent.

(2) George McGowan, additional time of 180 days. Net change of over 100 per cent. (3) George E. Mullen, additional time of 70 days. Net change of over 40 per cent. (4) Edwin Heideman, additional time of 45 days. Net change of over 28 per cent. (5) Gerald Dougherty, 14 days' time. No charge made. (6) John W. King, 2 days' time. No charge made. (7) Anthony Lipresti, 1 day's time. No charge made. (8) Andrew Hunter, 4/ days' time. No charge made. (9) Rocco Mangeanela, 1 day's time. No charge made. (10) Lawrence Byrnes, I day's time. No charge made. (11) Trowbridge, 1 day's time. No charge made. (12) Michael Vanchierri, 23 days' time. No charge made. (13) Jerry Brottman, 7 days' time. No charge made. (14) August J. -Dawson, 3 days' time. No charge made. (15) Meyer Tow, 24 days' time. No charge made. (16) John Bohlman. Additional 2 days. (17) Jas. Befalco. Additional 4 days. (18) John J. Reidy. Additional I day. (19) William Cohen. Additional 7/ days. (20) James Sposato. Additional 1 day. (21) John Schwartz. Additional 7days. (22) Wm. F. Carroll. Additional 3 days. (23) Anthony Reres. Additional 14 days. (24) Leslie Webster. Additional 15/ days. (25) Salvatore Raguso. Additional 27 days.

With the short time at our disposal and with the limited staff at our command, it was impossible to check the entire personnel. In view of these facts as well as the case of Albert J. Lizee referred to in Item (4) where the time omission was over 120 per cent, a detailed investigation would disclose a great deal more charges than those shown. It is our opinion, therefore, that the amount of $142,694.25 should be fixed at an increase of 50 per cent, making the total charge $214.041.38.

(7) Use of Equipment ($63,139.17). This item was computed on the basis of days assigned, which means the full-time that each piece of equipment was at Sanita, and not on the basis of hours of use. The dates of the use of the equipment has been accepted as correct. The rates charged for each piece of equipment, in our opinion, is a fair and reasonable one. The Comptroller reduced this charge to $20,321.17 on the basis of "out of pocket." The rates that were used in the original charge, are not in any way exces- sive or reflects any excessive profits or overhead, and in our opinion, the full amount should have been allowed.

(8) Trucking and Hauling ($11,836.62). This represents a charge for trucking and hauling materials and supplies to and from Sanita, which in our opinion, is reasonably accurate and fairly priced. Only $8,713.62 was allowed, but in our opinion, the full amount should have been allowed. Compares favorably with market prices. Therefore, this should be charged in full.

(9) Materials and Supplies ($3,789.02). The amount charged has been allowed. In view of the difficulty of the confusion of records in the paint shop- and motor repair shops which has been brought to light. it is difficult at this late stage, to determine if any additional charges could rightfully be made.

(10) Use of Departmental Cars ($4,635.86). This represents the use of cars by painters. The sum of $597.58 was allowed. Investigation of the records, and by testi-mony in the case of George McGowan. we find 352 additional days for the use of a Ford coupe, making a total of $3,129.28. Therefore, the full amount of $4,635.86 should be charged.

(11) Miscellaneous items ($2,085.58). This represents miscellaneous items which we are accepting as being correct.

(12) Investigators' Time ($20,458.28). This represents time spent by investigators on the awards. Interrogation of one of the investigators, brings to light that each award favorably reported upon, takes two days' time, and awards which are denied, only one day. Therefore, upon checking the records, we find 1,291 favorable awards, and 652 denied. Calculating this on the above basis. we arrived at the sum of $20,45828.

(13) Men at Yankee Stadium ($625). Upon investigation, we were advised that there were a great number of Sanitation employees used at the Yankee Stadium on September 20, 1943 to clean up after the baseball game. At this date, no definite number could be obtained, but we did definitely determine so far, that there were at least 17 men. We were informed that a very large number, possibly 200 had been

4688 THE CITY RECORD MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

used, but in the absence of definite number, we have determined that a fair number woul be 100, at an average pay of $6.25 per day, making a total of $625.

(14) Supplemental Charges ($33,852). This represents the charges for labor, us of equipment, etc., from June 20, 1943 to September 19, 1943.

(15) "El" Cars ($72,393.73). There were 9.4 "El" cars transferred from Depart ment of Transportation to Department of Sanitation (74 motor cars and 20 trailer cars) Majority of these were of 1902 to 1904 model. The Department Transportation sold 15 cars to the War Department, majority of which was of 1886 to 1889 model, at a pric of $1,200 for motor car and $600 for trailer. Therefore, the above 94 cars at said price amount to $100,800, less the amount of salvage of $28,406.27 received, leaves a net valu of $72,393.73.

(16) Baseball-Selling Tickets ($2,670,777.40). As per letter received from Mr Nugent dated July 7, 1943, 3,597 men were used in selling tickets while on their routin duties. They were Drivers, Loaders and Sweepers. No dates were given, but upoi questioning two or three Foremen, we find that they would each consume about two o three hours, for each man. Therefore, we were conservative in stating that they cadl worked at least two hours for a period of 10 weeks, and on this basis, the sum o $337,218.75 was arrived at.

Under date of August 6, 1943, Mr. Nugent advises us that there were 215 men wh( spent their full-time from June 22, 1943 to July 7, 1943, which amounts to $17,468.75 Commissioner Nugent also stated that no further employees were used to sell ticket; after July 7, 1943. Yet, investigation brings to light, that at least 24 men have spen time since that date. In some cases, full-time, and in others, one-half day each, whirl amounts to $2,527.40, making the total charge for selling baseball tickets in 1943 $357,214.90.

Mr. Nugent in his testimony said that the same condition existed in prior years, an( in the case of 215 men who spent full-time from June 22, 1943 to July 7, 1943, spent sia weeks in prior years. Therefore, in arriving at the cost for the six years, from 1937 tc 1942, we arrived at the following basis--3,597 men at two hours per day for ten week! and 215 men at full-time for six weeks, making a total charge per year of $385,593.75 The total charges for the six years amounts to $2,313,562.50. The grand total for thf seven years, therefore, amounts to $2,670,777.40.

(17) Baseball Players ($162,720.60). Examination and investigation has showy that there have been 21 employees assigned to the baseball team. They were relieve( from regular duties from March 15th to October 9th, with few variations. The cost o, actual time amounted to $23,245.80 for the year of 1943. On the same basis, the amoun' for the preceding years of 1937 to 1942 would be $139,474.80. The grand total for the seven years, $162,720.60.

(18) Administrative Officials ($5,702.66). This represents the time of every indi-vidual who devoted any time attending meeting of the trustees from August, 1937 tc June, 1939, and the meetings of the Board of Directors from June, 1939 to August, 1943

(19) Department of Investigatir'n ($9,869.20). From information submitted, we learr that this Department devoted 'he services of approximately 20 accountants for a perioc of eight weeks on Sanita matters only.

Therefore, our recommendation for the total charges to Welfare Fund, amount tc $3,315,791.75.

SANITA HILLS

Summary of Charges Up to September 19, 1943

Charges as per Department Allowed Recommen- of Investigation dations

1. Selection of site ....................... $3,809 39 None $4,752 77 2. Legal survey . ............ .......... 47 39 None 2,221 17 3. Department of Public Works........... 442 85 $442 85 442 83 4. Administrative Officials ................ 21,091 65 11,596 65 26,516 31 5. Engineering inspection ................ 5,832 83 5,832 83 5,932 15

6. Labor ............................... 142,694 25 142,694 25 214,041 38 7. Use of equipment ..................... 63,139.17 20,321 17 63,139 17 8. Trucking and hauling .................. 11,836 62 8,713 62 11,836 62

9. Materials and supplies .................. 3,789 09 3,789 09 3,789 02

10. Use of departmental cars ............... 1,506 58 597 58 4,635 86 11. Miscellaneous items ................... 2,085 58 2,085 58 2,085 58

$256,275 40 $196,073 62 $339,392 88

12. Investigators' time ..................... None None 20,458 28

13. Men at Yankee Stadium ............... None None 625 00

14. Supplemental charges-June 20, 1943 to September 19, 1943.. None None 33,852 00

15. "El" cars ............................. None None 72,393 73

16. Baseball (selling tickets) ............... None None 2,670,777 40

17. Baseball players .......... ........... None . None 162,720 60

18. Administrative Officials attending all Trus- tee and Board of Directors meeting of company ........ ................. None None 5,702 66

19. Department of Investigation-Accountants' time ................................ None None 9,869 20

$256,275 40 $196,073 62 $3,315,791 75

Contingent Liabilities:

WPAGrants (U. S.) ................................................ $345,310 92

Total............................................... • .... $3,661,102 67

THE FUTILITY OF SUBMITTING THE EXPENSE BUDGET TO THE CITY COUNCIL

Under the Charter, the heads of the various departments submit estimates of the expense incident to the operation of their departments for the ensuing year, to the Direc-tor of the Budget.

The Comptroller submits to the Director of the Budget, his estimate of the antici-pated receipts from all sources exclusive of real estate taxes. The Director of the Budget, with the aid of this information, together with the Mayor, prepares and submits to the Board of Estimate the so-called Executive Budget.

The Board of Estimate is empowered to increase, decrease, eliminate or in any other manner, change any item thereof, or add additional items thereto.

Usually, before the Budget is submitted to the Council, the Mayor issues a state-ment to the effect that "it has been cut to the bone."

The sole power given to the Council under the Charter is to make further cuts in the Budget. It has no power to increase any item therein or vary any part thereof. After the Council has acted upon the Budget, the power is still vested in the Mayor to veto the reduction or omission of any item and the items thereupon are considered restored, unless the Council subsequently overrides the veto by a vote of three-fourths of the entire Council.

It will be observed from the foregoing, that the Council is given the right to make further cuts in a Budget which the Mayor invariably claims "has already been cut to the bone," before its submission to the Council.

The Administration has repeatedly refused to make available to the Finance Com-mittee, the services of accountants to assist them in examining this complicated document, and it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to make an appropriate study of the Budget within the limited time fixed by the Charter.

The futility, however, of submitting this Budget to the Council under present condi-tions, becomes apparent after an examination of the testimony of Thomas J. Patterson, Budget Director, given at a private hearing of this Committee. His testimony follows:

"Q. What is the purpose of submitting the Budget to the City Council? A. For study by the City Council, to my way of thinking, and any suggestions of economy or reductions that you could make,

Q. When the Budget is submitted to the City Council, it is submitted after consideration and study by both the Budget Director's Office and the Board of Estimate? A. That is my idea of it.

Q. And the City Council then has the power to make such reductions, or effect such economies as it may see fit after study? A. That is right.

Is there a provision of law which gives the Board of Estimate the right to amend the Budget even after it is adopted by the City Council? A. That is right.

The Charter provides that the Board may adopt such terms and conditions in the administration of that Budget as they deem fit.

Q. Adopting terms and conditions may go to the extent of amending the Budget so as to increase items which have been passed upon by the Director of the Budget, the Board of Estimate and the City Council; is that right? A. Yes, sir." Mr. Patterson then testified that the Board of Estimate has delegated to the Comp-

troller and the Bpdget Director, the power to make these "modifications" in the Budget at any time after the Council has passed upcn it.

"Q. Under the power vested in the Budget Director and Comptroller to modify the Budget, the Budget Director and the Comptroller, if they so wished, could modify every item in that Budget, so as to bring about a complete change in the picture as it was originally presented to the City Council? A. That is right. They could do that. And, of course, make public all the changes that they do make. And in the presentation of the Budget to the Council in the following year, we enumerate whatever changes have been made.

Q. But if the Budget Director and the Comptroller so desired, they could change every item in that Budget? A. Within the appropriations that were made." The substance of the above testimony is this-after the Budget Director and the

Mayor have "cut the Budget to the bone" and the Board of Estimate has passed upon it, the Budget is then submitted to the Council for consideration. After the Council considers and passes the Budget, the Comptroller and the Budget Director may by "modifications," increase or decrease the salaries set forth in the original Budget or add or abolish positions.

While there is a limitation to the effect that they may not exceed the total appro-priation, this limitation is more apparent than real.

Examples of manipulations by way of "modifications," are set forth as follows: (1) At the time the last Budget was submitted to the Council, the salary of the

City Sheriff was set forth at $7,500 per year. Shortly thereafter, the Budet Director and the Comptroller by "modifications" increased the salary of the Sheriff to $10,000 per year. Hcw this was done, appears from the following testimony of Budget Director Patterson.

"Q. Now, the Sheriff's salary at the time it was submitted to the Council, was $7,500? A. That is right.

Q. The Council took no action with respect to that salary, is that right? A. That is right.

Q. Had the salary been $10,000, the Council would have been free to say, we will cut in to $7,500 had they been so mindful ; is that correct? A. That could be done.

Q. But by not putting it at $10,000 before it came to the Council, and leaving it at $7,500, the Council is without power to take any action with respect to reducing that salary, is that so? A. Yes, sir. (2) The salary of the City Register was also submitted to the Council at $7,500

and was in the same manner increased to $10,000 after the Council passed upon the Budget.

These "modifications" were not an afterthought on the part of the Budget Director and the Comptroller. It appeared from the testimony of Mr. Patterson that the Sheriff requested this increase before the Budget was submitted to the Mayor. The testimony on this point follows:

"Q. Did the Sheriff request this increase? A. Yes, sir. He requested it in ,is estimate. ,

Q. Did the Mayor eliminate the request for the increase? A. He recom-mended that the request be disallowed in accordance with general instructions in connection with the preparation of the Budget that I had taken up with the Mayor. And consulted with the Mayor on the item, itself.

Q. Now, subsequently, after the adoption of the Budget by the Council in its modified form, did you have a consultation with the Mayor? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And in the course of that consultation with the Mayor, did he say, "All right, give the Sheriff his $2,500 increase"? A. Yes, sir." The reason assigned by the Administration for the increased compensation to the

Sheriff and the Register, is that each of these officials has saved money in the operation of his department. The answer to that is that whatever savings were effected, were not due to the personal efficiency of the Sheriff or the Register, but to the consolidation of the offices of County Sheriff into the Office of City Sheriff.

In any event, the honest method of procedure would have been to submit to the Council, a Budget containing the proposed increased salaries of the Sheriff and the Register.

That these two items are set forth as examples, is not indicative of the fact that they are the only instances of "modifications."

From 1939-1943, the Administration has created approximately 10,000 new positions at a total cost of $12,249,000. 5,463 new positions were created in the fiscal year 1939-1940 at a cost of $7,648,000, 482 new positions were created at a cost of $810,000 in the fiscal year 1942-1943.

Most of these new positions were not included in the Budget submitted to the Council, but were created after the Council had passed upon the Budget by "modifica-tions" made by the Comptroller and the Budget Director.

The Committee, therefore recommends: (1) That the Finance Committee of the Council be empowered to employ account-

ants and clerical help to assist in the examination of the Budget. (These monies are available because appropriation was made for 21 members of the City Council at $5,000 per year, and only 17 members were elected. This leaves $20,000 available.)

(2) That a local law be enacted amending the Charter so as to provide that all `modifications" of the Budget be submitted to the Council for approval.

(3) That no "modification" shall be effective until it has been approved by the Council.

BUREAU OF REAL ESTATE AND THE TAX COMMISSION

This Administration was conceived in economy and dedicated to the proposition that he Budget and Tax Rate would rapidly dwindle.

Not only have the Budget and the Tax Rate reached an all-time high, but numerous studies by Real Estate Boards and the State Legislature have disclosed the fact that the assessed valuation of real estate in this City is out of proportion to the real value thg reof.

An examination by this Committee of the records of the Bureau of Real Estate •eveals the fact that in numerous instances the City practically confiscated the property )f taxpayers. The method adopted was to grossly over-assess real property to the extent .hat the income thereof was insufficient to pay the taxes.

The owner of the property would struggle along under this burden and then find iimself unable to pay his taxes. The City would thereupon acquire title to his property.

Some time thereafter, on the recommendation of the Director of Real Estate, a metition would be filed with the Board of Estimate requesting permission to sell the )roperty. These petitions contained:

1. A statement showing the assessed valuation of the property; 2. A statement by the Director of Real Estate as to the real value of the property; 3. A statement showing what the local Real Estate Board believed the property to

ie worth. Invariably, the Director of Real Estate sought and was granted permission to sell

he property at a price equal to the value placed upon it by the Local Real Estate Board. II some instances, this figure was more than 50 per cent less than the assessed valuation howing that the property had been over-assessed in excess of 100 per cent. In some nstances, the City sold property for less than one-third of the assessed valuation.

For the purpose of clarifying this situation, the Committee refers the Council to Lem number "50" on the calendar of the Board of Estimate of November 4, 1943. An xamination of this item reveals the fact that the owner of premises number 69-20 Beach ;hannel Drive, in the Borough of Queens, had his property taken from him by the City s a result of an accumulation of unpaid taxes amounting to $2,225.22. The current ssessed valuation of the property is $6,000.

It further appears that the Director of Real Estate requested the Board of Estimate's ermission to sell this property for $2,500 and for permission to pay a commission mounting to 5 per cent of the selling price.

If the assessed valuation of this property is $6,000, why should the City sell it )r $2,500?

If the value of the property is only $2,500, why was it assessed for $6,000? If $2,500 was the real value of the property and it was assessed at $6,000 so that

2,225.22 in taxes accumulated thereon, the owner of this two and one-half story frame welling had his property fraudulently confiscated.

It is interesting to note that the Real Estate Boards in the various Boroughs have

MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943 THE CITY RECORD 4689

repeatedly claimed that property in this City is over-assessed. This statement has been challenged by the Mayor and other City officials. Nevertheless, in justification of sales by the City of property at half of its assessed valuation, the City invariably quotes the value placed upon the property by the local Real Estate Board. In fact, the City pays the local Real Estate Board for the appraisal so used by the Director of Real Estate.

For instance, in item number "50" referred to above, the following appears: "The 1943-1944 assessed valuation of the land is $2,400; of the land and

improvements, $6,000. On September 1, 1943, the Long Island Real Estate Board appraised the property as follows: land, $1,000; land and improvements, $2,500." In substance, the City says, "We have assessed the property at $6,000 and taken it

away from the owner because he could not pay taxes based upon that assessed valuation; hut the Real Estate Board says the property is only worth $2,500, so they are right and we were wrong'and now let us sell it for $2,500."

The Committee believes it would have been more wholesome to have originally assessed the property at $2,500 and permitted the original home owner to retain his property.

The above is just an illustration. It is not an isolated instance nor an exception to the rule. It is a condition which exists with respect to practically every piece of real estate in the City of New York. Annexed hereto is a schedule showing just a few examples of over-assessments of real estate which resulted in the property owner losing his property and the subsequent sale by the City of the same property for a fraction of the assessed valuation.

The records of the Tax Commission show another fallacy. They reveal that in many instances, after the City has sold the property at a fracticii of its assessed valuation, the Tax Commission carries the property on its books at the assessed valuation which existed prior to such sale.

In view of the fact that the State Legislature has under consideration the Bewley Report which recommends a complete revision of the method of assessing and reviewing the assessment of real property, it is recommended that a copy of this report and the annexed schedule be forwarded to the State Legislature for consideration.

Examples of Real Estate Taken by the City and Subsequently Sold for Less Than Its Assessed Valuation

Assessed Valuation at Sold by

Location Time of Sale City for

West 30th Street, east of 7th Avenue, Manhattan......... $220,000 00 $110,000 00 Southeast corner of Kings Highway and East 28th Street,

Brooklyn ........................................ 12,000 00 4,500 00 41 Lispenard Street, Manhattan .............. .......... 15,000 00 4,500 00 Northeast corner Monroe Street and Tompkins Avenue,

Brooklyn ........ ......... ... ........... 9,500 00 2,250 00 Southeast corner 6th Avenue and Grand Street, Manhattan 25,000 00 10,000 00 Monroe Avenue, East 174th Street, Bronx ................ 37,500 00 10,000 00 905 Atlantic Avenue, Brooklyn .......................... 51,000 00 20,000 00 146 Grand Street, Manhattan ............................ 80,000 00 47,500 00 52 East 126th Street, Manhattan.... .......... ...... 18,000 00 8,000 00 Fast side Nevins Street, north State Street, Brooklyn..... 40,000 00 10,000 00 143 South 8th Street, Brooklyn .......................... 120,000 00 21,500 00 101 'Mott Street, Manhattan ............................. 28,000 00 10,000 00 106th Avenue, Liverpool Street, Queens .................. 50,000 00 10,000 00 149 Watts Street, Manhattan .. ........................ 14,500 00 5,300 00 Southern Boulevard, Freeman Street, Bronx ............. 75,000 00 20,000 00

DEPARTMENT OF PURCHASE

Under section 782 of the Charter, the Commissioner of Purchase is given "sole power to purchase, store aiid distribute all supplies, materials or equipment required by any department . . . payment for which is made from the City Treasury" (except the Department of Education).

Section 93, subdivision C, of the Charter, provides that it shall be the duty of the Comptroller "to audit all vouchers before payment... .

The Commissioner of Purchase testified, at the public hearing, that his Department expends between twenty-five and thirty million dollars annually. George J. Basso is the Chief Food Buyer, and, in addition, the Department employs 13 other food buyers, all highly qualified and specialists in their own field. In spite of this fact, the Com-mittee ascertained that Basso entered into an agreement with A. Carobine & Company, whereby Carobine & Company purchased fruits and vegetables on behalf of the City on a commission basis.

It was brought out at the public hearing that the City paid Carobine & Company 12/ cents for, each package purchased on behalf of the City and a trucking charge of 17/ cents per package for delivery. It was further brought out that in several instances, Carobine & Company sold its own merchandise to the City and charged the City a commission on such sales.

In view of the testimony of the Commissioner that the Department has 14 highly specialized food buyers, it is difficult to understand why it was necessary to pay an outside a commission for purchasing food on behalf of the City, particularly since these were not emergency food purchases. They were purchases for canning at Camp LaGuardia. In fact, these payments were in violation of the provisions of the Charter.

In 1942, a revolving fund was created by resolution of the Board of Estimate for the purpose of making emergency food purchases on behalf of the City. Thereafter, out of said funds, the Commissioner of Purchase created a "Petty cash" account. A pocket check book was given to George J. Basso, Chief Food Buyer of the Department of Purchase, and Edward J. Hetherington, Chief Inspector of Food at the Comptroller's Office. Monies could be withdrawn from this account upon the signature of Hethering-ton and Basso. Between December 3, 1942, and April 30, 1943, Hetherington and Basso expended out of that account, $130,686.08.

Purchases were made from A. Carobine & Company and were paid for by checks, signed by Hetherington and Basso without previous audit by the Comptroller. as required by the Charter. It appears that the sales to theCity by A Carobine & Com-pany approximated $100,000 per year.

Examination of Carobine's books revealed the fact that there were cash withdrawals aggregating $18,000 during the 12-month period ending December 31, 1942, for which no explanation could be given. No record of any purchases for these cash withdrawals could be found.

The Committee feels that to permit City employees to travel around with check hooks for the purpose of making cash purchases is a dangerous practice, especially when these check books are entrusted to two employees who have been publicly characterized by the Mayor as "petty chiselers."

The Committee further developed the facts that:

1. In October of 1942, the City entered into a so-called "custom slaughter" arrange-ment with Wilson & Company;

2. The purpose of this "custom slaughter" arrangement was to pay Wilson & Company a price approximately 33?/ per cent above the ceiling price for "Commercial" beef;

3. This arrangement was entered into as a result of negotiations between Chief Inspector Hetherington, Chief Food Buyer Basso and Special Investigator Dineen with Wilson & Company ; and

4. Sufficient "Commercial" beef was available for use in the City institutions at ceiling prices but the orders therefor were cancelled by Basso.

After the public hearing in this matter, the Mayor directed his Commissioner of Investigation to reinvestigate this matter. At his public hearing, the Commissioner of Investigation called as witnesses:

1. Leon Henderson, who testified that "custom slaughtering" was legal;

2. Representatives of packers were called and testified that indiz'iduallv they would fiave been unable to deliver to the City the amount of beef required for use in its institutions. The Committee agrees that "custom slaughtering" is legal, but the arrangement between

The City of New York and Wilson & Company was not "custom slaughtering." With respect to the first proposition, the Committee never contended that "custom

slaughtering" was illegal. It did contend, however, that the arrangement with Wilson & Company was not "custom slaughtering."

"Custom slaughtering" is an arrangement between the owner of cattle and a

slaughterer whereby the cattle are slaughtered and the dressed beef is delivered to the owner of the cattle.

The arrangement with Wilson & Company was not "custom slaughtering." Accord-ing to the testimony, the City never purchased a single head of cattle. Wilson & Com-pany would purchase the cattle, charge the City a commission, charge the City shipping expenses and, in addition thereto, a slaughtering fee.

Title to the cattle was never in the City but it at all times belonged to Wilson & Company. When cattle died in transit, Wilson & Company made affidavit to the railroad company to the effect that Wilson & Company owned the cattle.

The testimony of Bernhardt Gissel, Manager of Wilson & -Company, is to the effect that of all of its customers. the City was the only one that paid Wilson & ;Company a commission for buying, shipping charges and a slaughtering fee.

It can readily be seen, as was testified to by Hetherington, that the so-called "custom slaughtering" arrangement was a scheme designed to enable the City to pay in excess of the ceiling prices for its beef.

The Committee will, therefore, quote from the testimony of witnesses for the purpose of establishing the true facts.

Proof that the City paid over the ceiling price. The following is an excerpt from the testimony of Chief Food Buyer George J.

Basso of the Department of Purchase : Q. On no occasion did The City of New York buy beef over the ceiling

price? A. Never bought it over the ceiling price, but the slaughtering price is over the ceiling.

Q. What do you mean by that? A. Simply that the cost of the beef to us after this custom slaughtering exceeds the ceilinq price." Next we take the testimony of Raymond F. Dineen, Special Investigator of the

Department of Purchase: "Q. When we sum up this entire picture of the purchase of the cattle and the

custom killing and the arrangement of selling hack the entrails and paying for the trucking, isn't that indirectly a round-a-bout way to beat the ceiling price? A. I couldn't say no." Then we have the testimony of Edward J. Hetherington, Supervising Inspector of

Foods, Office of the Comptroller: T. We are talking about the meat that is consumed. Neither you nor any

other representative of The City of New York has actually gone and bought cattle? A. No, sir.

Q. That is just a subterfuge, and Wilson is really buying the cattle as they did before, when they delivered it, and sold meat to the City as hinds and fores, ze'ithout any slaughtering charge, purchase charge, trucking charge, or credit for entrails; isn't that so? A. Yes, sir. Conclusive evidence that the 'City paid six and one-tenths cents ($.061) per pound

above the ceiling price is contained in a letter from L. J. Cook, Director of Purchase, dated July 14, 1943, to Mr. W. S. Waterbury, Food Administrator, a portion of which is reproduced herein below:

"The average cost of beef custom slaughtered to the City is $.266 per lb., while the OPA wholesale ceiling price is $.205. A monetary loss of $.061 per lb. will result if meat is disposed of at wholesale ceiling nrices. The City 'Charter restrictions on the City Commissioner of Purchase will not permit the sale of material at a loss, and OPA will not permit even the Army to pay more than $.01 over the ceiling prices, We are, therefore, faced with a dilemma which will cause no end of embarrassment." From the above letter and the testimony of Basso, Dineen and Hetherington, it is

conclusively established that the City was paying six and one-tenth cents ($.061) per pound above the ceiling price under the so-called "custom slaughtering" arrangement with Wilson & Company.

(It is interesting to note that both Hetherington and Dineen, who, with Basso, made the arrangement with Wilson & Company on behalf of the City, were formerly employed by Wilson & Company.)

Now we turn to the testimony of Bernhardt Gissel, who is in charge of the New York plant of Wilson & Company. He testified as follows:

"0. At any rate. under this custom slaughtering plan the City was paying more for beef than it had before you engaged in this plan? A. I wouldn't be a bit surprised.

0. It is a fact, undoubtedly. A. Yes. Q. Because added to it, to your cost, was the commission paid, the slaughtering

charge, and the shinpine charge which were not being paid by your retailers? A. That is why we are fighting the OPA, and have from the start. I don't concede that the ceiling prices are sufficient to keep the packing plants alive." At the public hearinF, Gissel testified that the ceiling price for "commercial" beef

was 18/ cents ner pound and the City was paying an average of $.266 per pound for "commercial." His testimony is as follows:

"0. All right. Now. it anrears the ceiling mice for `choice,' grade AA, is 211/ cents a pound; for `good.' 201/ cents; for 'commercial.' 181/ cents, and the City was paying an average of $266 for `commercial.' That is a fair summarization, is it not? A. I would say it is a fair summarization, yes." This witness further to stit;ed that every customer of Wilson & Company other

than thr City was only charged the ceiling price.

The City could have burrhased beef at ceiling Prices. There was no necessity for engag-ing in the so-called "rnstom slaughtering" plan under which the City paid $.266 per pound for commercial beef. the ceilina Price for which was $.185 rents Per pound.

To establish this proposition, we quote from the testimony of Chief Food Buyer Basso: "Q. Mr. Basso, was there ever any time since the initiation of this system in Octo-

ber or November, or before where you weren't able to buy sufficient beef and other meats for The City of New York? A. I would say no." Basso had testified that he made an arrangement with Armour, & Company, Swift &

Company, Wilson & Company and the Cudahy Packing Company whereby each of these concerns was to sunnly the City with annroximately 10,000 pounds of beef per week. He further testified that the City's requirements were approximately 35,000 pounds per week. His testimony reads as follows :

"Q. Did Armour & Company continue to ship you 10,000 to 12,000 pounds per week? A. As far as I can remember, they did.

Q. Did Cudahy Packing Company continue to ship you 10,000 to 12,000 pounds per week? A. No, we stopped when we went into the custom slaughtering.

0. Who stopped ? A. I think we stopped taking from Cudahy. Q. Did you call un Mr. Callahan at Cudahy and tell him you didn't want any

more meat because you were going into custom slaughtering? A. I may have."

"Q. What was the average Price of the meat delivered by Cudahy Packing Comnany to the City? A. I would only be,guessiniz.

Q. It was not above the ceiling, was it? A. No." Hereinbelow set forth is the affidavit of Robert L. Callahan, the manager of the

Cudahy Packing Company, New York City Branch :

"State of New York, City of New York, County of New York, ss.: I, ROBERT L. CALLAHAN, being duly sworn, depose and say:

That I am the manager of the Cudahy Packing Company branch at 450 West 14th Street, in the Borough of Manhattan, City of New York.

That in the month of September, 1942, pursuant to the request of a Mr. Basso of the Denartment of Purchase of The City of New York, I, on behalf of the said Cudahy Packing Company. commenced to sell and deliver meat in straight cattle form in the amount of 35 head per week, of the approximate weight of 22,000 pounds, dressed weight. '

That these shipments continued until the latter part of October, 1942. That the company with which I am connected was ready and willing to continue

to make such deliveries, but I was informed by Mr. Basso to discontinue the same because he had evolved a plan of so-called "custom slaughtering" and did not desire to purchase any more meat from Cudahy Packing Co.

That all of the sales hereinbefore referred to were at a ceiling price, plus a 250 per hundredweight delivery charge and at the time of the discontinuance of the relationship by Mr. Basso, Cudahy Packing Company was ready, willing and able to continue the sale of meat in such quantities to the City as thereto for.

That at no time did the said Cudahy Packing Company ever refuse to sell meat to The City of New York, nor did it ask any price in excess of the ceiling price, nor did the Cudahy Packing Company ever tell any representative of the City that it

4690 THE CITY RECORD MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

would not continue to sell whole carcass or that the City could purchase onl certain specified cuts. R. j.,

'Sworn to before me this 4th day of August, 1943. HARRY J. COOK, Notary Public, Queens County No. 40. Certificate filed in N. Y.

Co. Clks.' No. 7. Commission expires March 30, 1944.

George E. Mlitchell, District Manager of Swift & Company, testified as follows: "Q. Did you from that time on continue to supply 10,000 pounds per week to

City for use in its institutions, up to a certain point? A. We offered them 10,000 pounds a week up to January something, and they took a part of it,

Q. In other words, up to January of 1943 you offered them 10,000 pounds per and some weeks they would take it all and then some weeks only part of it?

A. Right. Q. When was this arrangement stopped? A. About the last week in January. Q. Who stopped it? A. Mr. Basso, I think it was, of the Purchasing Depart-

ment, told our contract man that they would no longer take the 'Commercial' beef, which was the grade we agreed to ship, U. S. 'Commercial' and asked that we make our subsequent offers on the basis of U. S. grade 'Good.' We didn't have that grade of meat available, and we told him so, and then the deal stopped." It is interesting to note that the "custom slaughtering" arrangement with Wilson

& Company called for "Commercial" beef and not "Good." Both Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Callahan testified that their companies were willing to

sell to the City at ceiling prices. It will be noted that these two concerns were delivering and were willing to continue to deliver at ceiling prices, the following quantities of beef: Cudahy Packing Company ................................... 22,000 pounds per week Swift & Company .. .... .................................. 10,000 pounds per week —making a total of 32,000 pound per week.

The City's total requirements were 3,000 pounds per week. Jay F. Bond, Division Manager of Armour & Company, testified that they had

agreed to ship the City 10,000 to 12,000 pounds of beef per week but that the City gradually reduced the amount of its purchases. His testimony is as follows:

"Q. Did there come a time when the City discontinued its purchases from you? A. They have been buying regularly to date, but recently the purchases have only beer. averaging 3,000 pounds a week.

Q. What has that been due to? A. Our manager just informed me that we have given them what they wanted, that it was of their request that the quantity was limited. In other words, they didn't ask for a greater quantity; perhofs that would be the better way to put it.

Q. And they could have asked for and received greater quantities, sometimes, than they got? A. Within the limits of our deal, yes.

Q. And the limits of your deal were 10,000 to 12,000 pounds? A. 10,000 to 12,000 pounds, yes." It thus appears that the three packers aforesaid were willing to sell the City a total

of 42,000 pounds of beef per week which was in excess of the City's requirements. It is significant to note, however, that Wilson & Company was the only packer that

was unwilling to continue to sell beef to the City at ceiling prices. In spite of this fact, it was from Wilson & Company that the City purchased its beef and paid $.061 per pound above the ceiling price.

Bernhardt Gissel of Wilson & Company further testified: "Q. So that as far as Wilson & Company were concerned and as far as the

institutions of The City of New York were concerned, although you were selling beef to your regular customers at ceiling prices you were unwilling to sell it to The City of New York because The City of New York was not a regular customer? A. Right.

Q. But you were willing to enter into this arrangement of custom slaughtering which resulted in the City paying 26 and six-tenths cents a pound, to take their figure, for 'Commercial' beef the ceiling price of which was 18/ cents? A. Right." Gissel further testified that Wilson & Company continued to slaughter cattle for the

City in an amount greatly in excess of the City's needs.

The following is, Gissel's testimony : "Q. And what was the maximum amount that you had in storage for the City

during this period of custom-slaughtering? A. I would say, roughly speaking again, approximately 300,000 pounds.

Q. And was any of that earmarked for the Army or Navy? A. No, nothing. It is all specifically killed for the City and set aside as their own, they stamp it themselves.

Q. None of it was set aside for the Army or Navy? A. No." The attention of the Council is directed to the fact that under the Federal regula-

tions, the City was not permitted to slaughter a greater amount of cattle than would meet its weekly requirements, i. e., 40,000 pounds per week.

It appears from Gissel's testimony that the City was not only slaughtering its weekly requirements, but was in addition thereto, hoarding hundreds of thousands of pounds of beef in the freezers. In fact, the records supplied by the Department of Purchase show that on June 30, 1942, there was on hand in the Wilson freezer, 402,850 pounds of beef belonging to the City.

It will be noted that in spite of the fact that there was a requirement that 45 per cent of all dressed beef be laid aside for use by the Army and Navy, this regulation was not lived up to.

The reason for this becomes apparent from a reading of the letter sent by Director Cook of the Department of Purchase to the Food Administrator, wherein he states that in view of the fact that the City is paying .266 cents per pound for beef, it could not afford to sell it to the Army at the ceiling price of .205 cents.

Purchases of Beef by the State of New York The State of New York supplies approximately 70 institutions with a population

of 130,000 persons, as against the City's 26 institutions with a population of 30,000 persons. Throughout all of the period hereinbefore referred to, the State Division of Standards

and Purchase was able to obtain beef for the inmates and employees of these institu-tions at ceiling prices.

The fact of the matter is that while the City was feeding its inmates with "Com-mercial" or "Grade B" Beef, the State of New York was using "Good" or "Grade A."

It has heretofore been pointed out that the Purchase Department of the City admitted paying .266 cents per pound for Commercial Beef.

In a report filed by the State Division of Standards and Purchase at the request of Governor Dewey, it appears that the average price paid by the State for "Grade A" Beef was .2143 cents per pound (the ceiling price for "Grade A" Beef was .215 cents per pound).

No explanation has been forthcoming as to why the State could buy "Grade A" Beef in sufficient quantity at less than the ceiling price, while the City was paying .061 cent per pound above the ceiling for Commercial or "Grade B" Beef.

Petty Chiselers In the course of the investigation, the fact developed that not only were many of the

Food Inspectors formerly employed by certain packing houses, but they were assigned to iii pect the food which their former employers were selling to the City.

In addition to this, while the public in general, was compelled to tighten its belt because of an inadequate supply of beef in the City, these inspectors were being accom-modated by the packers who furnished them with rationed commodities in great abundance.

We quote from the testimony of Joseph J. Klumback, Food Inspector attached to the Comptroller's Office.

"Q. Now, what did you get from Wilson & Company? A. Beef. You mean each article?

Q. Well you got — A. Steaks. Q. Yes? A. Top round, ham, bacon, butter, eggs. I guess that's all. Q. Well, what you got from them you got at prices greatly below what you

have to pay to your own butcher; isn't that so? A. Yes. Q. In other words, you got sirloin steak at 40 cents, porterhouse steak at 49

cents, round steak at 35, butter at 454 and ham at about 28 cents. A. Yes, sir. Q. And that was distributed throughout your department to the various inspec-

tors? A. Yes, sir." These Inspectors who were accorded this special privilege by Wilson & Company

and other packers, were charged with the duty of inspecting the food products sold by these packers to the City. The effect that these "courtesies" would have upon the nature of their inspection, can best be gathered from the following testimony of Klumback:

Q. And in addition to that, you and the other men are in a position where you

y Company at these bargain prices, you felt grateful to Wilson & Company for grant- ing you this privilege, didn't you? A. Why, yes."

The witness further admitted that by these purchases, the Inspectors effected savings. "Q. And in addition to that, you and the other men are in a position where you

don't have to worry whether your butcher has porterhouse or sirloin? A. For-tunately, we get it.

° Q. Otherwise you might be in the same position as the general public, and not be able to get any? A. That is true." The record also discloses that some of these Inspectors still "owed" money to the

r packers for merchandise received, and that George Basso, Chief Food Buyer of the Department of Purchase, one of the inaugurators of the "custom slaughter" plan, not only owed a balance to Armour & Company, but admitted receiving a gift of a "couple of dozen eggs" from Armour & Company.

Upon these facts being disclosed, the Mayor directed the Comptroller and the Commissioner of Purchase to take summary action against these "Petty chiselers." Among these so-called "petty chiselers," were Hetherington and Basso, the originators of the "custom slaughter" plan.

Up to the present time, no action has been taken against any of these employees. The excuse being given by both the Comptroller and Commissioner of Purchase that "good men nowadays are hard to find."

Attached hereto is a copy of the Mayor's letter on this subject. Recommendations : At the time of the public hearing, the Committee made the

following recommendations : (1) That action be taken against Carobine & Company to recover "commissions"

illegally paid by the City to Carobine & Company in violation of the Charter. (2) That action be taken against Wilson & Company to recover the amount paid

in excess of the ceiling price for commercial beef. Instead of such action being taken, the Mayor directed the Commissioner of Investi-

gation to hold a hearing. The result of said hearing was a foregone conclusion ; i.e., a white-wash and a dissipation of any possibility of the City recovering these illegal payments.

Office of the Mayor, City of New York, September 11, 1943. Hon. ALBERT PLEYDELL, Commissioner of Purchase, Municipal Building, New ,York City:

My Dear Commissioner—I am submitting herewith a report from the Commissioner of Investigation involving misconduct on the part of two employees of your department.

The facts are clearly stated but I want to add to the conclusions and recommenda-tions contained in the report, that the acceptance of any gratuity or favor by any employee is a violation of the "Cremo Cigar Rule" which I laid down on assuming office January 1, 1934. Such employees cannot continue in places where the City must depend on their discretion, decision or judgment. Such employees are susceptible to dismissal or to reduction in rank, and to assignment to purely mechanical or paper routine where no decision, discretion 'or judgment are involved.

I expect you to act accordingly. Sincerely yours, F. H. LA GUARDIA, Mayor.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Release of Infectious Prostitutes

Under existing Public Health laws of the State of New Yozk (Article 17-B, section 343-gg, providing for the examination of suspected persons infected with venereal diseases and the dentention until the results of such examinations are known) and as supplemented by the provisions of the Sanitary Code of The City of New York (Article 17-B, section 343-hh, providing for the examination of persons under arrest, charged with a crime involving prostitution; and section 343-ii, providing for the treatment of persons found to be suffering from, or infected with any venereal disease under such rules and regulations for their isolation and treatment, and further providing that the local Board cf Health Officer shall, in that case, define the place and limits of the area within which such person shall be isolated and the conditions under which such isolation and treatment shall be terminated, and further providing every person held for treatment shall be required by the Board of Health to conform to rules and regulations of the Sanitary Code of the Board of Health of The City of New York), the Department of Health sends infected women to the Kingston Avenue Hospital, a City institution, for isolation and medical care.

However, an infected prostitute, committed to the hospital, may be released upon the application of a licensed physician who states that the patient will be removed to another hospital or to her "home" where she will remain in strict isolation until cured, usually a period of four weeks, under his private medical treatment. (Section 88, regulation 5 of the provisions of the Sanitary Code of The City of New York, providing for the isolation of the infected person by removal to a hospital designated by the Board of Health of the Department of Health of The City of New York, unless proper accommodations, facilities, and requirements can be and are provided at the home of such person for proper examination, medical care and treatment.)

It has been established that diseased prostitutes who were committed to the Kingston Avenue Hospital were prematurely released while still infected. A great majority of the infected prostitutes were released upon the application of a single physician, Dr. Benjamin A. Gilbert, unconnected with any hospital, who admitted that he was signally successful in getting approval of releases as evidenced by the fact that out of 56 cases he secured the approval of 52, while other physicians were denied releases in 31 out of 85 cases in a single year.

The doctor testified that in most instances he never met the patient prior to her release, but was retained for this purpose by an attorney and in some cases, by a procurer whose interest in effecting the speedy release of the prostitute is apparent.

The application form for the release of the diseased women required the setting forth of the address of the "home" of the patient, in addition to the statements that she had her own cooking and eating utensils and private washroom, laundry and lavatory facilities.

The doctor entered into an arrangement with the management of a local City hotel, whereby the patients were easily and speedily released from the City institutions, the hotel being designated as the "home" of the patients.

On the application for the release, the doctor would insert alongside the word "residence," in the application form, the words "Hatfield Hotel," although the patient had never. resided at the hotel and did not even know that such a hotel existed.

The Department of Health assigned nurses to visit the "home" of the patient at the Hatfield Hotel, for the purpose of determining whether the sanitary requirements were satisfied and to determine whether the patient actually lived there.

Invariably the nurse found "props" supplied'by the hotel management in the form of clothing, luggage and cooking utensils.

The prostitutes thus released from the Kingston Avenue Hospital were under no direct supervision or restriction, but were free to leave the hotel and ply their trade throughout the City. In the majority of cases, these patients possessed previous criminal records for convictions involving commercial prostitution in New York and other places.

Officials of the Health Department never checked the criminal records of the infected patients applying for release and professed ignorance of the availability of such records. Dr. Theodore Rosenthal, head of the Bureau of Social Hygiene, who passed on the release applications, testified he was unaware of the privilege of examining police records which would have shown that many Kingston Avenue Hospital patients had long criminal records. He further testified that had he known this, doubtless many applications would have been rejected.

Apparently these officials did not even know that they had a right to require the Police Department to assign police officers to them to aid in their work. (Administrative Code, section A 35-2-0.)

. Health Department officials admitted that there were no means of identifying these patients who were discharged as being cured and non-infectious. A stand-in, free from the disease, could be easily "planted" to substitute for an infected prostitute.

The management of the hotel stated to nurses that the rent on these women was paid four weeks in advance (a requirement of the Health Department), although the records of the Hotel Hatfield indicated the use by transients during the same period that the rooms ostensibly were occupied by the released patients.

The testimony indicated that there were numerous instances when the patients who were confined to the hotel were drunk and disorderly, entertained men vistors in their rooms and were often absent from the hotel overnight.

It was disclosed that the rent was never paid in advance and that the rooms were irregularly occupied by the released prostitutes.

Only on rare occasions were nurses, assigned by the Health Department for inspec-tion purposes, able to find patients in their rooms. In some instances they found men

MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

THE CITY RECORD

4691

in the rooms under such circumstances as to lead to the inevitable conclusion that the patient had resumed her profession while still under treatment and supposedly isolated.

Some of these women were re-arrested for prostitution shortly after their release and while still in an infectious condition. A number of these released prostitutes absconded immediately after release. No effective means have been adopted by the Health Depart-ment for their apprehension despite the fact that means are available under section 434A-170 of the Administrative Code, providing for the detail of officers and men to assist the Department of Health for the enforcement of the provisions of the Sanitary Code.

The combined fees paid to the physician and attorney approximate four or five hundred dollars per patient, and obviously, this added obligation by the prostitute com- pelled the immediate resumption of her profession.

This tragic situation had a ludicrous touch in the testimony showing that the deten- tion of the diseased prostitutes for treatment at the City institutions was ordered reduced from four weeks to ten days by Mayor La Guardia because of his belief and fear that the hospital beds, occupied by the infected prostitutes, were needed for possible casualty victims of air-raids.

Dr. Edward Horowitz, Joint Supervisor of the venereal ward in the Kingston Avenue Hospital, stated that venereal sufferers were hurried out to make way for potential bomb casualties. The charge v, as substantiated by Dr. Hyman Strauss, who alternated as Chief of the venereal division of the hospital.

In the year 1942, 109 infected prostitutes were released from the Kingston Avenue Hospital despite the protestations and contrary opinion of Dr. Horowitz. The doctor testified that if only 100 of these were returned to their profession they could infect hundreds of thousands in the course of one year. The freedom of conduct and action of infected prostitutes released from the hosgital and living at the hotel was in sharp contrast to the vigilance and surveillance maintained at Kingston Avenue Hospital where police officers were stationed on guard at the hospital grounds to preserve and assure isolation of the infected patients.

Dr. Emily Barringer, Gynecologist at New York Polyclinic Hospital, former Director of Gynecology at Kingston Avenue Hospital, former President of the American Women's Medical Association, and holding a high position in many other medical associations and hospitals and who is considered an outstanding national authority on the subject of venereal diseases, stated that it was unwise to reduce the four-week test period and that the practice of releasing prostitutes under the Hotel Hatfield arrangement was entirely unwarranted and a serious menace to the public health and especially to the health of the members of the armed forces.

The Kingston Avenue Hospital situation reflects a flagrant and disgraceful abuse flourishing without restraint with the tacit and passive approval of the City Admin- istration,

It had progressed from bad to worse until it became comparable to any racket whereby thousands of dollars are mulcted from unfortunate girls. It is a most serious menace to the public health and the well being of hundreds of thousands of servicemen of the armed forces, who enter the City for a short stay every month.

This Administration has been woefully lax and blind in assuming direct responsi-bility and it has failed to exercise that responsibility fully and effectively to take steps and means for its elimination.

Dr. Stebbins testified that he had voted to change the existing provisions of the Sanitary Code to meet the evils existing under this system and that he had been out-voted by the other members of the Board of Health, of which he was one.

A representative of this Committee was directed to secure a copy of the resolution at the request of the Vice-Chairman and it was found that the resolution contained substantially what the present Sanitary Code provisions provided.

Dr. Stebbins later informed the representative that the vote on this resolution was unanimous to table it and when asked to explain his testimony that he had voted in favor of this resolution, he said he didn't vote "because the Chairman only votes in the case of a tie."

It must be remembered that the statements hereinbefore contained are based solely upon the testimony of responsible City officials, including the Commissioner of Health.

Dr. Hyman Strauss testified that he is the senior attending gynecologist in the Kingston Avenue Hospital and has been employed in said institution for the past 15 years, and that he is in charge of all patients inflicted with gonorrhea, and that he has no superior as far as the medical treatment of those patients is concerned. His testimony in part is as follows:

"Q. Is it a fact that a large percentage of thb persons sent to the Kingston Avenue Hospital are prostitutes or promiscuous persons? A. Yes, sir.

Q. In what percentage, would you say? A. Almost 100 per cent. Q. Are they all infectious? A. The reason they are sent there is to control

their infections, yes, sir. Q. Have patients been released from your institution while they are still in

the infectious condition? A. Yes, sir. Q. And how are they released while they are still in an infectious condition?

A. Well, as I mentioned, and as I qualified by answer before, that we were respon-sible for their care, but not completely for their custody. It is enough that a patient can get a release order signed by the Bureau of Social Hygiene, the Board of Health, and she can be released from the Hospital irrespective of what we think of their infectivity, or how sick they are, or what their status is, that takes the responsibility completely from our shoulders on towards that of the department." Dr. Strauss further testified that he objected to the release of these patients and

voiced his objection to the Commissioner of Hospitals. Further testifying, Dr. Strauss said:

"Q. And you have been informed, have you, that they have to pay a large sum of money to the doctor who makes the application, and on numerous occasions to the lawyer. A. Yes, I have been told that, yes, sir.

Q. And I believe that you used the expression, have you not, that these girls leave the hospital with their future mortgaged ? A. That's right.

Q. And do those factors, in your opinion and based upon your experience, tend to an immediate resumption of her—shall we call it `soliciting'? A. I can best answer that by quoting one of the girls.

Q. All right. A. She said, 'How am I expected to live?"' Dr. Strauss further testified that the average prostitute has relations with approxi-

mately 20 men each day, and that the release of these infected prostitutes constituted a menace to the people of The City of New York. He further testified that Dr. Gilbert obtained the release of well over 95 per cent of these patients.

In the Journal of the American Medical Association of April 10, 1943, Dr. Strauss, the head of the Kingston Avenue Hospital, wrote:

"Assuming that only 100 of these 109 girls returned to prostitution as a liveli-hood, and allowing them 65 days for idleness and menses, and granting the average number of daily exposures to be even less than their admitted minimum of 20, approximately half a million men could be infected in a year while the girls are under private medical care and yet continue the practice of their profession at the same time." He further testified:

'iIf the State can call on a man for his life in this grave emergency, surely the common welfare demands that the 'right' of the infected prostitute to be at liberty while still infectious be disallowed, at least for the duration of the war." Some time in 1942, Dr. Strauss was ordered by the Commissioner of Hospitals to

release patients after two weeks. He testified that this was contrary to his judgment and experience. He further stated,

"When we cut down our period of observation for two weeks, some of our patients were found—some cultures came back positive after we had released patients." In other words, in compliance with the direction of theCommissioner of Hospitals,

patients were released at the end of two weeks. At the time of their release a culture was taken. After their release, the report on the culture showed that these patients, who had already been discharged, were still infectious.

The testimony of Dr. Strauss was corroborated by that of, Dr. Edward R. Horowitz, attending gynecologist of the Kingston Avenue Hospital. He also told of the uncon-ditional discharge of patients after two weeks, and that in many cases the culture came back 48 hours after the patient was released, showing that the patient was still infectious.

At the request of the Minority Leader' Dr. Ernest L. Stebbins, Commissioner of Health, was called to the stand. Dr. Stebbins stated that the Board of Health is a

wdy of five men, who have the power of establishing regulations within the scope of the Public Health Law. He added the qualification that the powers were limited by the Public Health Law of the State of New York. He admitted that the Board of Health has the legal right to confine infectious venereal patients to a hospital, 'tut the Board of Health has refused to require that." This testimony on that point is as follows:

"Q. If the Board of Health so specified, you have the perfect legal right to see to it that these patients are confined in an institution? A. Right, but the Board of Health has refused to require that." He conceded that he is a member of the Board of Health. He further testified:

"Q. And that to release these prostitutes would constitute a menace to the health of the soldiers and sailors on furlough? A. Yes." The Commissioner admitted that the payment of the fees to Dr. Gilbert constituted

a fraud. His testimony follows : "Q. Don't you think that was a fraud on these patients? A. I do, definitely."

The attention of the Council is directed to the fact that this pracice has been going on since 1936, and the records indicate that it was reported to theCommissioner of Investigation by City Magistrate Charles Solomon in that year.

The efficiency of the Health Department is demonstrated by the following testimony: "Q. You were fooled by those practices ? A. Yes."

Here, we had the spectacle of the Commissioner of Health of the largest City in the world admitting that over a period of seven years they were fooled into releasing infected prostitutes to roam at large throughout theCity. The menace thus created is apparent. This "Committee, however, will not draw any conclusions but will quote the testimony of the Health Commissioner on this point :

"Q. Do you subscribe to this view, that 100 infectious prostitutes released in a city like New York could infect hundreds of thousands of people? A. One hundred infectious prostitutes released in The City of New York over what period of time?

Q. Over a period of a year, we will say. A. I would say there is a definite possibility of it, yes.

Q. ' Of infecting hundreds of thousands of people? A. Yes." The Committee was gratified to learn from the Commissioner that, after this inves-

tigation was commenced, the practice of releasing infected patients from the Kingston Avenue Hospital to private physicians was stopped. The present regulation only permits them to be released to another institution, where they will be kept in isolation.

TheCommissioner testified that in August, 1943, after this Committee's investiga-tion had been brought to his attention, he consulted with the Mayor and, thereafter, he issued the aforesaid order.

The, Committee again comments upon the fact that these abuses had continued for a period of seven years. The Commissioner had testified that he was powerless to stop it because his own Board of Health refused to change the provisions of the Sanitary Code. However, as soon as he was apprised of the investigation being conducted by this Committee, the Commissioner stopped it by the mere expedient of issuing an order.

In view of the fact that it appears that the investigation by this Committee brought about a discontinuance of this outrageous condition, the Committee makes no recom-mendations on this subject.

Note—The Committee submitted the foregoing report in two sections. For the purpose of avoiding confusion, however, it was combined and treated as one when presented to the Council.

Laid over. At this point Mrs. Earle offered a statement and requested that it be received and

printed along with the foregoing report. Following discussion by Messrs. Cohen, Isaacs and Mrs. Earle, Mr. Isaacs moved

that Mrs. Earle's statement be received and printed in the record. Seconded by Mrs. Klein.

On point of order raised by Mr. Cohen, the Chair ruled that Mr. Isaacs' motion was in order.

Whereupon, Mr. Quinn moved to sustain the ruling of theChair. Seconded by Mr. Cohen.

The President put the question whether the Council would agree with said motion of Mr. Quinn to sustain the ruling of the Chair, which was decided in the negative by the following vote:

Affirmative—Messrs. Cacchione, Earle, L. P. Goldberg, M.Goldberg, Isaacs, Klein and Ninfo-7.

Negative—Messrs. Bryne, Carroll, Cohen, Conrad, DiFalco, DiGiovanna, Donovon, Hart, Kinsley, McCarthy, Nugent, Phillips, Quinn, Schick, Vogel and the Vice-Chair-man-16.

Not Voting—Christensen and Powell-2. The President then declared Mr. Isaacs motion out of order. At this point Mrs. Earle moved that her statement be received as a minority report.

Seconded by Mrs. Klein. . Mr. Cohen raised a point of order that Mrs. Earle, not being a member of the

Committee, could not submit a minority report. Following discussion by Messrs. Hart, Cohen, L. P. Goldberg, Mrs. Earle and the

Vice-Chairman, the Chair ruled that Mr. Cohen's point of order was not well taken. Mr. Hart then moved to sustain the ruling of the Chair. Seconded by Mr. Cohen. Following discussion by Messrs. Hart, L. P. Goldberg, Quinn and Mrs. Earle, the

President put the question whether the Council would agree with said motion of Mr. Hart to sustain the ruling of the Chair, which was decided in the negative by the follow-ing vote:

Affirmative—Messrs. Cacchione, Earle, L. P. 'Goldberg, M. Goldberg, Isaacs and Ninfo-6.

Negative—Messrs. Byrne, Carroll, Christensen, Cohen, Conrad, DiFalco, DiGiovanna, Donovan, Hart, Kinsley, Klein, McCarthy, Nugent, Phillips, Quinn, Schick, Vogel and the Vice-Chairman----18.

Not Voting—Powell-1. The President then declared Mrs. Earle's motion out of order. At this point Messrs. Cohen and Cacchione each in turn rose to a point of high

personal privilege.

REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES Report of the Committee on General Welfare

Nos. 396-411 Int. No. 332 Report of the Committee on General Welfare in Favor of Adopting an

Amended Local Law to Amend the Administrative Code of The City of New York, In Relation to the Procqrement or Sale of Tickets, Reserva. tions or Passenger Accommodations Issued by Any Railroad, Parlor. or Sleeping Car Owner or Operator, Steamship Company, Air Line or Bus Line and Limiting the Prices at Which Such Tickets, Reservations or Accommodations May Be Sold.

The Committee on General Welfare, to which was referred on Ncvember 30, 1943 (Minuses, page 145), the annexed Local Law, as amended, to amend the Administrative Code of The City of New York, in relation to the procurement or sale of tickets, reserva-tions or passenger accommodations issued by any railroad, parlor or sleeping car owner or operator, steamship company, air line or bus line and limiting the prices at which such tickets, reservations or accommodations may he sold, respectfully

REPORTS: This legislation, among other things, prohibits a service charge in excess of $1 for

the procurement, sale, or re-sale within the City of New York, of any ticket, reserva-tion or passenger accommodation, issued by any railroad, parlor or sleeping-car company, steamship company, air or bus line.

It is a penal statute, making any violation a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine up to $100, or imprisonment not exceeding ten days, or both, for each separate offense. Its purpose is to do away with the excessive charges exacted by certain agencies and individuals for procuring or selling such travel accommodations.

The bill has been amended in committee by exempting from its provisions tickets, reservations or passenger accommodations to or from places outside of the continental United States and Canada, excluding Alaska ; it has also been made unapplicable to existing written contracts between any travel agency with corporations, firms or govern-ment agencies covering tourist or travel services. There are also additional clarifying and technical amendments.

Your Committee recommends the adoption of this bill as amended, in the public interest.

4692 THE CITY RECORD MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

A LOCAL LAW to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to the procurement or sale of tickets, reservations or passenger accom-modations issued by any railroad, parlor or sleeping car owner or operator, steam-ship company, air line or bus line and limiting the prices at which such tickets, reservations or accommodations may be sold.

Be it enacted by the Council as follows: Section 1. Chapter fourteen of the administrative code of the city of New York

is hereby amended by adding thereto a new section, to follow section 363-1.0, to be section 363-2.0, to read as follows:

§ 363-2.0 Procurement or sale of tickets, reservations or passenger accommoda- tions.—a. It is hereby determined and declared that the price or charge for the procurement on behalf of another, by purchase or otherwise or upon the sale or resale, within the corporate limits of the city of New York, of tickets, reservations or passenger accommodations issued by any railroad, parlor or sleeping car owner or operator, steam-ship company, air line or bus line is a matter affected with a public interest and subject to the supervision of the authorities of said city for the purpose of safeguarding the public against fraud, extortion, exorbitant rates and similar abuses.

b. It shall be unlawful for any person to require, charge, make or receive, within the corporate limits of the city of New York, for the procurement on behalf of another, by purchase or otherwise, of any ticket, reservation or passenger accommodation, issued by any railroad, parlor or sleeping car owner or operator, steamship company, air line or bus line, a fee or service charge or any payment or consideration for rendering such service in excess of $1.00 for the first transportation ticket, reservation or passenger accommodation or first parlor car or sleeping car reservation or passenger accommoda-tion, or in excess of $1.00 for any additional transportation ticket or parlor car or sleeping car reservation or passenger accommodation over the established tariff charge or charges therefor.

c. It shall be unlawful for any person to procure on behalf of another person, within the corporate limits of the city of New York by purchase or otherwise, any ticket, reservation or passenger accommodation, issued by any railroad, parlor or sleeping car owner or operator, steamship company, air line or bus line, with the intent, with respect to such other person, to require, charge, make or receive a service charge or any payment or consideration for rendering service in excess of the amount or amounts hereinabove specified in paragraph "b" over the established tariff charge or charges therefor.

Proof of the making of a service charge or of the receipt of any payment or con- sideration, in connection with the procurement of such ticket, reservation or passenger accommodation, for such other person, in excess of the amount or amounts hereinabove specified in paragraph "h", over such established tariff charge or charges, shall be presumptive evidence of the intent mentioned in the next preceding paragraph.

d. It shall be unlawful for any person to sell, resell or cause to be resold, within the corporate limits of the city of New York, any ticket, reservation or passenger accommo-dation, issued by any railroad, parlor or sleeping car owner or operator, steamship company, air line or bus line, at a price in excess of the amount or amounts hereinabove specified in paragraph "b" over the established tariff charge or charges therefor.

e. It shall be unlawful for any person to procure, within the corporate limits of the city of New York, by purchase or otherwise, any ticket, reservation or passenger accommodation, issued by any railroad, parlor or sleeping car owner or operator, steam-ship company, air line or bus line, with the intent to sell or resell the same, or cause the same to be sold or resold, at a price in excess of the amount or amounts hereinabove specified in paragraph "b" over the established tariff charge or charges therefor.

Proof of the sale or resale of such ticket, reservation or passenger accommodation or combination thereof at a price in excess of the amount or amounts hereinabove speci-fied in paragraph "b" over such established tariff charge or charges shall be presumptive evidence of the intent mentioned in the next preceding paragraph.

f. The term "person" as used in this section includes any officer or employee of a corporation or a member or employee of a partnership who, as such officer, member or employee, is responsible for the act in respect of which the violation occurs.

The term "established tariff charge" shall be the charge set forth in the tariff as published and filed by the railroad, parlor or sleeping car owner or operator, steam-ship company, air line or bus line involved.

g. The person responsible for the management of each travel agency and hotel operating within the corporate limits of the city of New York shall cause a copy of this local law to be posted in a conspicuous place upon the premises of the agency or hotel for the information of patrons, guests and members of the public at large. ,

h. Any person violating any of the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, shall be punished by a fine of not exceeding one hundred dollars or by imprisonment not exceeding ten days or both, for each separate offense.

i, This law s'.iall not apply to tickets, reservations or passenger accommodations: (a) to or from places outside of the continental United States and Canada, excluding Alaska ; nor (b) to existing written contracts between any travel agency with corpora-tions firms or government agencies covering tourist or travel services.

Section 2. This local law shall take effect immediately, WM. A. CARROLL, JAMES A. PHILLIPS, JOHN P. NUGENT, LOUIS

COHEN, JOSEPH E. KINSLEY, ANTHONY J. DiGIO'ANNA, Committee on General Welfare.

In connection with the foregoing local law, His Honor, the Mayor, transmits the following message of necessity:

City of New York, Office of the Mayor. Pursuant to authority vested in me by section 13 of the City Home Rule Law and

by section 37 of the New York City Charter, I hereby certify to the necessity for the immediate passage of Local Law Int. No. 332, No. 396, as amended, introduced by Mr. Kinsley, entitled:

A local law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to the procurement or sale of tickets, reservations or passenger accommoda-tions issued by any railroad, parlor or sleeping car owner or operator, steamship company, air line or bus line and limiting the prices at which such tickets, reserva-tions or accommodations may be sold. Given under my hand and Seal this 23d day of December, 1943, at City Hall in

the City of New York. F. H. LA GUARDIA, Mayor. On motion of Mr. Kinsley, seconded by Mr. Cohen, the foregoing local law was

made a General Order for the day. Following discussion by Mr. Kinsley, Mrs. Earle and the Vice-Chairman, the

President put the question whether the Council would agree with said report and adopt such amended local law, which was decided in the affirmative by the following vote:

Affirmative—Messrs. Byrne, Cacchione, Carroll, Casey, Christensen, Cohen, Conrad, DiFalco, DiGiovanna, Donovan, Earle, L. Goldberg, M. Goldberg, Hart, Isaacs, Kinsley, Klein, McCarthy, Ninfo, Nugent, Phillips, Powell, Quinn, Schick, Vogel and the Vice-Chairman-26.

At this point Mr. Cacchione served notice that at the next meeting of the Council, he would move to discharge the Committee on Rules from further consideration of Res. No. 318:

Resolution requesting Mayor La Guardia and Police Commissioner Valentine to order immediate suspension of Patrolman James LeRoy Drew, accused of anti-semitic, anti-war, un-American activity.

GENERAL ORDERS G. 0. No. 151—Nos. 274-390 Int. No. 232.

A LOCAL LAW to amend the administrative code of the cite of New York, in relation to materials for fire resistive stairway enclosures.

On motion of Mr. Quinn, the foregoing General Order was recommitted to the Committee on Buildings.

INTRODUCTION AND READING OF BILLS Resolution Appointing Various Persons Commissioner of Deeds.

By the President- . Resolved, that the following named persons he and they hereby are appointed Com-

missioner of Deeds for a term of two years. By Councilman Carroll—David Wiggs, 118 Fast 40th Street, Manhattan. By Councilman Casey—Jerome D. Oltarsh, 2620 Fast 7th Street, Brooklyn. By Councilman Conrad—Anton Herbst, 41-63 Forley Street, Elmhurst, Queens. By Councilman DiGiovanna—Samuel Drucker, 1755 Ocean Parkway, Brooklyn : Joseph J. Kanner, 613 Bedford Avenue, Brooklyn; F. Clemence Baker, 34 Cambridge Place,

Brooklyn. By Councilman Louis P. Goldberg—Lillian Keisler, 1530 St. John's Place, Brooklyn.

By Councilman Hart—William King, 8 East 55th Street, Brooklyn; Beatrice M. Eschwege, 51 Stratford Road, Brooklyn.

By Councilman Kinsley—Samuel Bushwick, 1420 Crotona Avenue, Bronx; Marco ,Macaluso, 1259 White Plains Road, Bronx.

By Councilman Klein—Leo S. Marcus, 1265 Croes Avenue, Bronx. By Councilman McCarthy—Irving A. Friedman, 2285 East 22d Street, Brooklyn;

Charles E. Sullivan, 649 Carroll Street, Brooklyn. By Councilman Nugent—Louis Richman, 174 West 76th Street, Manhattan; Marie

Roehrig, 55 Cooper Street, Manhattan; Dorothy Shapiro, 200 West 20th Street, Manhattan. 0

By Councilman Phillips—Theresa M. Priolo, 97-21 Allendale Street, Queens. By Councilman Vogel—

Pauline Osdin, 781 Eastern Parkway, Brooklyn; Winfield C. Gillespie, 112 Lafayette Avenue, Brooklyn; Frances Feldman, 476 Hinsdale Street, Brooklyn; Sylvia Lichten-stein, 1640 Ocean Parkway, Brooklyn.

The President put the question whether the Council would agree with and adopt such resolution which was unanimously decided in the affirmative by the following vote:

Affirmative—Messrs. Byrne, Cacchione, Carroll, Casey, Christensen, Cohen, Conrad, DiFalco, DiGiovanna, Donovan, Earle, L. Goldberg, M. Goldberg, Hart, Isaacs, Kinsley, Klein, McCarthy, Ninfo, Nugent, Phillips, Powell, Quinn, Schick, Vogel and the Vice-Chairman.-26.

Whereupon, on Motion of the Vice-Chairman, the Council adjourned to meet on Tuesday, December 28, 1943, at 11 o'clock a. m.

H. WARREN HUBBARD, City Clerk and Clerk of the Council.

THE COUNCIL •

RECESSED SPECIAL MEETING

The Special Meeting called by the President of the Council on December 7, 1943, pursuant to the provisions of section 222 of the New York City Charter, reconvened on Thursday, December 23, 1943, at 425 p. m. (immediately following the Stated Meeting) in the Council Chambers, City Hall.

Present Newbold Morris, President of the Council

Councilmen Joseph T. Sharkey, S. Samuel DiFalco Gertrude W. Klein

Vice-Chairman Anthony J. DiGiovanna William M. McCarthy Doris I. Byrne George E. Donovan Salvatore Ninfo Peter V. Cacchione Genevieve B. Earle John P. Nugent William A. Carroll Louis P. Goldberg James A. Phillips Rita Casey Meyer Goldberg Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. John M. Christensen Walter R. Hart Hugh Quinn Louis Cohen Stanley M. Isaacs Frederick Schick William N. Conrad Joseph E. Kinsley Edward Vogel

The President announced the presence of a quorum.

M-148 Call for Recessed Special Meeting.

The City of New York, Office of the President of the Council, City Hall, December 21, 1943. Hon. H: WARREN HUBBARD, Clerk of the Coivtcil, 263 Municipal Building, New York

City: Sir—Please be informed that the recessed special meeting of the Council called to

consider the Capital Budget for the year 1944 will reconvene on Thursday, December 23, immediately after the regular meeting of theCouncil scheduled on that day.

Very truly yours, NEWBOLD MORRIS, President of the Council; JOSEPH T. SHARKEY, Vice-Chairman.

Filed. M-145

Report of the Committee on Finance in Favor of Concurring in the Resolu-tion of the Board of Estimate Adopted December 2, 1943, Adopting the Capital Budget for the Year 1944, as Certified by the Mayor and Sub-mitted to the Council.

The Committee on Finance, to which was referred on December'7, 1943 (Minutes, page 151), the Capital Budget for the Year 1944, as adopted by the Board of Estimate on December 2, 1943, and certified by the Mayor on the same day, respectfully

REPORTS: Your Committee conducted two hearings on the proposed Capital Budget, a general

public hearing and a hearing devoted exclusively to a discussion on the proposed appro-priation for the Municipal Airport at Idlewild, Queens. No item in the budget provoked more interest than the proposal to appropriate $11,540,000 in the year 1944, for the planning and construction of the Municipal Airport at Idlewild, Queens. That amount is in addition to the unencumbered balance of $3,847,000 of funds obtained from the sale of Floyd Bennett Field. If the proposed appropriation is approved $15,387,000 will be available for planning and construction in 1944.

When the plans for the proposed airport were first submitted to the Council in the year 1941, it was assured that the appropriation then sought of approximately 10 million dollars would be the,only investment required of the City, and that this money would be derived from the sale to the United States Government of Floyd Bennett Field. Now, we are confronted with a request to make an additional investment for the planning and construction of the airport of $11,540,000 and $2,414,000 for the acquisition of additional land. The eventual cost to the City for planning and construction and acquisition of land will total $65,228,000. The advance in the estimated cost is, to say the least, startling, but it is common knowledge that the rapid development of aviation, since the inception of the war, has made the plans of yesteryear already obsolete.

This does not explain why the present proposal has been shrouded in such secrecy. The proposed appropriation for the airport did not appear in theCapital Budget submitted by the Planning Commission to the Board of Estimate. It was adopted by the Board of Estimate without explanation, and no breakdown of the cost was furnished. It was not until the hearing conducted by your Committee that an estimate of the cost of the items entering into the proposal was verbally furnished by the Commissioner of Marine and Aviation, and then set forth in writing by the Chairman of the Planning Commission. The. estimate furnished by the Planning Commission is attached hereto, and made part of this report.

Statement Submitted By City Planning Commission, December 15, 1943

Estimate of Amounts Required During 1944,

Line No. 195, Project 168A Recommended

Items of Work : Estimated 1944 Cost Allowance

Field— Dredging and Filling . ....... . ....................... $7,560,000 00 $3,632,000 00 Rough Grading ..................................... 1,300,000 00 1,000,000 00 Drainage ........................................... 2,800,000 00 2,800,000 00 Paving Runways—Taxi Slip ..... ........... ..... 21,000,000 00 6,000,000 00 Landscaping, Auto Parking, Interior Roads, Fencing,

Etc ............................................... 4,370,000 00 870,000 00 Utilities .. ..... ............................ 2,500,000 00 500,000 00 Field Lighting and Radio ............................ 3,000,000 00 ........ Sea Plane Base ..................................... 3,000,000 00 ........

Sub-Total for Field ........................ $45 530 000 00 $14,802,000 00. (The above items include engineering costs.)

Buildings— Administration Building ............................. $7,500,000 00 ........ Sea Plane Base Building ............................ 1,000,000 00 ... , ... . C. A. A. Building.. 500,000 00 ...... I . City Utility Building ................................ 300,000 00 ........ Pumping Station ................... ............. 500,000 00 ........ Freight Terminal ....................:.............. 2,000,000 00 ........

1

MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

THE CITY RECORD

4693

Within Debt Limit .... $16,011,425 79 $10,034,248 57 $24,988,751 10 $51,034,425 46 Outside Debt Limit..... 4,333,763 13 ...I.... 200,000 00 4,533,763 13

Grand Totals ...... $20,345,188 92 $10,034,248 57 $25,188,751 10 $55,568,188 59

—and be it further Resolved, That the Department of City Planning and the Director of the Budget

are hereby authorized and directed to correct such clerical and typographical errors as may be found in said Capital Budget ; and be it further

Resolved, That the Department .of City Planning and the Director of the Budget be and they are hereby authorized to make changes and adjustments within the various schedules embraced in the 1944 Capital Budget submitted by the City Planning Com-mission on October 29, 1943, and as adopted by the Board of Estimate on December 2, 1943, so far as such changes are made necessary by appropriations by the Board of Estimate during 1943 or by virtue of amendments made to the Capital Budget prior to its adoption.

A true copy of resolution adopted by the Board of Estimate on December 2, 1943. ISAAC EICHHOLZ, Acting Secretary.

(For text of Capital Budget see Council Minutes of December 7, 1943.) JOSEPH E. KINSLEY, FREDERICK SCHICK, EDWARD VOGEL, HUGH

QUINN, WILLIAM M. McCARTHY, WM. A. CARROLL, Committee on Finance. On motion of Mr. Kinsley, seconded by Mr. McCarthy, the foregoing report was

made a General Order for the day. At this point Mr. Isaacs offered a minority report and moved to substitute the same

for that of the majority. Seconded by Mr. Hart. Following discussion by Messrs. DiGiovanna, Isaacs, Kinsley, Nugent, Mrs. Klein

and Mrs. Earle, the same was withdrawn. In lieu thereof, Mr. Isaacs moved that the majority report be amended to include

his report. Seconded by Mrs. Earle. Following discussion, this motion was likewise withdrawn. The President put the question whether the Council would agree with and adopt

said majority report; which was unanimously adopted by a viva voce vote. At this point Mr. Kinsley offered the following resolution:

Res. No. 347 Resolution Adopting the Capital Budget for the Year 1944.

Resolved, That the Council hereby adopts the Capital Budget for the year 1944 (as adopted by the Board of Estimate on December 2, 1943) and thereafter submitted to the Council in accordance with section 222 of the New York City Charter.

On motion of Mr. Kinsley, seconded by Mr. DiGiovanna, the foregoing resolution was made a General Order for the day.

The President put the question whether the Council would agree with and adopt such resolution, which was unanimously decided in the affirmative by the following vote:

Affirmative—Messrs. Bryne, Cacchione, Carroll, Casey, Christensen, Cohen, Conrad, DiFalco, DiGiovanna, Donovan, Earle, L. Goldberg, M. Goldberg, Hart, Isaacs, Kinsley, Klein, McCarthy, Ninfo, Nugent, Phillips, Powell, Quinn, Schick, Vogel and the Vice-Chairman-26.

Whereupon the President declared the 1944 Capital Budget as passed by the Board of Estimate on December 2, 1943, in accordance with section 222 of the New York City Charter, adopted at 5.11 p. m.

At this point Mr. Isaacs moved to print his minority report in THE Cirm RECORD. Seconded by Mr. Cacchione and lost by a viva voce vote.

Following discussion, on motion of the Vice-Chairman, seconded by Mr. DiGiovanna, the foregoing motion of Mr. Isaacs, lost by a viva voce vote, was reconsidered.

The President again put the questi9n whether the Council would agre6 with said motion of Mr. Isaacs, which was decided in the negative by the following vote:

Affirmative—Messrs. Cacchione, Earle and Isaacs-3. Negative—Messrs. Byrne, Carroll, Cohen, Conrad, DiGiovanna, Donovan, Hart,

Kinsley, McCarthy, Nugent, Phillips, Schick, Vogel and the Vice-Chairman-14. Not voting—Messrs. Casey, L. Goldberg, Klein and Ninfo-4. At this point Mr. Kinsley, Mrs. Earle, the Vice-Chairman and the President made

brief remarks extending the season's greetings to their fellow members. Whereupon, on motion of the Vice-Chairman, the Recessed Council Meeting

adjourned sine die. mission to the Council for its consideration. H. WARREN HUBBARD, City Clerk and Clerk of the Council.

Estimate of Amounts Required During 1944,

Line No, 195, Project 168A Recommended

Items of Wcrk : Estimated 1944 Cost Allowance

*Hangar ............................................ 2,500,000 00 ........

Architects' Fees .................................... 858,000 00 $585,000 00

Sub-Total for Buildings .................... $15,158,000 00 $585,000 00

Grand Total ............................... $60,688,000 00 $15,387,000 00

Less available unencumbered balance of funds ob-

tained from sale of Floyd Bennett Field.......... **3,847,000 00

*Additional Hangars to be erected when and as leased by Airlines ....... $11,540,000 00

** Includes cancellation of beachgrass contract. The testimony taken by your Committee indicated an almost unanimous belief that

the proposed airport is most necessary, if The City of New York is to maintain its proper place in the airborne commerce of the post-war world. The present facilities of LaGuardia Field are already taxed to the utmost; in fact, some persons characterized it as already obsolete. It is seemingly apparent that a new airport must be constructed.

Therefore, the only issue remaining is the question of the cost to the City. The various persons, who appeared before your Committee, indicated their belief to be that the cost breakdown is fair and reasonable.

Why, then, has this evidently worthwhile proposal been surrounded with such hush-hush secrecy? Is it because that the now proposed expenditure of $65,228,000 does not represent the entire cost to the City? A study of the figures indicates that no allowance has yet been made for the construction of hangars, with but one exception. It is estimated that the proposed airport will require the construction of at least 40 hangars. Each of these hangars costs $2,500,000. It is, therefore, readily apparent that the field, when completed, will require the expenditure of more than $160,000,000. Your Committee believes that the taxpaying public is entitled to a true picture of the entire outlay involved. We are assured that the hangars and other buildings will only be constructed, if and when leases are made that will place them on a self-sustaining basis. With that policy your Committee is in agreement.

Seemingly reliable estimates furnished by the Commissioner of Marine and Aviation, the Director of Aviation, and the Commerce and Industry Association of New York indicate that the traffic at the proposed airport, together with the income from leases, will put the field on a self-sustaining basis. Your Committee has come to the conclusion that the proposal for the construction of the new airport is an instance of a meritorious matter badly mishandled in its presentation.

It, ti erefore, recommends the Council's approval of this item. There was much criticism made of the lack of appropriations in the new budget for

the Departments of Education, Health, Hospitals, and Transportation. These were outstanding in the list of cuts made in •the appropriations in the new budget for various City Departments. The representatives of the Comptroller and the City Planning Com-mission informed your Committee that these reductions were made, because priority restrictions prevented the construction of the various projects involved. Your Committee believes this explanation to be true. It regrets that the much needed facilities, previously provided for, will probably not be undertaken within the near future. Yet, although this cannot be done, your Committee wishes to respectfully suggest to the Council that when happier times return, the items, now deferred, be placed on the "must" list.

In conclusion, your Committee recommends that the proposed Capital Budget for the year 1944 as adopted by the Board of Estimate on December 2, 1943 and certified by the Mayor on December 2, 1943, be approved.

CAPITAL BUDGET FOR THE YEAR 1944 Office of the Mayor—Transmitting to the Council Capital Budget for the

Year 1944, as Adopted by the Board of Estimate on December 2, 1943, Together with Resolution of Adoption and Certification Signed by the Mayor.

City of New York, Office of the Mayor, December 2, 1943. The Council, City Hall, New York, New York:

Gentlemen—Pursuant to section 222 of the New York City Charter, I transmit here-with the Capital Budget for 1944, as adopted by the Board of Estimate on December 2, 1943 and certified by the Mayor on the same day.

Yours very truly, CHARLES F. MURPHY, Law Secretary. City of New York, Board of Estimate, Bureau of the Secretary, Municipal Building,

December 2, 1943. The Honorable FIORELLO H. LA GUARDIA, Mayor of The City of New York:

Dear Sir—I transmit herewith the 1944 Capital Budget as adopted by the Board of Estimate on December 2, 1943. Pursuant to the provisions of section 222 of the New York City Charter, I am forwarding this Budget for certification by you and for sub-

Certified copies of the resolutions adopted by the Board of Estimate on December 2, 1943 (Cal. Nos. 1-A and I -B), relative thereto, are also enclosed for your information.

Respectfully yours, ISAAC EICHHOLZ, Acting Secretary. Resolution Adopting the Capital Budget for the Year 1944.

Resolved, By the Board of Estimate, in pursuance of section 221 of the New York City Charter, that the 1944 Capital Budget be and the same is hereby adopted in the total amount as follows:.

Completion Renewals Cost of Additional

of 1943 Existing Funds • Total Adoptions Projects

OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER

VOUCHERS RECEIVED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER ON FRIDAY, DECEMBER 24, 1943. Hereinbelow is a statement of all vouchers received in

the office of the Comptroller on this date in which is shown the contract number (if a contract), the name of payee, the Department number (if other than a contract), the tickler number and the amount of the voucher.

JOSEPH D. McGOLDRICK, Comptroller.

Contract Vouchers

Contract Tickler No. Name of Payee No. Amount

137084 Blaw, Knox Const. ......... 219966 $1,570 00 143243 Brewer Dry Dock Co. ...... 220105 11,724 25 143242 Brewer Dry Dock Co. ...... 220106 7,995 50 133648 Epstein Co., Inc., M......... 220107 2,060 03 136084 Flinn, G. H., Corp. ........ 219945 77,177 23 137792 Fox Plumbing Co., Inc. .... 220104 1,074 00 142376 Harrison, Fouilhoux Abr. .. 220108 3,000 00 142066 McPhilben Mfg. Co. ........ 219941 11 71 143437 McVicker Co., W. B. ....... 219940 400 23 1,30562 N. Y. Telephone Co......... 220065 458 06 130169 N. Y. Telephone Co. ........ 219963 1,111 90 130169 N. Y. Telephone Co......... 219964 596 33 130169 N. Y. Telephone Co......... 219965 351 67

Other Than Contract Vouchers (Key to Department Numbers May Be Obtained at Room

720, Municipal Bldg., Manhattan, N. Y. 7.)

Dept. Tickler Vame of Payee No. No. Amount

Abidor, L . .................... 69 219992 $8 76 Abidor, L . .................... 69 219992 13 14 Acker, H . .................... 68 220120 5 00 Adler, J . ..................... 69 220021 4 00 Adler, J . ..................... 69 220021 6 00 Air Reduction Sales Co........ 68 220117 24 40 Air Reduction Sales Co........ 68 220117 36 53

Dept. Tickler Name of Payee No. No. Amount

Baumen, M . .................. 69 219994 2 76 Baumen, M . .................. 69 219994 4 14

Beaudoin, I . .................. 69 219987 1 40

Beaudoin, I . .................. 69 219987 2 10 Children's Village ............. 69 220060 5 50 Chrysler N. Y. Co., Inc. ...... 68 220123 9 75 Cincinnati Time Recorder Co... 68 220118 28 65 DeFalco, S .................... 69 219985 3 00

Dellwell Realty Corp.......... 99 220181 366 66 Dictaphone Corp ............... 63 219936 71 00 Dullea, Charles B . ............ 99 220176 50 00 Eleda Realty Co . ............. 69 220001 10 80 Ellcam Realty Corp. .......... 69 220165 104 99 Emigrant Indust. Savings Bank 99 220164 101 91

Excelsior Savings Bank, N.Y.C. 99 220070 1,000 00 Faber, Richard C . ............ 99 220173 85 00 Falconieri, A . ................ 69 220027 3 14 Falconieri, A . ................ 69 220027 4 71

Gilbert, H. M ................. 60 219961 135 00 Goldsmith, G. 0 ............... 990 220161 96 10

Herz, George W . ............ 99 220174 50 00

Herz, George W . ............ 99 220175 50 00 High Grade Auto Trimming .. 10 219954 .57 50 Holder, T. A . ................ 78 220064 8 75

Kent Stores, Inc ............... 970 16531 7 84 Kent Stores, Inc . ............ 9770 16534 2 00 Keuffel & Esser Co. .......... 10 219958 74 95 Kimbrig, Max ................ 99, 220195 23 75

Kings Garage ................ 80 219952 30 00

Lieblich & Co., H . ............ 10 2199,57 25 00 Loeb Memorial Home ......... 71 220142 1,030 40

Moore. A. A .................. 970 16530 2,450 00

Morris, E . ................... 941 220100 33 70

Moskowitz, Inc., M. .......... 68 220126 41 75 Newman, Arthur H. .......... 99 220195 15 20 Newburgh City Pub. Welfare.. 69 219981 25 26 Nieves, J . .................... 69 220054 6 25

Ontario County Pub. Welfare .. 69 219976 203 34 Ontario County Pub. Welfare .. 69 219978 10 80 Ornstein, George G. .......... 99 220198 49 87 Peerless Towel Supply ........ 1 219933 5 10 Phillips, E . ................... 69 220049 5 25

Dept. Tickler Name of Payee No. No. Amount

Picker X-Ray Corp. .......... 68 220113 20 50 Portable Light Co., Inc. ...... 68 220128 12 00 Rand Tea & Coffee Stores ... , 69 220036 3 69 Ray, V. M . ................. 1 219931 16 50 Real Estate Industrials, Inc. ... 99 220167 102 73 Simpson Roofing Vent. Co., Inc. 68 220134 1,336 64 Simpson Roofing Vent. Co., Inc. 68 220135 984 00 Singer, S . .. ... ............ 68 220130 16 50 Skybeam Realty Corp......... 99 220168 103 42 Skybeam Realty Corp. ........ 99 220169 103 42 Thompson Bonney Co......... 68 220114 266 99 Transportation, Board of....... 80 219943 25 10 Treasurer, U. S ............... 842 220067 456,288 48 Tubridy, V. M . .............. 58 220146 3 90 Tubridy, V. M . .............. 58 220146 83 75 Tubridy, V. M . .............. 58 220147 3 90 Tubridy, V. M . .............. 58 220147 172 15 Tubridy, V. M . .............. 58 220147 1 45 Tubridy, V. M. .............. 58 220148 188 26 Tubridy, V. M . .............. 58 220149 29 05 Unger, Arthur S . ............. 99 220182 14 25 Village of Mt. Kisco .......... 60 219962 8 66 Wakeling, J. C . .............. 99 220151% 10 74 Wakeling, J. C . .............. 990 220151 424 60 Webatuck Holding Co......... 69 220043 13 20 Webatuck Holding Co......... 69 220043 19 80 Weiss, M ..................... 69 220044 1 80 Weiss, M . .................... 69 220044 2 70 Welfare Public, Dept., Nassau.. 69 220063 150 00 Welfare Dept., N. Y. C. ...... 69 219968 7,180 80 Welfare Dept., N. Y. C. ...... 69 219968 4,435 54 Welfare Dept., N. Y. C....... 69 219968 29 90 Welfare Dept., N. Y. C....... 69 219968 45 70 Welfare Dept., N. Y. C. ...... 69 219968 10 43 Welfare Dept., N. Y. C. ...... 69 219968 4 00 Zarrillo, Gerardina ............ 99 220180 30 00 Zino & Sons, F ................ 69 219991 3 06 Zino & Sons, F . .............. 69 219991 4 59 129 E. 81st St., Inc............ 99 220166 102 81 Hudson Blue Photo Co....... 960 957 22 58 400 F. 4th St., Inc ............. 69 220028 3 60 400 E. 4th St., Inc......... ... 69 220028 5 40

4694 THE CITY RECORD MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

ovuva.a, DVaIGAV ldg., Manh'n, N. Y. 7 . CO rtlnd 7-6701

CHIEF MEDICAL EXAMINER- 12S Worth it., Manb'n, N. Y. 13. WO rtb 2-3711

Open all hours of day and night. Bronx-d50 Walton ave., N. Y. 51.

JE rome 7-4642 Open9a.m.to5P.us... Sundays and

holidays to 12 noon. Bklyn.-Municipal Bldg., Bkn. 2.TR iangl 5-9251

Open all hours of day and night. Qneana-B'way and Justice at., Elm-

hurst, N. Y .... .........HA vemyr 4-9634 Open 9 a. M. to 5 P. M. Saturday,.

Sundays and holidays to 12 noon. Richmond-Police Headquarters Bldg.,

St, George, S. I. I ........ GI braftr 7-0007 Open 9 a. in. to S p. m. ; closed

Sundays and holidays. CITY CLERK-

Municipal Bldg., Maah'n, N. Y. 7. WO rth 2-4430 Bronx-177th st. and 3d ave.. N. Y. 57.

TR emnt 8-2204 Bklyn.-Municipal Bldg., Bkn. 2.TR iangl 5-7100 Queens-Sutphin blvd. and 88th ave.,

Jamaica 2, N. Y............. pubic 9-8694 Ricb'd-Borough Hall, S. I. 1..GI braltr 7-1000

CITY COURT- Broo"Sl Grand Concourse, N. Y. d1.

JE rome 6-6985 Kings-120 Schermerhorn at., Bklyn. 2.

CU mbrind 6-6070 New York-Old County Court House.

52 Chambers it N. Y. 7... CO rtlnd 7-6264 Queens-Sutphin 61vd. and 88th ave.,

Jamaica 2, N. Y..... ......... JA maica 6-2410 Richmond-Cestleton and Bement ayes.,

W. New Brighton. S. T. l0.GI braltr 2-5175 Clerk's office open 9 a. in. to 4 o. in.,

Sat. to 12 noon. Courts open at 10 a. in. General and commercial calen-dar called at 9.45 a in

CITY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM-52 Chambers at., Manh'n. N. Y. 7. WO rtb 2-4564

CITY PLANNING COMMISSION- Manic'paI Blda.. Manh'n. N Y. 7. WO rth 2-5600

CITY PRIORITIES AND ALLOCA-TIONS BOARD-

Municipal Bldg., Manh'n, N.Y. 7. WO rtb 2-1100 CITY RECORD. THE -

Municipal Bldg.. Manh'n, N. Y. 7. WO rth 2-1800 CITY REGISTER-

Hall of Records, Manh'n, N. Y. 7. WO rtb 2-3900 Bronx--851 Grand Concourse, N. Y. 51.

JE rome 7-9811 Bklyn.-Hall of Records, Bkn. 2.TR iangl S-6800 Queens-161.04 Jamaica ave., Jamaica 2, N. Y ......................JA maica 64684

CITY SHERIFF- Hall of Records, Manh'n, N. Y. 7 . WO rth 2-4300 Bronx-851 Grand Concourse, N Y. 51.

E tome 7-3501 Kings-Municipal Bldg., Bkn. 2.TR ian l 5-7100 Queens--Count Court House, L. I.

City 1, N. V.... .. ...ST ilwel 4-6017 Richmond-County Court House, S. 1. 1.

GI braltr 74041 COMMERCE, DEPARTMENT OF-

60 B'way, Manh'n. N. Y. 4....WH itch! 3-7575 COMPTROLLER, OFFICE OF-

Municipal Bldg., Manh'n. N.Y.7.WO rth 2-1200 Excite Taxes, Bureau of, 350 B'way.

Manh'n, N. Y. 7. ... WA lkr 5-9530 Welfare Payments, 134 Lafayette st.,

Manh'n, N. Y 13 ... ....... WA 1kr 5-4550 CORRECTION, DEPARTMENT OF-

100 Centre it. Manh'n, N. Y. 13. .RE ctr 2-6200 COUNCIL-

City Hall, Manh'n, N. Y. 7....CO rtlud 7-6770 Clerk's Office, Municipal Bldg., Manh'n,

N. Y. 7.. ... .. . WO rth 2-4430 President's Office, City Hall, Manb'n, N Y. 7 ....................CO rtlnd 7-6770

COUNTY CLERKS- Bronx-851 Grand Concourse, N. Y. 51.

E rome 6-4600 Kings-Hall of Records. Bkn. 2.TR iangl 54780 New York-County Court House, N. Y. 7.

WO rth 2-6114 Queen-Sutphin blvd. and 88th aye..

Jamaica 2, N. Y....... ..... JA maica 6-2607 Richmond-County Court House, S. T. 1.

SA intGeo 7-1806 COUNTY COURTS-

Courts open at 10 a. m. Bronx-851 Grand Concourse, N. Y. Si

1E rome 7-8965 Kings-120 Sehermerhorn at., Bklyn. 2.

MA in 4-5301 Queens-County Court House, L. I.

City 1, N. Y.... ... ....ST ilwel 4-7525 Richmond--County Court House. S. T. 1.

Cr braltr 7-7500 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS- Broax-BSI Grand Concourse, N. Y. S1.

JE some 6-5910 9 a. m. to S p. m., Sat to 12 noon.

Kings-Municipal Bldg., Rkn 2.TR iangl 5-8900 9 a. M. to S p. m.. Sat to 12 noon.

N. Y.-155 Leonard at.. N. Y. 13.. RE ctr 2-7300 9.30a.m.to6p m., SattoI y.m.

Queens-County Court House, L. I City 1, N Y ........ ...... ST ilwel 4 7590

9 a. m. to S p. m., Sat. to 12 noon Richmond-County Court House, S. I. 1.

GI braltr 7-0049 0 a. m. to 4 p. m., Sat, to 12 noon.

DOMESTIC RELATIONS COURT-135 E. 22d at., Manh'n, N. Y. 10.

AL gongr 4 1900 Children's Court Division-

Manhattan-137 E. 22d at.. N. Y. 10. AT. genon 4 1900

Bronx-1118 Grand Concourse, N. Y. 56 JE rome 7 9800

Brooklyn - III Schermerhorn at. Bklyn. 2 ................TR ianrl 5 8611

Queens--105.34 Union Hall at., it&. maica 4, N. Y........... . JA maica 6-254!

Richmond-100 Richmond terrace, St. George, S. I. I.......... SA intGeo 7-8301

Hear an cast& begins at 10 a. m. Family Court Division-

Manhattan-135 E. 22d at., I.. 10. 4-1900

Bronx-11118 Grand Concourse, N. Y. 56. JE rome 7-980C

Brooklyn - 327 Schermerhom at. Bklyn. 17 ................TR fang{ S-9770

Queens-105-34 Union Hall it., Jamaica 4, N. Y...........JA maica 6-2545

Richmond-100 Richmond terrace, St. George, S. I. 1.......... SA intGeo 7-8300

EDUCATION, BOARD OF- 110 Livingston et., Bklyn. 2...... MA in 4-2800

ELECTIONS, BOARD OF- 400 Broome at., Manh'n, N. Y. 13.

CA nal 6-2600 Broax-Tremont and 3d aues., .

7. Y.

TR emntS 8-1186 Bklyn.-Municipal Bldg., Bkn. 2.TR iangl 5-7100 Queens-120.55 Queens blvd., Kew Gar-

dens 15, N. Y............ BO ulvrd 8-5000 Rieh'd-Borough Hall, S. I. 1. SA intGeo 7-1955

9 a. m. to 4 p. m., Sat. to 12 noon. ESTIMATE, BOARD OF-

Secretary's Office, Municipal Bldg., Manb'n, N. Y. 7............ WO rth 2-4560

Real Estate Bureau of Municipal Bldg., Manh'n, iii. Y. 7 .............WO rth 2-5600

Retirement and Pensions, Bureau of, Si Chambers at., Manh'n, N. Y. 7,

WO rth 2-4566 t+'INANCE, DEPARTMENT OF-

Municipal Bldg., Manh'n, N.Y. 7. WO rth 2-1200 City Collections Bureau of-

Manhattan-Municipal Bldg., N. Y. 7. WO rth 2-1200

Bronx-Tremont and Arthur aves.,

N. Y. 57 .......... ... TR emnt 2-6000 Brooklyn-Municipal Bldg., Bklyn. 2.

TR langl S-7100 Queens--120.55 Queens blvd. Kew Gardens IS, N. .BO ulvrd 8-5000

Rich'd-Borough Hall, S. I. 1.GI braltr 7-1000 Special Taxes Division of-

3S0 B'way. Manh'n. N. Y. 13.. WA lkr 5-9530 FIRE DEPARTMENT-

h'n, N. Y. 7. WO rth 2-4100 dg., Bkn. 2.TR iangl 5-8340' S, COURT OF- ,

100 Centre it., Manb'n, N.Y.13.RE ctr 2-2442 Clerk's office open 9 a. m. to 4 p. m.; Saturdays to 12 noon. Court opens at 10 a. in.

gEALTH, DEPARTMENT OF- 123 Worth at., Manh'n, N. Y. 13 . WO rtb 2-6900 Broatt-1826 Artbur ave., N. Y. 57.

TR emnt 8-6320 Brooklyn-295 Flatboat avenue extension,

Bklyn. 1.

.. ....... TR iangl 5-940( Queens-148.15 Archer ave., Jamaica 2, N. Y. ........ . RE pubic 9-1300

Richmond-Sl Stuyvesaat pl., St. George, S. I. I .............. . GI braltr 7-7664

HIGHER EDUCATION. BOARD OF- 695 Park ave.. Manb'n, N. Y. 21. RE gent 7-4131

ROSPTTALS, DEPARTMENT OF- 125 Worth at Manh'n. N. Y. 13. WO rtb 2-4440

ROUSING AND BUTLI)INGS- Mmticipal Bldg., Manh'n, N. Y. 7. WO rth 2-5600 Bronx-1932 Arthur ave., N. Y. 57.

TR emnt 8-6700 BMyn.-Munielpal Bldg., Bins. 2.TR langi 5-7100 Queens-120-SS Queens blvd., Kew Gar.

dens 15, N. Y .......... ...BO ulvrd 8-500(1 Ricb'd-Aornueh Hall. S. I. I ... GT braltr 7-1000

INVESTIGATION. DEPARTMENT OF-2. Lafavette st , Manh'n, N. Y. 7. WO rth 2-2300

LAW DEPARTMENT- Municipal Bldg., Manb'n, N.Y. 7. WO rtb 2-4600 Rktyn.-Municipal Bldg., Bkn. 2.TR iangl 5-6330 Queens-Sutphin blvd. and 88th ave., Jamaica 2. N. Y........... TA maica 6-5234

LICENSER. DEPARTMENT OF- 112 White at.. Manh'n. N. Y.13. CA nal 6-5651

Bklyn.-Municipal Bldg., Bktt.2,TR iangl 5-7100 Rleb'd-Rmmugh Hall. S I. 1...GI braltr 7-1000

WAGISTRATES' COURTS- General Office, 100 Centre at.. Manh'n,

N. Y. 13 ............. . ...RR etr 2-6200 Brooklyn Office-Municipal Bldg.. Bklyn.

2 ....... .. .TR iangl 5-7100 CleNs ntiicr open 9 a. m. to 4.30 p, in., Saturdays to 12 noon.

Moshe"" Bowery 100 Centre it., N. Y. 13. RE etr 24226 Essex Market-2d aye. and 2d sL. N. Y. S.

rR smrcy 5-0290 Felony-100 Centre st., N. Y. 13..RE etr 2-6200 Harlem-121st at. and Sylvan pl.. N. Y. 33 ... ........ LE high 4-3535

Homicide-100 Centre it., N. Y., 13. RV ctr 24200

Jefferson Market-425 6th ave.. N. Y. 11. OR amrcy 7-4467

Municipal Tenn-100 Centre at., N. Y.13. RE etr -6204'

Night-100 Centre at, N. Y. 13. . . RE ctr 2-6226 Probation-100 Centre at, N. Y. 13.

RR ctr 2-6200 Traffic (Downtown)--60 Baxter at., N. Y.

................ RE etr 3-6200 Traffic (Uptown)-435 W. 151st at

N. Y. 31. .... .. ED reontb 4-3700 Washington Heights-453 W. 151st at.. N. Y 31..... .. ....ET vrrnmh 4-8429

Wayward Mlnora'-100 Centre rat., N. Y. 13 .. ........ RE ctr 2-6900

Weds End-100 Centre at.. N. Y. 13. RR etr 24320

Women's-100 Centre at., N. V.13.RF ctr 2-6200 Yorkville-151 E. 57th at, N. Y. 22.

VOlunter 5-0442 Brea,

Arrest-161st at. and 3d ave., N. Y 56. ME !lase 5-2466

Felony-161st at. and 3d ave., N. Y. 56. ME (rose 5-2466

Municipal Term-161st it and 3d aye., N. Y. 56........... ..ME lrnir 5-3670

Prphation-161st it. and '3d.ave.. N. Y.

S6 ..... .... ...HE irate 5-2345 Summons-161 at at. and 3d aye., N.Y. S6.

ME Irose 5-3670 Traffic-161st at. and 3d ave., N. Y. 36.

ME !rose 5-1958 Brooklyn

Adolescent-31 Snyder ave.. Bklyn. 26. BU ckninatr 2-3516

Bay Ridge-43d at and 4th aye.. Bklyn. 32 . .. ... WT ndsr 5-0381

Coney Island-2963 W. 8th at., Bklyn. 24. C(1 nevts 6-0013

Rut New York-127 Penn's ave.. Bklyn. 7 ..... ............ A P nlegate 6-8606

Felony-120 Schermerhorn at., Bklyn. 2. MA in 4-0214'

Flatbush-25 Snyder ave., Bkly° 26. BU ckmnstr 2-1506

Municipal Term-120 Scherinerhorn at„ Bklyn. 2 ...................TR iangl 5-4220

Night-25 Snyder ave., Bklyn.26. BU ekmnatr 2-1506

Probation-S10 Municipal Bldg., Bklyn. 2. TR iangl 5-7100

TraMc-1005 Bedford ave., Bklyn. S. MA in 2-2904

Week End-2S Snyder ave., Bklylt. 26. BU ckmnstr 2-1$04'

Williamsburg-Williamsburg Bridge Plaza, Bklyn. II .................EV ergrn 7-2501

Felony---Chaffee at and Catalpa ave., Glendale (Bklyn. P. 0.1. 27. HE retain 3-8331

Flushing-Town Hall, Flushing, N. Y. FL uahng 9-0221

L. I. City-County Court House, L I. City 1, N. Y ...............IR ouadee 6-900

Rockaway-Beach Channel dr., 90th and 91st au., Rockaway, N. Y... BE llHrbr 5-012

Traffic--120.55 Queens blvd., Kew Gardens 15. N. Y...........BO ulvrd 8-500

RicI*MIi Staten Island-67 Targee at., Stapleton,

S. I. 4.. , SA intGeo 7-115 MANHATTAN, PRESIDENT OF-

Municipal Bldg., N. Y. 7........ WO rth 2-560 MARINE AND AVIATION DEPT. OF-

Pier A, North River, Manjt'n, N. Y. 4. WH itehl 4-060

MARKETS, DEPARTMENT OF- 137 Centre at., Manh'n, N. Y. 17. .CA nal 6-565'

MAYOR'S OFFICE- City Hall. Manb'n, N. Y. 7.....CO rtlnd 7-1001

MUNICIPAL BROADCASTING SYSTEM-Municipal Bldg., Manh'n, N. Y. 7. WO rtb 2-5601

I(UNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COM'N-299 B'way, Manh'n, N. Y. 7... CO rtlnd 7-8381

MUNICIPAL COURTS- Office of the President justice, 8 Reade

at. Manh'n, hours: 8.45 a. m. to 5 p. rth

Saturdays to 12 noon. Dist. Manhattan

1-6 Reade at., N. Y. 7......... WO rth 2-1471 2-10 Reade at., N. Y. 7........ WO rth 3-1471 3-314 W. 54th at., N. Y. 19... CO lumbs 5-1771 4-327 E. 38th at., N. Y. 16... CA ledonia 5-9431 5-314 W. 54th at., N. Y 19..... CI role S-S11J! 6-170 E. 121st at., N. Y. 35....LE high 4-4904 7-447 W. 151st at., N. Y. 31...AU dubs 3-5410 8-170 E. 121st at., N. Y. 35....LE high 4-5390 9-153 E. 57th at., N. Y. 22... VO lunter 5-31 Se

10-447 W. 151st et., N. Y. 31. ED gecomb 4-7070 Central jury and Non-Jury Parts and 8 Reade at., N. Y. 7. Small Claims Partj WO rth 2-1400

Bronx 1-1400 Willianisbridge rd., N. Y. 61.

UN drhil 3-6100 2-Washington ave. and 162d at.. N. Y. 56.

ME trust 3-3042 Central Jury and Small Claims Parts,

Washington ave. and 162d at., N. Y. 56. ME Iroae J-3042

Brooklyn 1-120 Scbermerhorn at., Bkn. 2.TR iaagl 5-2052 2-495 Gates ave., Bklyn. 16.....MA In 2-3010 3-6 Lee ave., Bklyn. I1.......... ST ag 2-7813 4-363 Liberty ave., Bkt n. 7..AP legate 7-1760 5--4th ave. and 42d at Bleu. 32.. WI odor 5-2540 6-27 Snyder ave., Bklyn. 26. BU ckmnetr 2-9643 7-363 Liberty ave., Bklyn. 7..AP plegate 6.8600 8-4th ave. and 42d st., Bkn. 32. WI radar 8-5040 Central jury and 20 Schertnerhorn at., Small Calms PartaS Bklyn. 2... TR iangl 5-2052

BOARD MEETINGS

Art Commb ion Meets at its office, City Hall, Manb'n, N, Y. 7,

on second Monday in each month at 2.30 p. in. LUKE VINCENT LOCKWObD, Secretary.

Board of Assessors Meets in Room 2200, Municipal Bldg., Manh'u.

N. Y. 7, on Tuesdays, at 10.30 a. in. FREDERICK J. H. $RACHE, Chairman.

Banking Commission Meets in Mayor's Office, City Hall, Moab'n

N. Y. 7, on first day in February, May, Angus and November.

WILLIAM D. BRENNAN. Secretary. City Planning Commission

Meets in Room 16, City Hall, Manh'n, N. Y. 7, on Wednesdays at 2.30 p. in.

ALBERT HOCHMAN. Acting Secretary. Connell

Meets in Councilmanie Chamber, City Han. Manh'n, N. Y. 7, op Tuesdays, at I p. m.

H. WARREN HUBBARD, City Clerk and Clerk of the Council.

Board of Education Meets at its office, 110 Livingston at., Bklyn. 2,

every third Wednesday at 4 p. m. EUGENE R. CANUDO, Secretary,

Board of Elections Meets in Room 407, 400 Broome st., Manh'n

51. Y. 13, on Tuesdays, at 11 a. m., and at the cal. Af the President.

S. HOWARD COHEN, President. Board of Estimate

Meets in Room 16, City Hall, Manh'n, N. Y. 7 m Thursdays, at 2.30 p. m., unless otherwise srdered b the Board.

ISAAC EICHHOLZ, Acting Secretary. Examining Board of City Surveyors

Meets in Room 1347, Municipal Bldg., Manh'n N. Y. 7, at call of the Chairman.

JOHN C. RIEDEL, Chairman. Board of Health

Meets in Room 330, 125 Worth at. Mash's N. Y. 13, at 10 a. m., on the second 'Tuesday a meb mouth and at the call of the Chairman.

ERNEST L. STEBBINS, M.D., Commiaaiene If Health, Chairman.

Board of Higher Education Meets at 695 Park ave., Manh'n, N. Y. 21, a'

I p. m., on third Monday in January, February March, Aril, June, September, October, Novem 9er and December. Annual meeting held thint Monday In May. ORDWAY TEAD, Chairman.

Municipal Civil Service Commission Meets at its office, 299 B'way, Manh'n, N. Y. 7

m Tuesdays, at 10.30 a. M. HARRY W. MARSH, President. Parole Commission

Meets at its office, 100 Centre at., Manh'n, N. Y 13, on Thursdays, at 10 a. m.

JOHN C. MAHER, Chairman. Board of Revision of Assessments

Meets in Room 500, Municipal Bldg., Maah'a v. Y. 7, upon notice of the Chief Clerk.

LEWIS F. LANG, Chief Clerk. Board of standards and Appeals

Meets In Room 1013, Municipal Bldg., Manh'n N, Y. 7, Tuesdays at 10 a. m., and 2 p m.

HARRI H. MURDOCK, Chairman. Board of Statutory Consolidation

Meets in City Hall, Manh'n, N. Y. 7, at call o! lilayor. REUBEN A. LAZARUS, Counsel.

Tax Commission Meets in Room 936, Municipal Bldg., Manh'n.

!T. Y. 7, on Wednesdays, at 10.30 a. m. WM. WIRT MILLS, President.

Teachers' Retirement Board Meets in Room 603 Municipal Bldg., Manh'n

R. Y. 7, on fourth II'ueaday of each month at p. M. LOUIS TAYLOR, Secretary.

Board of Transportation Meets at 250 Hudson at., Manb'n, N. Y. 13, of

l'uesdaya, at 11.30 a. M. and at the call of tht :hairman. JOHN H. UELANEY, Chairman.

Board of Water Supply Meets at 120 Wall at., Manh'n, N. Y. 5, or

I.'uesdays, at I I a. m. GEORGE J. GILLESPIE, President.

POLICE DEPARTMENT

Special Regulations for Vehicular Traffic

BY VIRTUE OF THE AUTHORITI VESTED in me by law, I hereby establish a parking space

for United States Navy Cars Only at the follow-

ing location, effective upon the installation of the necessary signs:

Borough of Manhattan Church st. (west side), beginning at a point

7 feet south of the south building line of I)ay st., extending south thereof for a distance of 90 feet.

Dated, Dec. 23, 1943. d27 LEWIS J. VALENTINE, Police Commissioner.

BY VIRTUE OF THE AUTHORITY VESTED in me by law, I hereby establish temporary no-

parking traffic regulation at the following location, from December 15 to 31, 1943, effective upon the installation of the necessary signs:

Borough of Manhattan In front of Sub•Post Office Station, 305 W.

140th st., for a distance of 75 feet. Dated, Dec. 23, 1943. d27 LEWIS J. VALENTINE, Police Commissioner.

BY VIRTUE OF THE AUTHORITY VESTED in me by law, I hereby establish fire-zone, no•

parking traffic regulations at the following loca. tions for 24 hours daily, effective upon the instal- lation of the necessary signs:

Borough of Brooklyn Hooper st. (south side); from west building line

of premises No, 24, to the west building line of premises No. 30 Hooper st., a distance of 60 feet.

Hooper st. (north side), from west building line of premises No. 21, to the east building line of premises No. 29 Hooper st., a distance of 100 feet.

Dated, Dec. 23, 1943. d27 LEWIS J. VALENTINE, Police Commissioner.

BY VIRTUE OF THE AUTHORITY VESTED in me by law, I hereby establish a bus stop,

no-parking traffic regulation at the following loca- tion, for a distance of 125 feet, effective upon the installation of the necessary signs:

Borough of Queens Roosevelt ave. (south side), east of 74th st. Dated, Dec. 23, 1943. d27 LEWIS J. VALENTINE, Police Commissioner.

BY VIRTUE OF THE AUTHORITY VESTED in me by law, I hereby revoke the bus stop,

no-parking traffic regulation at the following loca-tion, for a distance of 65 feet, effective upon the removal of the signs:

Borough of Queens Roosevelt ave. (south side), east of 74th st. Dated, Dec. 23, 1943. d27 LEWIS J. VALENTINE, Police Commissioner.

BY VIRTUE OF THE AUTHORITY VESTED in me by law, I hereby revoke the one-way

traffic regulations on the following thoroughfares, effective upon the removal of the signs:

Borough of Queens 76th st., 101st ave. to Rockaway blvd., north-

oound. 76th st., Jamaica ave. to Rockaway blvd., south-

lound. 78th st., Rockaway blvd. to Jamaica ave., north-

iound. 78th st., Jamaica to 86th ayes., northbound. 78th st., Liberty to Atlantic ayes., northbound. 84th st., 91st to Liberty ayes„ southbound. 96th st., 95th to Jamaica ayes., northbound. 107th st., Jamaica ave. to Rockaway blvd., south-

ound. 123d st., Atlantic to Liberty ayes., southbound. 129th st., 94th to 107th aves., southbound. Dated, Dec, 23, 1943. d27 LEWIS J. VALENTINE, Police Commissioner.

3Y VIRTUE OF THE AUTHORITY VESTED in me by law, I hereby prohibit the park-

ng of vehicles on the following thoroughfate for !4 hours daily; and that all existing regulations ieretofore promulgated restricting or 'prohibiting he parking of vehicles in the area indicated, be 'evoked, except existing bus stops, hack stands, ire zones and areas therein set aside for the park-ng of official cars of the Federal, State and City government agencies, effective upon the installation if the necessary signs:

Borough of Queens Alhion ave. (west side), beginning at a point

25 feet north of Queens blvd. and extending north hereof for a distance of 200 feet.

Dated, Dec. 23, 1943. d27 LEWIS J. VALENTINE, Police Commissioner.

OFFICIAL DIRECTORY Unless otherwise stated, City Omees i

epsat from 9 a. m. to 6 p. m. dally; CsuiI U/as, 6 a. m, to 4 p. m.; Saturdays to it noon

N. Y. 7.... CO rtlnd 7-119; D OF- nh'n. N.Y. 7 . WO rth 2-363(

wcoaua:a1 a vr- i Concourse, N. Y. 51..JErome 6-3941 N PRESIDENT OF- i hail{, B~ klyn. 2......TR iangl S-710(

and ,ewer, Municipal Bldg. 2 ...................TR ion S-710t

Owners Wanted for Unclaimed Property

)WNERS ARE WANTED BY THE PROPERTY Clerk, Police Department, The City of New

fork, for the following listed articles, now in bit ustody without claimants, consisting of recovered, ast and abandoned property, property feloniously btained by prisoners, and effects of persons do eased, alleged to be insane, intoxicated or ether. 'sae incapable of caring for themselves:

Adding machines, automo~ilea, bicycles, boats, ameras, electrical and optical goods, furniture, urs, handbags, hardware, jewelry, metals, motor-ycles, pocketbooks radios, robes, securities, silver- rare, atones, suitcases, surgical and musical iatru• septa, tools, trunks, typewriters, United States nd foreign currency, wearing apparel and other cscelIaneoua articles.

Orrice or PaornTT CLnI Inquiries relating to such property should be

lade in the Boroughs concerned, at the following thces of the Property Clerk: Manhattan-Police Headquarters Annex, 400

Iroome st., N. Y. 13. Brooklyn-Police Headquarters, Bergen at. and

th ave.. Bklyn. 17. Bronx-42d Prec., 160th at. and 3d ave., N. Y. 56. Queen.-103d Free., 91st ave. and 168th at.,

amaica 3, N. Y. Richmond-120th Prec., 78.81 Richmond ter.,

t. George S. I. 1. LEWIS J. VALENTINE, Police Commissioner.

IEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

Proposed Approval of Subcontractor

HE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS proposes to approve as subcontractor, Edmonds-

anger Elec. Co., 17 E. 42d st., Manhattan, for ectrical supplies., as submitted by Staley Elevator o., Inc., of 155 Greene st., Manhattan. d27,29

PROPOSALS See Regulation on Last Page

EALED BIDS WILL BE RECEIVED BY the Department of Public Works, Room 1800 L,

funicipal Building, Manhattan, N. Y. 7, as follows:

rntii 11 a. m., on TUESDAY, DECEMBER 28, 1848

For furnishing all labor and materials required )r the completion of the construction of a drain• e system in the storage areas under the approach

the Kosciuszko Bridge over Newtown Creek. it of New York. tDeposit for contract documents, $5. d4,28

Blank bid forms and further information may ' obtained upon application to the Contract See-on of the Department of Public Works Room 300 L, Municipal Building, Manhattan, 1R. Y. 7, here plans and specifications may be seen. Deposits for contract documents must be made

i cash or certified check for the amount specified a each notice payable to the Comptroller of The ity of New York.

MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943 THE CITY RECORD 4695

PRESIDENT, BOROUGH OF RICHMOND

PROPOSALS See Regulation on Last Page

SEALED BIDS WILL BE RECEIVED BY the President, Borough of Richmond, at his

office, Borough Hall, S. I. 1, as follows:

Until 12 noon, on MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

For repaving with concrete foundation the road• way of Sea View ave. from Hylan blvd. to Quincy ave., together with all work incidental thereto.

d1S,27

Until 12 noon, on TUESDAY, JANUARY 4, 1944

For repaving with concrete foundation the road way of Richmond Hill rd. from Richmond ave. to Forest Hill rd., together with all work incidental thereto. d22,j4

DEPARTMENT OF HOSPITALS

PROPOSALS See Regulation on Last Page

SEALED BIDS WILL BE RECEIVED BY the Department of Hospitals, Room 626, 125

Worth st., Manhattan, N. Y. 13, as follows:

Until 11 a. in., on MONDAY, JANUARY 3, 1944

For labor and material to install gas burning appliances in the main kitchen, diet kitchen, staff house kitchen and thirtytwo (32) main pavilion ward serving kitchens at Sea View Hospital, Staten Island, N. Y. d21,j3

Blank forms and further information may be obtained upon application, in Room 627,125 Worth at., Manhattan, N. Y. 13, where plans and speci-fications may be seen.

PRESIDENT, BOROUGH OF THE BRONX

SEALED BIDS Wt'ILL BE RECEIVED BY the President of the Borough of The Bronx, at

Room 207, Bronx County Building, 851 Grand Concourse, N. Y. 51, as follows:

Until 11 a. m., on FRIDAY, JANUARY i, 1944

No. 1, for grading, removing and replacing trees, building inlets, receiving basins, drains, culverts, approaches and guard rails where neces-sary in Halsey st., from Herschefl st. to Munn ave.; and in Munn ave., from Halsey st. to Zerega ave., together with all work incidental thereto. d27,j7

BOARD OF TRANSPORTATION

Proposed Approval of Subcontractors

THE BOARD OF TRANSPORTATION, ACT• ing by its Chief Engineer, proposes to approve

as subcontractor the following: Terry Engineer. ing Company, 103 Park ave., Manhattan, for re-having and erecting structural steel; as submitted by E. W. Foley, Incorporated, 16 Court st., Bklyn., general contractor for Changes in Transit Facilities for Brooklyn Bridge Improvement.

Dated, December 21, 1943. d24,28

We of Ferrous Scrap Material

SEALED BIDS FOR THE SALE OF AP. proximately 1,130 gross tons of ferrous scrap

consisting of frogs and switch points, solid steel wheels, miscellaneous iron and steel car and track scrap, girder rail and flat rail, etc., will be re-ceived by the Board of Transportation, 250 Hudson at., Manhattan, N. Y. 7, until 10 a. m., on Tuesday, Dec. 28, 1943. Bid form no. 26408 may be obtained at Room 411. d14,28

PROPOSALS See Regulation on Lint Pale

SEALED BIDS WILL BE RECEIVED BY the Board of Transportation, at 250 Hudson it.

Manhattan, N. Y. 13, as follows:

Until 10 a. m., on WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 29, 1943

For repairs to bus engine heaters and heater radiators (bid no. 26285). d23,29

Until 10 a. m., on MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

For lumber: Spruce, fir, hickory, pine, ash, poplar, cherry, whttewood, mahogany, oak, maple, etc. (bid nos. 26302 and 26363).

For splice bars and joint plates (bid no. 26070). For grinding bricks (bid no. 26107). dl5,27

Until 10 a. m., on THURSDAY, DECEMBER 80, 1943

For re-enameling pipe barriers (bid no. 26736). d24,30

Until 10 a. m., on THURSDAY, DECEMBER 30, 1943

For furnishing and installing new built-up roof ing for roofs of inspection shops, at the Flathipb and Canarsie depots, Brooklyn (bid no. 26512).

d1S,30

Until 10 a. m., on THURSDAY, DECEMBER 30, 1948

For relining of bearings for trolley and subway cars (bid no. 26134).

For bearings for subway cars (bid no. 25960). d16,30

Until 10 a. m., on THURSDAY, DECEMBER 80, 1943

For track special work: frogs and switches (bid no. 26144).

For iron and steel to blue print (bid no. 26218) d10,30

Until 10 a. m., on FRIDAY, DECEMBER 31, 1943

For lubricants: car journal oil (bid no. 26365) For genuine SKF axle and journal bearings for

surface cars (bid no. 26106). For bolts to blue print (bid no. 26507). For grinding wheels' (bid no. 26251). For journal bearings for subway cars (bid no.

26263). d18,31

Until 10 a. m., on WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 6, ' 1944

For lumber: yellow pine ties and timber (bid no. 26298).

For lumber: douglas fir, planking, timber and slatting (bid no. 26299).

For lumber: yellow pine ties (bid no. 26153). d17,15

Until 10 a. m., on THURSDAY, JANUARY 8, 1944

For tabulating cards (bid no. 26577). d24,j6

Until 10 a. m., on THURSDAY, JANUARY 6, 1944

For insulating material, bakelite, fibre, paper, etc. (bid no. 26444).

For electrical supplies: Genuine McGill "Easy Lamp" changers; genuine Hart Mfg. Co. switches; genuine Westinghouse Electric Mfg. Co. panel-boards, resistors; genuine Eagle lamp guards, etc. (bid no. 26446). d22,j6

Until 10 a. m., on THURSDAY, JANUARY 6, 1944

For lumber: yellow pine ties, fir or yellow pine to blue print (bid nos. 26200, 26201 and 26202).

dl8,j6

Until 10 a. m., on FRIDAY, JANUARY 7, 1944

For hardware: Chisels, punches, stone forks, trowels, wrenches; genuine Ridge Tool Co.'s pipe wrenches and parts; coal hods; genuine Magor Corp. sidewalk scrapers; shovels, etc. (bid no. 26272). d23,j7

Until 10 a. m., on FRIDAY, JANUARY 7, 1944

For lumber: Yellow pine boards, yellow pine ties and cherry (bid nos. 26203, 26204 and 26205).

d20,j 7

Until 10 a. m., on MONDAY, JANUARY 10, 1944

For iron and steel to blueprint. For special bolts and nuts to blueprint. d22,jlO

Until 10 a. m., on TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1944

For special bolts and nuts to blue print (bid no. 26270).

For springs: Coil and leaf to blue print (bid no. 26437).

For track special work: Frogs and switch points (bid no. 26233). d23,j11

Until 10 a. m., on WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 12, 1944

For lumber: yellow pine timber (bid no. 26578). d24,j 12

9

Several Instructions to Bidders for Furnishing Material:, Supplies and Equipment to The City

New York for Use in the Maintenance and Operation of the New York City Transit System.

VARYING QUANTITIES OF MATERIALS. supplies and equipment used in connection with

he operation and maintenance of the New York ,ity Transit System and other activities of the 3oard of Transportation are being purchased as egnired. ' Competitive bids for such supplies are ieaired from all responsible individuals and cur-)orations. Names of those desiring to be bidden will be placed on appropriate list, but bids will not ie limited to those on such lists. Where quantities is excess of $1,000 in value are required the same will be advertised and the time for opening the yids will be announced by public notice.

For further information and particulars apply n Room 411, office of the Board of Transportation, ,o. 250 Hudson at., Manhattan, N. Y. 13.

No bid will be requested or accepted from any .ontractor who is in arrears or in default to The City of New York. The right is reserved to reject %ny and all bids.

DEPARTMENT OF PURCHASE

Sale of Timber Piles, Pile Points, and Lag Screws

SEALED BIDS WILL BE RECEIVED BY the Commissioner of Purchase of The City of

New York, Room 2429, Municipal Building, Man-hattan, N. Y. 7, until 12 noon, on

FRIDAY, JANUARY 7, 1944 For the sale of timber piles, pile points, and

lag screws. Apply to Department of Purchase, Room 2214,

Municipal Building, Manhattan, N. Y. 7, for Sales Agreement Proposal No. 77269. d27,j7

Sale of Used X-Ray Films

SEALED BIDS WILL BE RECEIVED BY the Commissioner of Purchase of The City of

New York, Room 2429, Municipal Building, Man• hattan, N. Y. 7, by registered mail only, until 12 noon, on

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 29, 1943 For the sale of miscellaneous used X-Ray

films. Apply to Department of Purchase, Room 2214,

Municipal Building, Manhattan, N. Y. 7, for Sales Agreement Proposal No. 77267. d21,29

Sales of Privileges

SEALED BIDS WILL BE RECEIVED BY the Commissioner of Purchase of The City of

New York, Room 2429, Municipal Building, Man• hattan, N. Y. 7. until 12 noon, on

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 28, 1943 For the privilege of collecting thefollowing.

Ashes and cinders; bones, fats, entrails, grease, gristle, etc.; and skimmings.

For further particulars and for sales agreement proposals and specifications, apply to Department of Purchase, loom 2214, Municipal Building, Manhattan, N. Y. 7. d18,28

SEALED BIDS WILL BE RECEIVED BY the Commissioner of Purchase of The City of

New York, Room 2429, Municipal Building, Man• hattan, N. Y. 7, until 12 noon, on

MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943 For the privilege of collecting the following:

garbage and swill; miscellaneous containers; horse manure; bypa solution; and waste paper. For further particulars and for sales agreement

proposals and specifications, apply to Department of Purchase, Room 2214, Municipal Building, Man• hattan, N. Y. 7. d17,27

PROPOSALS See Regulation on Last Page

SEALED BIDS WILL BE RECEIVED BY the Commissioner of Purchase at Room 2429

Municipal Building, Manhattan, N. Y. 71 at the following times for the following supplies, ma-terials, equipment, etc., to ,wit:

Until 10.30 a. m., on MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1948

For calcium chloride. For boiler compound, briquetted. For specialties of Lederle Laboratories, Inc. For specialties of Hoffman La Roche and Roche

Organon, Inc. For specialties of Eli Lilly and Co. For specialties of E. R. Squibb and Sons. For specialties of Abbott Laboratories. For specialties of Merck and Co. d20,27

Until 10.30 a. m. on MONDAY, DECEMBER 27,1948

For shirts. d18,27

Until 10.30 a. m., on MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1948

For genuine X•ray tubes and parts. For paper products. For pan scrapers and scoops. For bedspreads, cotton duck, hospital clothing,

toweling, piece goods, etc. d15,27

Until 10 a, m., on TUESDAY, DECEMBER 28, 1943

For horsemeat. For dog food, rabbit food, and grain mixture. For shortening. d22,28

Until 10.30 a. m., on TUESDAY, DECEMBER i:8, 1948

For floor and cleaning chemicals. For cleaning compound. d1S,28

Until 10 a. m., on WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 29, 1943

For butter. d27,29

Until 10 a. in., on WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 29, 1943

For eggs. d24,29

Until 10 a. m., on WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 29, 1943 -

For sugar, powdered milk, Cal•C-Tose and pea- nut butter. d22,29

Until 10.30 a. m., on THURSDAY, DECEMBER 30, 1943

For medical gases. d23,30

Until 10.30 a. m., ot1 FRIDAY, DECEMBER 31, 1943

For pharmaceutical and biological specialties. For oxygen. d24,31

Until 10.30 a. m., on FRIDAY, DECEMBER 31, 1948

For lumber, plywood and compoboard. d23,31

Until 10.30 a. m., on MONDAY, JANUARY 3, 1944

For envelopes, all types. d21,j3

Until 10.30 a. m., on TUESDAY, JANUARY 4, 1944

For surgical and orthopedic appliances and shoes; for artificial limbs and artificial eyes.

d22,j4

Until 10.30 a. m., on WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 5, 1944

For sand boxes. d23,j5

Blank proposal forms for submission of bids a' he above bid openings may be obtained at Roos 3214, Municipal Building, Manhattan, N. Y. 7 where bidders may examine specifications, blue ~riuts and the contract forms.

BOARD OF ESTIMATE BUREAU OF REAL ESTATE

Corporation Sales of Certain Real Estate

PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Board of Estimate of The City of New

York, by virtue of the power vested in them by law, will offer for sale at public auction on

FRIDAY, JANUARY 14, 1944 at 11 a. m., at Room 1030, Municipal Building, Manhattan, City of New York 7, the following described property:

All that certain lot, piece or parcel of land with the improvements thereon situate, lying and being in the Borough of Brooklyn, County of Kings, City and State of New York, bounded and de-scribed as-follows:

Section 6, Block 1492, Lot 44, as now shown on the Tax Map for the Borough of Brooklyn, being known as 877A Halsey street.

The minimum or upset price at which said property may be sold is hereby fixed at the sum of one thousand dollars ($1,000) and the sale shall be conditioned upon the following terms and conditions:

The successful bidder will be required to pay 20 per cent of the amount of the bid in cash or by certified check, made payable to the Treasurer, City of New York, together with the auctioneer's fee, at the time of sale, and the balance within 60 days of the date of sale.

The deed to be delivered shall be in the form of a bargain and sale deed without covenants, and shall be delivered within 90 days from the date of sale.

The property will be conveyed free and clear of liens and encumbrances except as herein stated.

Taxes, assessments and water rates shall be apportioned as of the date of closing title.

The risk of loss or damage by fire between the date of sale and the date of delivery of the deed is assumed by the purchaser.

Subject to building violations, if any. Subject to any state of facts an accurate survey

would show provided the same does tot render title unmarketable.

The successful bidder will he required to accept the property in its "as is" condition on the date of closing title.

No individual or corporation or any stockholder, director or officer of any corporation who or which has been or is now in default in or on any con-tract, obligation or agreement of any kind, or nature entered into with The City of New York or any of its agencies, will be accepted as a bidder for this property, and the Director of Real Estate reserves the right to reject any such bidder if investigation establishes such a default.

The Director of Real Estate, at his option, may resell the property if the successful bidder shall fail to comply with the terms of sale and the person so failing to comply therewith shall, in addition to forfeiting any deposits made on account thereof, he held liable for any deficiency which may result from such resale.

The right is reserved to reject any and all bids. By order of the Board of Estimate under reso-

lution adopted at the meeting of the Board held December 16, 1943 (Cal. No. 39•A).

TEE THOMPSON SMITH, Director of Real Estate. d27,j 13

PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Board of Estimate of The City of New

York, by virtue of the power vested in them by law, will offer for sale at public auction on

FRIDAY. JANUARY 14, 1944 at 11.30 a. m., at Room 1030, Municipal Building, Manhattan, City of New York 7, the following described property:

All that certain lot, piece or parcel of land with the buildings and improvements thereon,

situate, lying and being in the Borough of Brook-lyn, County of Kings, City and State of New York, designated and shown upon the Tax Map of The City of New York for the Borough of Brooklyn as Section 6, Block 1841, Lot 10, as the said Tax Map was on April 1, 1931, said premises being known as 384 Hancock street.

The minimum or upset price at which said property may be sold is hereby fixed at the sum of two thousand two hundred dollars ($2,200) and the sale shall be conditioned upon the following terms and conditions:

The successful bidder will be required to pay 15 per cent of the amount of the bid in cash or by certified check, together with the auctioneer's fee, if any, at the time of sale, and a minimum of 18/ per cent additional within 60 days of the date of sale; the balance may be represented by a purchase money bond and mortgage for five (5) years with interest at the rate of four (4) per cent per annum, and amortization at the rate of ten (10) per cent per annum, with the privilege to pay off all or any additional part of the mortgage debt on any interest date; both interest and amortization payable quarterly.

The deed to be delivered shall be in the form of a bargain and sale deed without covenants, and shall be delivered within 90 days from the date of sale, and the bond and mortgage to be executed by the purchaser shall contain, in addition to the provisions hereinbefore outlined, such other usual clauses as are required in purchase money mort-gages acceptable by The City of New York; the purchaser to pay the recording tax, recording fees and all Federal or State taxes in relation thereto, if any.

The property will be conveyed free and clear of liens and encumbrances except as herein stated.

Taxes, assessments and water rates shall be apportioned as of the date of closing title.

The risk of loss or damage by fire between the date of sale and the date of delivery of deed is assumed by the purchaser.

Subject to building violations, if any. Subject to monthly tenancies. Subject to any state of facts an accurate survey

would show provided the same does not render title unmarketable.

No individual or corporation or any stockholder, director or officer of any corporation who or which has been or is now in default in or on any con-tract, obligation, or agreement of any kind or nature entered into with The City of New York or any of its agencies, will be accepted as a bidder for this property, and the Director of Real Estate reserves the right to reject any such bidder if investigation establishes such a default.

The Director of Real Estate, at his option, may resell the property if the successful bidder shall fail to comply with the terms of sale and the person so failing to comply therewith shall, in addition to forfeiting any deposits made on account thereof, be held liable for any deficiency which may result from such resale.

The right is reserved to reject any and all bids.

By ordet of the Board of Estimate under reso-lution adopted at the meeting of the Board held on December 16, 1943 (Cal. No. 40-A).

LEE THOMPSON SMITH, Director of Real Estate. d27,j13

PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Board of Estimate of The City of New

York, by virtue of the power vested in them by law, will offer for sale at public auction on

FRIDAY, JANUARY 14, 1944 at 10.30 a. m., at Room 1030, Municips1 Building, Manhattan, City. of New York 7, the following described property:

All those certain lots, pieces or parcels of land, situate, lying and being in the Borough of Brook-lyn, County of Kings, City and State of New York, known and designated on the Tax Map of The City of New York, for the Borough of Brooklyn as Section 9, Block 2643, Lots 27 and 28, as the said Tax Map was on April 1, 1931.

The minimum or upset price at which said property may be sold is hereby fixed at the sum of five thousand dollars ($5,000) and the sale shall be conditioned upon the following terms and condi• tions:

The successful bidder will be required to pay ten (10) per cent of the amount of the bid in cash or by certified check, together with the auctioneer's fee, if any at the time of sale, and the balance within 60 Jays from the date of sale. The deed shall be a bargain and sale deed with-

out covenants, to be delivered within ninety (90) days from the date of sale.

Subject to any state of facts an accurate survey would show, provided it does not render title unmarketable.

Subject to building violations, if any. Subject to monthly tenancies. The property will be conveyed free and clear of

liens and encumbrances, except as herein stated. Taxes and water rates shall be apportioned as

of the date of closing of title. No individual or corporation or any stockholder,

director or officer of any corporation who or which has been or is now in default in or on any con-tract, obligation or agreement of any kind or nature whatsoever, entered into with The City of New York or any of its agencies, will be accepted as a bidder for this property, and the Director of Real Estate reserves the right to reject any such bidder if investigation establishes such a default.

'I he Director of Real Estate, at his option, may resell the property if the successful bidder shall fail to comply with the terms of sale, and the person so failing to comply therewith shall, in addition to forfeiting any deposits made on account thereof, be held liable for any deficiency which may result from such resale.

The right is reserved to reject any and all bids. By order of the Board of Estimate under reso-

lution adopted at the meeting of the Board held December 16, 1943 (Cal. No. 38),

LEE THOMPSON SMITH, Director of Real Estate. d27,j 13

PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Board of Estimate of The City of New

York, by virtue of the power vested in them by law, will offer for sale at public auction on

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 18, 1944 at 10.30 a. m., at Room 1030, Municipal Building, Manhattan, City of New York, the following de• cribed property:

All that certain piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in the Borough and County of Queens, City and State of New York, bounded and described as follows:

Beginning at a point in a line drawn at right angles to the southeasterly side of Far Rockaway boulevard, formerly Central avenue, which point is distant 150 feet southeasterly from the south-easterly side of Far Rockaway boulevard, and w'.ich line is drawn from a point in said south-easterly side of Far Rockaway boulevard distant 412.13 feet southwesterly measured along the southeasterly side of Far Rockaway boulevard from its intersection with the westerly sideof Beach 12th street, formerly Seneca streets running thence northeasterly and parallel to said south' easterly side of Far Rockaway boulevard 200 feet; thence southeasterly and at right angles to the last mentioned course 50 feet; thence southwesterly parallel to said southeasterly side of Far Rockaway boulevard 200 feet; thence southwesterly and at right angles to the last mentioned course 50 feet to the point or place of beginning, being part of Lot 17 in Block 35, Ward 5, as shown on the Tax Map for the Borough of Queens. Subject to covenants and restrictions in Liher 1490 of conveyances, page 500,

PROPOSALS See Regulation on Last Page

Prepoeal.-Notlee to Bidders

Until 10 a. m., on MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

For stock and fresh fruits and vegetables. d23,27

Until 10.30 a. m., on - MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

For surgical dressings. d23,27

Until 10 a. m., on MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

For chow mein. For sauerkraut. d22,27

MTAN GROW .r v i_ I : A D J 1 i'•

ANNAT.~J lJ L_J LJ t.,J L

47CNERAL fog

H16H5CNOOL OP 5P£C/AL TY TRADES DORO(!GN of DROOKLYN

0

4696 THE CITY RECORD MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

The minimum or upset price at which said may be sold is hereby fixed at the sum of

thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500) and the sale shall be conditioned upon the following terms and conditions:

The highest bidder will be required to pay 20 cent of the amount of the bid, together with auctioneer's fee, if any, at the time of sale

and the balance within 60 days of the date of sale. The deed to be delivered shall be in the form of

a bargain and sale deed without covenants and shall be delivered within 90 days of the date of sale.

Taxes and water rates shall be apportioned as of the date of closing title.

Subject to any state of facts an accurate survey would show provided the same does • not render title unmarketable.

Subject to encroachments of building erected on abutting parcel.

The Director of Real Estate, at his option, may resell the property if the successful bidder shall fail to comply with the terms of sale and the person so failing to comply therewith shall, in addition to forfeiting any deposits made on account thereof, be held liable for any deficiency which may result from such resale.

The property will be conveyed free and clear of all liens and encumbrances except as herein stated,

No individual or corporation or any stockholder, director or officer of any corporation who or which has been or is now in default in or on any con-tract, obligation or agreement of any kind of nature whatsoever, entered into with The City of New York or any of its agencies, will be accepted as a bidder for this property, and the Director of Real Estate reserves the right to reject any such bidder if investigation establishes such a default. The right is reserved to reject any and all bids.

By order of the Board of Estimate under reso lution adopted at the meeting of the Board held December 16, 1943 (Cal. No. 42).

LEE THOMPSON SMITH, Director of Real Estate. d23,j I1

PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Board of Estimate of The City of New

York, by virtue of the power vested in them by law, will offer for sale at public auction on

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 12, 1944 at 11 a. m., at Room 1030, Municipal Building. Manhattan, City of New York, the following de-scribed property:

All that certain lot, piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in the Borough of Queens, County of Queens, City and State of New York, more particularly described as follows:

Ward 5, Block 761, Lot 44, on the Tax Map of The City of New York for the Borough of Queens as the said Tax Map was on February 11, 1937. Property is known as 123 Beach 121st street.

The minimum or upset price at which said property may be sold is hereby fixed at the sum of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) and the sale shall be conditioned upon the following terms and c9n• ditions:

The successful bidder will be required to pay 10 per cent of the amount of the bid in cash or by certified check, made payable to the Treasurer, City of New York, together with the auctioneer's fee, at the time of sale, and a minimum of 10 per cent additional within 60 days of the date of sale, the balance may be represented by a purchase money bond and mortgage for ten years with interest at the rate of 4 per cent per annum, and amortization at the rate of 4 per cent per annum, with the privilege to pay off all or any additional part of the mortgage debt on any interest date; both interest and amortization to be payable semi- annually.

The deed to be delivered shall be in the form of a bargain and sale deed without covenants, and shall be delivered within 90 days from the date of sale, and the bond and mortgage to be executed by the purchaser shall contain, in addition to the provisions hereinbefore outlined, such other usual clauses as are required in purchase money mort-gages acceptable by The City of New York; the purchaser to pay the recording tax, recording fees and all Federal or State taxes in relation thereto, if any. The property will be conveyed free and clear of

liens and encumbrances except as herein stated. Taxes, assessments and water rates shall be

apport,oned as of the date of closing title. The risk of loss or damage by fire between the

date of sale and the date of delivery of the deed is assumed by the purchaser.

Subject to building violations, if any. Subject to any state of facts an accurate survey

would show, provided the same does not render title unmarketable. The successful bidder will be required to accept

the property in its "as is" condition on the date of closing of title.

No individual or corporation or any stockholder, director or officer of any corporation who or which has been or its now in default in or on any con-tract, obligation or agreement of any kind or nature entered into with The City of New York or any of its agencies, will be accepted as a bidder for this property, and.the Director of Real Estate reserves the right to reject any such bidder if investigation establishes such a default.

The Director of Real Estate, at his option, may resell the property if the successful bidder shall fail to comply with the terms of sale and the person so failing to comply therewith shall, in addition to forfeiting any deposits made on account thereof, be held liable for any deficiency which may result from such resale. The right is reserved to reject any and all bids. By order of the Board of Estimate under reso-

lution adopted by the Board at a meeting held December 16, 1943 (Cal. No. 41).

LEE THOMPSON SMITH, Director of Real Estate. d23,j 11

PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the Board of Estimate of The City of New

York, by virtue of the powervested in them by law, will offer for sale at public auction on

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 12, 1944 at 11.30 a. m., at Room 1030, Municipal Building, Manhattan, City of New York, the following de-scribed property:

All that certain lot, piece or parcel of land, with the building and improvements thereon erected, situate, lying and being in the Borough of Man-hattan, City and State of New York, bounded and described as follows:

Beginning at a point on the sjutherly side of 61st street, distant one hundred feet easterly from the corner formed by the intersection of the south- erly side of 61st street with the easterly side of West End avenue; running thence southerly parallel with the easterly side of West End ave-nue, one hundred feet five inches to the center line of the block thence easterly along the center line of the block seventy-five feet; thence northerly again parallel with the easterly side of West End avenue and part of the distance through the party wall one hundred feet five inches to the southerly side of 61st street; thence westerly along the southerly side of 61st street, seventy-five feet to the point or place of beginning. Said premises being now known as and by the street numbers 246-250 West 61st street.

The said premises being designated as Lot 58 in Block 1152 on the Tax Map for the Borough of Manhattan.

The minimum or upset price at which said prop-erty may be sold, is hereby fixed at the sum of twenty-four thousand dollars ($24,000) and the sale shall be conditioned upon the following terms and conditions:

d The successful bidder will be required to pay f ten (10) per cent of the amount of the bid in

cash or by certified check, together with the auc-tioneer's fee, if any, at the time of sale, and a minimum of 15 per cent additional within sixty

0 days of the date of sale; the balance may be h represented by a purchase money bond and mort-

gage for ten years with interest at the rate of 4 per cent per annum, and amortization at the rate of 2 per cent per annum; with the privilege to pay off all or any additional part of the mort- gage debt on any interest date; both interest and amortization payable • quarterly.

The deed to be delivered shall be in the form of a bargain and sale deed without covenants, and shall be delivered within ninety days from the date of sale, and the bond and mortgage to be executed by the purchaser shall contain, in addition to the provisions hereinbefore outlined, such other usual clauses as are required in purchase money mort-gages acceptable by The City of New York; the purchaser to pay the recording tax, recording fees and all Federal or State taxes in relation thereto, if any.

The property will be conveyed free and clear of liens and encumbrances except as herein stated.

Taxes, assessments and water rates shall be apportioned as of the date of closing title.

The risk of loss or damage by fire between the date of sale and the date of delivery of deed is assumed by the purchaser.

Subject to building violations, if any. Subject to any state of facts an accurate survey

would show provided the same does not render title unmarketable.

Subject to covenants against nuisances in Liber 1066 of Conveyances at page 15, Liber 1044 of Conveyances at page 18 and Liber 1091 of Con- veyances at page 478.

Subject to a party wall agreement affecting east wall recorded March 16, 1904 in Liber 95, Section 4 of Conveyances at page 395.

Subject to the lease held by Comet Cab Co., Inc., expiring November 30, 1944.

No individual or corporation or any stockholder, director or officer of any corporation who or which has been or is now in default in or on any con-tract, obligation or agreement of any kind or nature entered into with The City of New York or any of its agencies, will be accepted as a bidder for this property, and the Director of Real Estate reserves the right to reject any such bidder if investigation establishes such a default.

The Director of Real Estate, at his option, may resell the property if the successful bidder shall fail to comply with the terms of sale and the person so failing to comply therewith shall, in addition to forfeiting any deposits made on account thereof, be held liable for any deficiency which may result from such resale.

The right is reserved to reject any and all bids. By order of the Board of Estimate under reso-

lution adopted at the meeting of the Board held December 16, 1943 (Cal, No. 37-A).

LEE THOMPSON SMITH, Director of Real Estate. . d23,j l l

PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, THAT the Board of Estimate of The City of New

York, by virtue of the power vested in them by law; will offer for sale at public auction on

TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1944 at 10.30 a. m. at Room 1030 Municipal Building, Manhattan, Ctity of New 'York, the following described property:

All that certain lot, piece or parcel of land with the improvements thereon situate, lying and being in the Borough and County of Queens, City and State of New York, more particularly described as follows:

Section I4, Block 2663 Lot 6, on the Tax Map of The City of New Y1ork for the Borough of Queens, as the said map was on February 11 1940.

The minimum or upset price at which acid prop-erty may be sold is hereby fixed at the sum of eight thousand three hundred dollars ($8,300) and the sale shall be conditioned upon the following terms and conditions:

The successful bidder will be required to pay 10 percent of the amount of the bid in cash or by certified check made payable to the City Trea. surer, together with the auctioneer's fee, at the time of sale, and a minimum of 15 per cent addi-tional within 60 days of the date of sale, the balance may be represented by a purchase money bond and mortgage for ten years with interest at the rate of 4 per cent per annum, and amortization at the rate of 10 per cent per annum, with the privilege to pay off all or any additional part of the mortgage debt on any interest date; both inter- est and amortization payable quarterly.

The deed to be delivered shall be in the form of a bargain and sale deed without covenants, and shall be delivered within 90 days from the date of sale, and the bond and mortgage to be executed by the purchaser shall contain, in addition to the provisions hereinbefore outlined, such other usual clauses as are required in purchase money mort- gages acceptable by The City of New York, the purchaser to pay the recording tax, recording fees and all Federal or State taxes in relation thereto, if any.

The property will be conveyed free and clear of liens and encumbrances except as herein stated.

Taxes, assessments and water rates shall be ap ortioned as of the date of closing title.

Subject to any state of facts an accurate survey would show, provided the same does not render title unmarketable.

Subject to monthly tenancies. No individual or corporation or any stockholder,

director or officer of any corporation who or which has been or is now in default in or on any con-tract, obligation or agreement of any kind or nature whatsoever, entered into with The City of New York, or any of its agencies will be accepted as a bidder for this property, and the Director of Real Estate reserves the right to reject any such bidder if investigation establishes such a default.

The Director of Real Estate, at his option, may resell the property if the successful bidder shall fail to comply with the terms of sale and the person so failing to comply therewith shall, in addition to forfeiting deposits made on account thereof, be held liable for any deficiency which may result from such resale.

The right is reserved to reject any and all bids. By order of the Board of Estimate under reso-

lution adopted at the meeting of the Board held on December 16, 1943 (Cal. No. 43-A).

LEE THOMPSON SMITH, Director of Real Estate. d22,jlO

PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, THAT the Board of Estimate of The City of New

York, by virtue of the power vested in them by law, will offer for sale at public auction on

TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1944 st 11 a. in., at Room 1030, Municipal Building, Manhattan, City of New York, the following described property:

All those certain lots, pieces or parcels of land with the buildings and improvements thereon, situ• ite, lying and being in the Borough and County of

dueens, City and State of New York, known and esignated on the Tax Map of The City of New York for the Borough of Queens as the said fax Map was on the 11th day of February, 1937, is Section 10, Block 1768, Lot 9, being known as 102-14 and 102-16 37th avenue.

Subject to an easement in favor of the premises mmediately adjoining on the west for a right of gray, driveway and rear service road over a strip )f land 20.05 feet in width by 13.18 feet in depth mmediatel adjoining the southerly boundary line if the said on the west.

The minimum or upset price at which said

property may be sold is hereby fixed at the sum of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) and the sale shall be conditioned upon the following terms and conditions:

The successful bidder will be required to pay 10 per cent of the amount of the bid in cash or by certified check made payable to the Treasurer, City of New fork, together with the auctioneer's fee, at the time of sale, and a minimum of 25 per cent additional within 60 days of the date of sale; the balance may be represented by a purchase money bond and mortgage for five years with interest at the rate of 4 per cent per annum and amortization at the rate of 3 per- cent per annum, with the privilege to pay off all or any additional part of the mortgage debt on any interest date; both interest and amortization to be payable semi-annually.

The deed to be delivered shall be in the form of a bargain and sale deed without covenants, and shall be delivered within 90 days from the date of sale, and the bond and mortgage to be executed by the purchaser shall contain in addition to the provisions hereinbefore outlined, such other usual clauses as are required in purchase money mort-gages acceptable by The City of New York; the purchaser to pay the recording tax, recording fees and all Federal or State taxes in relation thereto, if any.

The property will be conveyed free and clear of liens and encumbrances except as herein stated.

PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, THAT the Bo4rd of Estimate of The City of New York,

by: virtue of the power vested in them by law, will offer for sale at public auction on

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 30, 1945 at 11 a. m,, at Room 1030 Municipal Building, Manhattan, City of New 11ork 7, the following described property:

All that certain lot, piece or parcel of land, situate, tying and being in the Borough of Man-hattan, City o` New York, County of New York and State of New York, bounded and described as follows:

Beginning at a point on the easterly side of Broadway distant 26 feet 4g inches northerly from the corner formed by the intersection of the easterly side of Broadway and the northerly side of 76th street; thence northerly along the easterly side of Broadway 79 feet 10 inches to the center line of the block between 6th and 77th streets; thence easterly parallel with '76th street 134 feet 2 inches; thence southerly and parallel with Am-sterdam avenue (10th) avenue 102 feet 2 inches to the northerly side of 76th street; thence west- erly along 76th street 2S feet; thence northerly parallel with Amsterdam (10th) avenue 25 feet 654 inches; thence westerly parallel with 76th street 89 feet 6144 inches to the point or place of beginning;

It being intended to describe Lot 22, Block 1168, on the Tax Map of The City of New York for the Borough of Manhattan as the said Tax Map was on the 29th day of March, 1939;

The street address being Nos. 2162 to 2168 Broadway and No. 213 West 76th street, and known as the Manhattan Towers Hotel.'

Together with whatever right, title and interest, if any, which the City may have in and to the personal property in the premises and now used for the operation and maintenance of said premises.

The minimum or upset price at which said prop• erty may be sold is hereby fixed at the sum of five hundred and seventy-five, thousand dollars ($575,000) and the sale shall be conditioned upon the following terms and conditions:

The successful bidder will be required to pay 5 per cent of the amount of the bid in cash or bj certified check, made payable to the, Treasurer, City of New York together with the auctioneer's fee, at the time of sale, and a minimum of 8 per

additionalytbn 60 da date of~the balance

erpe~bypuse

money bond and mortgage for 10 years, with inter-est at the rate . of 4 per cent per annum, and amortization at the rate of 2 per cent per annum with the privilege to pay off all or any additions{

Reqneiti for Th~ Cls

to y of New York

PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT offerings from all owners of real property within

the following designated area who desire to sell

Taxes, assessments and water rates shall be apportioned as of the date of closingtitle.

The risk of loss or damage by bre between the date of sale and the date of delivery of the deed is assumed by the purchaser.

Subject to building violations, if any. Subject to any state of facts an accurate survey

would show, provided the same does not render title unmarketable.

No individual or corporation or any stockholder, director or officer of any corporation who or which has been or is now in default in or on any con• tract, obligation or agreement of any kind or nature entered into with The City of New York or any of its agencies, will be accepted as a bidder for this property, and the Director of Real Estate reserves the right to reject any such bidder if investigation establishes such a default.

The Director of Real Estate, at his option, may resell the property if the successful bidder shall fail to comply with the terms of sale and the person so failing to comply therewith shall, in addition to forfeiting any deposits made on account therzof, be held liable for any deficiency which may result from such resale.

The right is reserved to reject any and all bids, By order of the Board of Estimate under reso-

lution adopted at the meeting of the Board held December 16 1943 (Cal. No. 45-A).

LEE THOMPSON SMITH, Director of Real Estate. d22J 10

part of the mortgage debt on any interest date, both interest and amortization payable quarterly.

Consideration shall be given to bids made an the basis of a cash payment in excess of the minimum of 13 per cent.

The final acceptance of the bid shall be subject to the approval of the Board of Estimate.

The deed to be delivered shall be in the form of a bargain and sale deed without covenants, and shall be delivered within 90 days from the date of sale, and the bond and mortgage to be executed by the purchaser shall contain, in addition to the provisions bereinbefore outlined, a clause to the effect that the mortgage shall cover all the per-sonalty now in and used for the operation and maintenance of said property and any other equip ment or property now appurtenant thereto, or which at any time may be installed, and such other usual clauses as are required in purchase money mortgages acceptable by The City of New York; the purchaser to pay the recording tax, recording fees and all Federal or State taxes in relation thereto, if any;

The property will be conveyed free and clear of liens and encumbrances except as herein stated.

Taxes, accessmeats and water rates abali be apportioned as of the date of closing title.

The risk of loss or damage by Ere between the date of sale and the date of delivery of the deed is assumed by the purchaser.

Subject to building violations, if any. Subject to any state of facts an accurate survey

would show provided the same does not render title unmarketable.

No individual or corporation or any stockholder, director or officer of any corporation who or whio>< has been or is now in default in or on any sea. tract, obligation or agreement ' of as kind w nature entered Into with The City of New Yoatt or any of its agencies will be accepted as a bidder for this property and the Director of Real Estate reserves the rfg!tt to reject any such bidder if investigation establishes such a default.

The Director of Real Estate, at his option, resell the property if the successful bidder aiaa fail to comply with the terms of sale and the person so failing, to comply therewith shall, In addition to forfeiting annymdeposits made on account thereof, be held liable for any deficiency which ma result from such resale;

The ng ht is reserved to reject any and all bids. By order of the Board of Estimate under res.

Lution adopted at the meeting of the Board heN an December 9 1943 (Cal. Na 1•A). FLEE THOMPSON SMITH, Director a Real

Their property to The City of New York, will be received by the Director of Real Estate, Room 1030, Municipal Building, Manhattan, N. Y. 7, until 11 a. m- on

WEDN)~BDAY, DICE BU 19 1943 High School of off ~~~1►a«

All offerings shall contain the street number, The exact size and location of the site will be tax map designation, size of plot, character of ins- determined after all offerings have been analysed. provement, assessed valuation and the lowest cash Further information may be secured by calling

Price the owner of the plot will accept for the

in LEE at said office.

LEE THOMPSON SMITH, Director of Real property at private sale. Estate. d13.29

MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943 THE CITY RECORD 4697

SEALED BIDS WILL BE RECEIVED BY the Superintendent of School Supplies of the

Board of Education of The City of New York, at his office, 131 Livingston at., Bklyn. 2, as follows:

Until 11 a. m., on MONDAY, DECEMBER 87, 1948

For furnishing and delivering photographic supplies. d15,27

Until 11 a. m., on THURSDAY, JANUARY 6, 1944

For the sale, removal and disposal by the bidder of garments, formerly used by health improvement

classes.

SEALED BIDS WILL BE RECEIVED BY the Superintendent of Plant Operation and Main'

tenance, Board of Educationsofth a .

The City of Manhattan, York at his office, 34, E.

N. 7. 3, as follows:

Until 10 a. in., on MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1948

For repairs to the following schools: Borough of Manhattan

P. S. 6, linoleum for tables. P. S. 98, alterations to kindergarten toilet room. P. S. 116, removal of metal stacks. P. S. 190 ash hoist repairs. Chelsea Socational High School (Annex), in•

stalling basin and hot plate. Food Trades Vocational High School (Annex),

transferring and installing barber shop equipment, wash basins, etc.

Machine and Metal Trades High School, instal• ling office partition, etc.

Metropolitan Vocational High School, transfer• ring and resetting furniture.

New York School of Printing, reconditioning Intertype machine, etc.

Various Schools-Metal work repairs, Julia Richman High School, etc.

Shops-New air valves. Borough of The Bronx

P. S. 46, engine and pump repairs, etc. P. S. 70, boiler grate rep airs etc. James Monroe High 5choo(, heating repairs,

etc.; relocating and repairing lockers, etc. Walton High School, repairs concrete pavement. Various Schools-Repairs and replacing vault

lights, roofs, etc., •P. S. 54, 55, 66. Repairs and painting, P. S. 9, etc. Repairs cement pavements, etc.. P. S. 68, 76, 96. Heating repairs, etc.: P. S. 6, 72, etc.; P. S. 32, 74, etc. Piping repairs, etc., P. S. 92, 98, etc. Valve and pump repairs, etc., P. S. 39, 43, etc.

Borough of Brooklin P. S. 53, repairs wall tile. P. S. 54, replacing smoke pipe. P. S. 64, roof repairs. P. S. 73, resurfacing slate blackboards. P. S. 108, leader repairs. P. S. 146, plumbing repairs. P. S. 147, moving shop equipment, etc. P. S. 157, new asphalt floor, shelving; removing

fixtures from toilet. P. S. 174, cement pavement repairs. P. S. 215, new water heater, etc. P. S. 227 vacuum pumprepairs, etc. Eastern bistrict High School, replacing gas

ran es. Franklin K. Lane High School, replacing Samuel J. Tilden Hi h School, repairs bubblers;

new side tabs and repairs cyclorama curtains. Thomas Jefferson High School, iron work re•

pain; bleacher repairs. Hall (Board of Education), new venetian blinds;

new rug. Various Schools-Carpentry repair&, P. S. 64,

154. Securing cabinets, P. S. 72, 85, etc. Plaster repairs, P. S. 114, 175. Ash hoist repairs, etc., P. S. 46, 197. Iron and wire work repairs, etc., P. S. 163, 185, etc. Glazing, P. S. 163, 227, etc. Piping and heating repairs, etc., P. S. 64, 181, etc.

P. S. 159, grate repairs, etc. Borough of Queens

P. S. 4, sanitary repairs. P. S. 60, beating repairs. P. S. 77, sanitary repairs. P. S. 123, attain repairs. P. S. 133, sheet metal repairs. P. S. 146, installing wash tray, etc. P. S. 154, piping repairs, etc. P. S. 170 heating repairs. Forest Hills High School, repairs dishwashing

machine. Newtown High School (Annex), new boiler

smoke pipe. Queens Vocational High School, repairs leaks at

waste lines. Woodrow Wilson Vocational High School, re-

pairs furniture.

J

Various Schools-Roof repairs, P. S. 14, 76, etc. Roof repairs, P. S. 127, etc. Glass, P. S. 24, 140. Repairs water lines, P. S. 76, etc. Plumbing re airs, etc., P. S. 132, 163. Sanitary repairs, etc., ohn Adams High School, etc. 420,27

Until 10 a. m., on MONDAY, JANUARY 3, 1944

For repairs to the following schools: Borough of Manhattan

P. S. 37, repairs curtains. P. S. 104, relocating library, etc. Machine and Metal Trades High School, install.

ing~blackboards, etc. New York School of Printing, reconditioning

linotype machine etc. Seward Park high School, additions to control

sound system. Various Schools-Repairs tile and pavements,

P. S. 33, 60, etc. Repairs and painting flagpoles, P. S. 41, 47, etc. Heating repairs, P. S. 10, 24, etc. Repairs and refinishing furniture, P. S. 40, 65, etc.

Shops-Natatorium spring boards. Borough of The Bronx

P. S. 82-Electric refrigerator. Various Schools-Fire protection equipment,

P. S. 77, etc. Repairs metal work, P. S. 4, etc. Repairs slag and tile roofs, etc., P. S. 12, 36, etc. Sanitary repairs, P. S. 2, 7, etc. Piping repairs, etc.: P. S. 26, 95, etc.; P. S. 28, 44, etc. Roof repairs: P. S. 34, 56, etc.; R.S. 43, etc.

Borough of Brooklyn P. S. 151, roof repairs and caulking. Abraham Lincoln High School, heating and pip-

ing repairs, etc. Various Schools-Cement work, P. S. 252, 105,

etc. Replacing pipe covering, P. S. 16, 19, etc. Removing sink, etc., P. S. 64, 150, 175. Repairs leaks in leader, gas range, etc., P. S. 84, 149, etc. Piping and heating repairs, P. S. 27, 29.

Brooklyn Technical High School, repairs fire door.

Borough of Queens

P. S. 1, repairs air compressor motor, etc. Jamaica High School Athletic Field-Clay for

baseball diamond. William Cullen Bryant High School, vent ducts

and grilles; removing and resetting metal lockers. Various Schools-Carpentry repairs, P. S. 2, 4,

etc. Drain plate covers, etc., P. S. 38, 125, etc. Repairs water lines, P. S. 75, 134.

Borough of Richmond P. S. 29, heating repairs. d27,j3

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE Board of Estimate at its meeting held an Thurs-

day, December 2, 1943 (Cal. No. 9), adopted the following resolution:

Whereas, The Board of Estimate is considering the advisability of authorizing the construction of a combined sewer and appurtenances in Wood-haven boulevard, westerly side, from Queens bou-levard, southerly side, to 60th road, and 60th road from Woodhaven boulevard, westerly side, to Van Horn street, Second Ward, in the Borough of Queens, the preliminary authorization for the improvement having been granted by resolution adopted on April 9, 1942 (Cal. No. 100), and of apportioning the cost thereof;

Whereas, The total estimated cost of the im-provement is the sum of $9,800, the total esti-mated expenses are the sum of $1,500, and the assessed valuation of the property deemed bene-fited thereby as shown by the tax rolls of the Borough of Q ueens for the fiscal year 1943-1944 is the sum of $254,475;

Resolved, That the Board of Estimate pursuant to the provisions of Section 300 of the kew York City Charter, consider the said authorization and apportionment of cost.

By placing the cost of permanent pavement restoration in the intersection of Woodhaven boule-vard and Queens boulevard and one-third of the remaining cost of the entire improvement upon The City of New York, the City's share to be payable with the taxes of the said City the first fiscal year next succeeding the confirmation of the assessment, and by assessing the residual two-thirds of the remaining cost upon the property deemed to be benefited by the improvement as shown upon a map bearing the signature of the Acting Secretary of the Board of Estimate and dated August 3, 1943;

Resolved, That the Board of Estimate consider the proposed action at a meeting of the .Board to be held in the City Hall, Borough of Manhattan, City of New York, on Thursday, January 6, 1944, at 2.30 p. m., and that at the same time and place a public hearing thereon will then and there be had;

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Board cause this resolution and a notice to allersons affected thereby to be published in THE ~ITY RECORD at least ten (10) days prior to Thursday, January 6, 1944.

Dated, New York December 22 1943. ISAAC EICHHOLZ, Acting Stecretary, Board

of Estimate, Municipal Building, Manhattan, N. Y. 7, Telephone, WO rth 2.4560. d22,j4

CITY PLANNING COMMISSION

PROPOSALS See Regulation on L*st Page

SEALED BIDS WILL BE RECEIVED BY the City Planning Commission 27th door Mu-

nicipal Building, Manhattan, N. . 7, as follows:

Until 19 a. m., on WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 88, 1943

For furnishing of all labor, materials, equip-ment and appliances necessary for and properly incidental to the preparation and complete installs tion on the main floor and the mezzanine of the public building, 500 Park ave., Borough of Man-hattan, Index maps ofpoat war projects of the Boroughs of Manhattan, Bronx, Brooklyn, 4ueens and Richmond, and the work incidental thereto, in accordance with the specifications, scale and detail drawings therefor.

Blank forms for proposal, instructions to bid-derst form of contract and specifications may be obtained at the City Planning Commission, 27th floor, Municipal Building, Manhattan, where con• tract drawings may be seen and arrangements will be made whereby prospective bidders desiring sets of blueprints of thecontract drawings for their own use may secure same at the cost thereof to be paid by them. d16,29

DEPARTMENT OF MARINE AND AVIATION

PROPOSALS See Regulation on Last Page

SEALED BIDS WILL BE RECEIVED BY the Commissioner of Marine and Aviation, at

Room 4, Pier A foot of Battery pl., North River, Manhattan, N. Y. 4, as follows:

Until 12 noon, on WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1048

Contract no. 2397, for retubing the condenser on the Department of Marine and Aviation Ferry-boat "Tompkinsville."

Specifications and form of contract may be ex• amined at the above office where a copy of the specifications and form of contract may be ob-tained by personal application, upon payment of $1 in cash as a deposit to guarantee the safe return thereof. d17,29

OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER

Interest on City Bonds and stock

THE INTEREST DUE JAN. 1, 1944, ON Registered and Coupon Bonds and Stock of The

City of New York and of former Corporations now included therein, will be paid on Jan. 3, 1944, by the Comptroller, at his office (Room 830), Municipal Building, Chambers and Centre eta., Manhattan! N. Y. 7. The books for the transfer of bonds and stock

on which the interest is payable Jan. 1, 1944, will be closed Dec. 16 to 31, 1943, both dates inclusive.

Dated, Dec. 10, 1943. d16.31 JOSEPH D. MI GOLDRICK, Comptroller.

MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

Proposed Authorization-Filling Vacancies as Director of Management, Director of Re-search and Special Studies and Director of Information

PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN OF the proposed authorization by the Municipal

Civil Service Commission of New York to fill by temporary appointment vacancies in the positions of Director of Management, Director of Research and Special Studies, and Director of Information, in the New York City Housing Authority pursu-ant to the provisions of rule V, section 1*, para. graph 2c.

A public bearing will be allowed at the request of any interested person in accordance with the above noted rule at the office of the Municipal Civil Service Commission, Room 712, 299 Bway., Manhattan, N. Y. 7, on

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 28, 1943 at 2.30p m.

MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMIS-SION, HARRY W. MARSH, President ; FERDINAND Q. MORTON and ESTHER BROMLEY, Commissioners.

WILLIAM J. MURRAY, Acting Secretary. 423,27

NOTICES OF EXAMINATIONS

General Zxarvination Instructions

Note: These instructions are to be considered as part of the advertised requirements unless spa• cific exception is made.

Age and Sex: All examinations are open to both men and women of all ages unless advertisement states otherwise.

Citizenship and Residence: At the date of filing applications-Candidates must be citizens of the United States and residents of the State of New York. The foregoing provision regarding residence does not apply to candidates for license examinations, except as provided in the notice for a particular examination under the heading "Re-quirements."

At the time of appointment-Candidates must comply with that section of the Administrative Code which provides that any office or position, compensation for which is payable solely or in part from the funds of this City$hall be filled only by a person who is a bona brde resident and dweller of the City for at least three years im. mediately preceding appointment. (This provision don not apply to the following departments: Board of Transportations Board of Water Supply; New York City Housing Authority; Municipal Civil Service Commission; Triborougb Bridge Authority; New York City Tunnel Authority; Board of Edu-cation; Board of Higher Education.)

Applications for examinations must be filed on forms furnished by the Commission at its Appli. cation Bureau, 96 Duane at., Manhattan, N. Y. 7. The Application Bureau is open for business on week-days and Saturdays from 9 a. m. to 4 p. m. Application blanks are also mailed on request, pro-vided that a self-addressed 9-inch envelope stamped four cents for return to Manhattan and Bronx address and six cents for return elsewhere, is enclosed.

Flung: Unless otherwise specified applications may be filed either in person or through the maila. Applications submitted through the mails mdst be stamped at the rate of two cents an ounce from Manhattan and The Bronx and three cents an ounce from other places. Applications mailed too the Commission with insufficient postage will be rejected. Applications submitted through the mails must be accompanied by a certified check or money order in the amount of the fee, and must be postmarked on the envelope not later than 12 midnight on the last day for filing. Such application must also be received not more than five days thereafter, unless eligibility is the adver-tisement is nation-wide. The official notice to ap-pear for the examination is also the receipt for the payment cf the fee. Applicants are cautioned not to send cash through the mails. Mailed appli-cations must have the position applied for noted on the lower left hand corner of the envelope, and the return address noted in the upper, left hand corner. Special envelopes designed to meet these requirements may be obtained at the time the application is requested.

Application. submitted in person must be filed during the normal hours of business of the Ap. plication Bureau noted above. In such cases, the fee must be paid at the time of filing by cash, check or money order.

Chanute of Address: Candidates for examination and eligibles on the lists must notify the Commis-sion promptly f all changes of address between the time of filing the application and appointment to a permanent position from the list. Failure to do so may disqualify them on any part or parts of the examination which have not already been held.

Refund@: There is no fee charged for the ap-plication. Candidates in open competitive esamina-ttons whose applications are rejected will receive a refund of their fee from the Comptroller's Office one month after receipt of their notice of rejection, in promotion examinations one month after the examination Is held. No fees will be refunded to candidates who fail to appear for examinations for which they are qualified or who fail to pass in any part of such examinations.

Pus Market Unless otherwise specified, the pass marks on each test is fixed in accordance with the needs of the service.

Caution: The Commission cannot assume any responsibility for the non-delivery of applications requested through the mails nor for the loo of any cash submitted with suci applications.

Notarization: All applications must be notarized except in the case of promotion examinations:

Unless otherwise specified, no supplementary statements of any kind will be accepted from ctm-didates after the filing date for the receipt of applications in the rating of training, or experi-ence, or personal qualifications.

Except as otherwise specifically stated in adver-tisements, all preliminary training or other quali-fications required for the examination must be completed on or before the date of application.

Training, experience and personal qualifications may be rate¢ after an examination of the candi. date's application and after an oral interview or such other inquiry or investigation as may be deemed necessary.

To be satisfactory the experience prescribed, in addition to covering the penal fixed herein, most also be of such a nature and quality as to warrant the inference that the candidate is fit to perform the duties of this position. The initial experience rating, therefore, is not necessarily final. If in-vestigation on inquiry discloses that the candidate's experience is not of the nature or quality desired then he may be either rested or failed is expert ence. Mere admission to the examination in any test thereof is not conclusive on the Commiuior as to the qualifications of any candidate.

Admission to the examination or to any part of it, conditionally or pending subsequent determine tion of qualifications does not imply that the candi date possesses the minimum qualifications required for the position or is entitled to a passing ratinc on the experience part of the examination. If the experience interview, held after the written or other parts of the examination, discloses that the candidate lacks the requisite experience or educe tion, he may be disqualified or given less than a passing rating for experience.

Not more than four months of provisional em• oloyment in 'the position for which an examinatlor is held may be cred'ted in the rating of experience

EklMMve Certltleotlon: At the request of i department bead or upon its own initiative, the Commission may make selective certification of t list resulting from any examination to similar o! related positions which require additional or ape cial qualifications not tested specifically by the ex urination. Such selective certification. except when made on the basis of age or additional or specs. physical or medical qualifications, will he mad, Sly upon due notice to all eligibles affected or this list, and only to obtain eligibles who pouter inch special qualifications or abilities as can b' evidence by experience record. or by the posses lion of a license, or by the possession of specifief paraphernalia, equipment or facilities or the passini of a qualifying test. Eligibles who pass it nor competitive test administered by the Contmiuior to ascertain the possession of such special qualifi cations will be certified to such similar or relater positions in the order of their standing on th. original list.

General Medical and Physical Standards No disease. injury or abnormality that tends tV impair health or usefulness. Other medical am physical standards may be specifically required.

EXAMINE WITH EXTREME CARE THE PRAI•.TMTNARY REQUIREMENTS PRE SCRTBFD.

Appointments: In the use of graded positions appointments are usually made at the minimum

salary of the grade. The eligible list may be used for appropriate positions in lower grades. In the case of ungraded positions, appointments are usually made at the salary advertised but subject to final determination of the Budget Director. In the case of per diem positions, the salary advertised is the one presently paid.

Promotion Examinations: The rules of the Municipal Civil Service Commission provide that in determining eligibility for promotion, the titles of positions and the duties which are natur and properly attached thereto shall be considea Duties which have been performed not in accord-ance with the title, or alleged personal qualifica-tion., shall not be considered to determining eligibility.

Any employee serving under a title, not men-tioned in the eligibility requirements, but which he believes falls within the provisions of the above rule, may file an application and an appeal It compete in the examination during the period stated in the advertisement. No appeals will be received after 4 p. m. on the closing date for the receipt of applications.

All persons on the preferred list for titles in. eluded under eligibility requirements are likewise eligible to participate in this examination.

THERE WILL BE NO DEVIATION FROM THIS PROCEDURE.

DENTAL HYOIENIST

AMENDED NoTrcz

(Candidates who filed is November, 1943, aced not file again, but may if they Sisk make additions or atncndments thereto.)

Salary: $1,200 per annum. Applications: Issued and received from 9 a. m..

Dec. 15, 1943 to 4 p. m., Jan. 19 1944. Fee: $1. Ijees are not refunded to persons who

are absent from examinations; refund& are made only to those candidates not permitted to take examinations by the Commission because they lack the necessary requirements.

Vacancies: Occur from time to time. Datiep: Under the supervision of a dentist to

remove deposits, accretions and stains from the teeth of school children or adults; give instruction in oral hygiene to parents and children; conduct educational programs; assist dentist in school or hospital clinics and at health centers; when neces-sary, clean equipment and maintain a clinic is acceptable condition; make reports and perform related work.

Requirements- Candidates must be graduate dental hygienists from a school of recognized standing at the time of filing applications, but graduates of February, 1944, will be accepted. Before appointment candidates must be licensed as dental hygienists by the Board of Repute of the State of New York, and must present their licenses to the Commission before their names will be certified.

Subjects and Weights: Written wdgbt $0, 75 per cent required; oral, practical, weight $0, 75 per cent required. At the oral practical test the personal qualifications of candidates will also be considered.

Applications mailed and postmarked up to and in. eluding 12 midnight on the last day for the receipt of applications will be accepted by the Commission.

ON "Oenei'al ihmo Datba inatrnrtlent" wbleb Is to be considered part of this notice.

MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMIS-SION, HARRY W. MARaa, President; Foutaau Q. MoaroN and EXTRER BtmncLST, Commissioners.

WILr.uw J. Muurn. Acting Secretary. d15J19

PROMOTION TO CIVIL SERVICE HEAMINf (RAILROAD) -

Tbfe examination b open only to empb7eN of the MaelofySI Civ11 Service Comxdwb&

Salary: $3,000 per;;;;; and over. Appoint-ments are usually made at the minimum salary of the grade.

Appieatitionr Issued and received from 9 a. m., Dec. 13, to 4 p. m., Dec. 29 1943.

Fee: $2. Fees are not refunded to persons who are absent from examinations; refunds are made only to those candidates not permitted to take examinations by the Commission because they lack the necessary requirements.

Vacancies: Occur from time to time. Date of Teat: The written examination will be

held March 2, 1944. Eligibility Requirements: Open to all perma-

neat employees of the Municipal Civil Service Commission now serving in the title of Assistant Civil Service Examiner (Railroad), who have served continuously in the Personnel Examining Service for not less than one year next preceding the date of the written test; and who are otherwise eligible.

Duties: Under general supervision to do re. sponsiblepublic personnel work In connection with examinations for the New York City Transit System, such as: prepare job analyses, advertise• manta, recruiting plans, various types of teats and key answers; conduct and rate written, practical, oral and technical-oral tests; evaluate test results; study recruitment problems, promotion lines, job classification and training programs; develop test• ing procedures and techniques; conduct field In-vestigations; perform pertinent research and eta. tistical work; prepare reports and make recom. mendations; when required, to coordinate the work of Associated employees and supervise subordi. nates; perform other related work.

Subjects and Weigbta: Record and seniority, weight 50, 70 per cent required; Written, weight 50, 70 per cent required; final average, 70 per cent reqaired.

Applications mailed and postmarked up to and in. eluding 12 midnight on the last day for the receipt of applications will be accepted by the Commission.

Bee "General Examination Instruction" whieb Is to be considered part of this notice.

MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMIS-SION, HARRY W. MAasa, President; YnDINAND Q. MDRTON and Enrup BaoKLET, Commissioners.

WILLIAM J. Mums, Acting Secretary. d13,29

PROMOTION TO ELEVATOR MECHANIC

This examination Is open only to employees of the New York City Tunnel Authority.

Salary: Prevailing rate. Applications: Issued and received from 9 a. m.,

Dec. 21, 1943, to 4 p. m., Jan. 7, 1944. Fee: $2. Fees are not refunded to persons who

are absent from examinations; refunds are made only to those candidates not permitted to take examinations by the Commission because they lack the necessary requirements.

Vacancies: One at $2,580 per annum in the New York City Tunnel Authority.

Date of Test: The written examination will be held Jan. 25, 1944.

Eligibility Requirements: Open to an vent employees of the New York City Tunnel Authority with the title of Elevator Mechanic's Helper who have served continuously for a period of not less than one year next preceding the date of the practical test and who are otherwise eligible for examination.

Any employee serving under a title not men- tinned above but which he believes should be made eligible, may file an application and an appeal to compete in the examination during the period stated in the advertisement.

Duties: To maintain, adjust, and repair electric elevators, including all electrical and mechanical

BOARD OF EDUCATION

BOARD OF ESTIMATE

PROPOSALS

Notice of Public Hearings

see Regulation on Last Page PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT MATTERS

4698 THE CITY RECORD MONDAY, DECEMBER 27, 1943

Filing, Tentative Decrees—Notices, to ment of the value of the benefit and advantage of File Objections the improvement to the respective owners of the

real property within the area of assessment for SUPREME COURT—BRONX COUNTY benefit herein, and the tentative decree of the said

Court as to awards for damages and as to assess. In the Matter of the Application of The City of ments for benefit was signed on the 10th day of

New York, relative to acquiring title to the real December, 1943, by Hon. Charles B. McLaughlin, property required for the opening and extending Justice of the Supreme Court presiding at the of BRUSH AVENUE from East 177th street trial of the above entitled proceeding, and was to Schley avenue, in the Borough of The Bronx, filed with the Clerk of the County of the Bronx City f New York. on the 11th day of December, 1943, for the in•

NOTICEIS HEREBY GIVEN TO ALL spection bf whomsoever it may concern. parties interested in the above entitled proceed- Second—That the said Court has assessed all the

ing as follows: real property within the area of assessment for 1 irst—That the above named Court, after con- benefit fixed and prescribed by the Board of

iidering the testimony and proofs submitted on the Estimate on the 27th day of March, 1925, and trial of the above entitled proceeding, has corn- that the said area of assessment includes the pleted its estimate of the compensation which parcels of real property situate and being in the tbould be made by The City of New York to the Borough of The Bronx, in the City of New York, respective owners of the real property to be ac- which, taken together, are bounded as shown on guired in this proceeding, and has made an assess • the following diagram:

laid out; thence northerly and along said easterly side of Lenox avenue 174.84 feet to its intersection with the southerly side of West 145th street; thence easterly and along said southerly side of West 145th street 489.97 feet to its intersection with the westerly line of Harlem River 'drive as laid out on a map dated November 24, 1941; thence southerly and along said westerly side of Harlem River drive 22.98 feet to a point of tan• gency; thence continuing southerly along a curve to the left of radius 1,579.71 feet, central angle 6 degree 49 minutes 21 seconds, length 188.10 feet to its intersection with the northerly side of West 144th street, which intersection is also a point of curvature; thence westerly and along said northerly side of West 144th street 607.98 feet to the point or place of beginning.

Parcel C (Harlem River Drive) Beginning at the corner formed by the inter-

section of the southerly side of West 143d street with the westerly side of Harlem River drive as laid out on a map dated November 24, 1941, said corner being 854.12 feet easterly from the corner formed by the intersection of the southerly side of West 143d street with the easterly side of Lenox avenue; thence northerly and along said westerly side of Harlem River drive along a curve to the left of radius 1,850 feet, central angle 11 minutes 14 seconds, length 6.04 feet to a point of com-pound curvature; thence continuing northerly and along a curve to the left of radius 1,483 feet, central angle 3 degrees 45 minutes 30 seconds, length 97.28 feet to a point of tangency; thence continuing northerly along a tangent 300.18 feet to a point of curvature; thence continuing north-

(XPCAALlTDRY WTI' .5 9q% .. d<om a rnrbowdafolrheaevdare w.,n+e XARO0rf5T/MATEANDAPR7R7/CNMENr

---~ icatesmej ,r it i w /ry✓iy aab'MsI. OfAW Ae rw( cH/rrzve ea 0 MdiCN/p I~1MpD.fh1 eJ0/~9e~V11 M'AVfAN Ii0/ —~~~~a-----

eTbermie cka.y lred D/AtFi+PAA/S/IOW/IVGAREA OI'A5SE3'SMENT A//datmetjmarioww&*io/ro/mdaretok#v +wed /N J71EP1PXEED/N6FORACQU/R/N5 TITLE TO

s, ,9b, onyka oreane/ N+elminnea MWh,th /hry BMW AVENUE .'r nlrnrxed

The anrl f hvdro,A 2aTh rAoa date PROM iA$T /77f7REET Tb $CNLEYAVENUE

#if(nfm, BOROUGMQPTNEBRONX

SCALE New)fvk,Pe, 1/975

.» •» Chief Enoirr

erly and along a curve to the right of radius 1,579.71 feet central angle 6 degrees 49 minutes 21 seconds, fengtb 188.10 feet to a point of tan-gency; thence continuing northerly along a line 197.94 feet to its intersection with the northerly side of West 145th street; thence easterly and along a prolongation of said northerly sideof West 145th street 241.04 feet to its intersection with the United States pierhead line, approved by the Secretary of War, October 18, 1890; thence southerly and along the various courses of the said United States pierhead line to its intersection with the prolongation of the southerly side of West 143d street; thence westerly and along said prolongation of the southerly side of West 143d street 159.88 feet to the point or place of beginning.

The Board of Estimate by resolution adopted on December 2, 1943, determined that the cost of such proceeding be apportioned by placing 50 per cent of the cost of acquiring title to Harlem River drive and the entire cost of acquiring title to the parks upon the Borough of Manhattan, and by placing the remaining 50 per cent of the cost of acquiring title to Harlem River drive, less the share of the value of buildings taken which the Court may, by saw, place upon The City of New York, upon The City of New York, the Borough's and City's shares to be payable with the taxes of the Borough and City the first fiscal year next 4 1. Advertisements, proposals and bids.

succeeding the confirmation of the assessment. (a) Bids for contracts shall be solicited by public Dated, New York, December 22, 1943. advertisement in at least 10 successive issues o6 IGNATIUS M. WILKINSON, Corporation Tas CITY Racoa . All advertisements soliciting

Counsel, Office and Post Office Address, Municipal bids for contracts shall be approved by the Building, Borough of Manhattan, City of New Corporation Counsel before publication. Bids shall

York 7. d22,j4 be publicly opened on the day of the last insertion of the advertisement.

(b) Except with the approval of the Corporatioc Counsel, the advertisement shall include only:

1. The place where the proposals may be ob-tained; 2. The place where and the day and hour when

the bids will be publicly opened; 3. A brief description of the supplies, materials

and equipment to be furnished and of the work or labor to be done.

(c) Proposals for bids shall be in such form as may be prescribed by the agency issuing the same and shall state:

1. That the person making the bid shall deliver it in a sealed envelope, addressed to the head of the appropriate agency, on or before the time auu at the place designated in the advertisement;

2. That the sealed envelope shall be endorsed with the name or names of the person or persons presenting the same, the date of its presentation and the title of the proposal•

3. The place where and tie day and hour whet the bids will be publicly opened;

4. The quantity and quality of the supplies, materials and equipment to be furnished and the nature and extent of the work or labor to be done;

5. That every bid shall be accompanied by a deposit in approximately the sum of two percentua of the amount of such bid; except that in the can of a proposal for a single item or class of items, the deposit shall be approximately two percentum of the contracting agency s estimated cost of the supplies, materials and equipment to be furnished and the work or labor to be done. Such deposit shall consist of a certified check upon a State or National bank or trust company or a check of such

bank or trust company signed a duly authorized officer thereof, drawn to the order of the Contp. troller, of money, or of the obligations of the City described in section 241 of the New York City Charter, which the Comptroller shall approve as of equal value with the sum so required, empt that the check submitted as security deposit with a bid for supplies, materials or equipment need not be certified;

6. That in the event of the failure of the bidder to execute the contract within five days after notice of the award of the contract to him, his deposit of so much thereof as shall be applicable to the amount of award made to him shall be retained by the City, and he &hall be liable for and shall agree to pay on demand the difference between the price bid and the price for which such contracts shall be subse• quently relet, including the cost of such reletting and less the amount of such deposit. No plea of mistake in such accepted bid shall be available to the bidder for the recovery of his deposit or as a defense to any action based upon such accepted bid; 7. That upon the execution of a contract for

work or labor, in which provision has been made for payments by installments the contractor may be

required to deposit not less than approximately two percentum nor more than approximately five per-centum of the amount of the contract, until the amount of the retained percentages under the con• tract shall equal the amount of the deposit. Such deposit shall consist of a certified check upon a State or National bank or trust company signed by a duly authorized officer thereof, drawn to the order of the Comptroller, of money, or of the obligations of the City described in section 241 of the New York City Charter, which the Comptroller shall approve as of equal value with the sum so required:

8. That each bid shall contain: (a) The name, residence and place of business

of the person or persons making the same. (b) The names of all persons interested therein

and if no other pe rson is so interested, such fact shall be distinctly stated;

(c) A statement to the effect that it is made without .an; connection with any other penes making a bid for the same purpose, and is in all respects fair and without collusion or fraud;

(d) A statement that no Councilman or other officer or employee or persons whose salary is payable in whole or in part from the City treasury is directly or indirectly interested therein, or in the supplies, materials and equipment and work or labor to which it relates, or in any portion of the profits thereof. (d) The bid shall be verified by the written oath

of the bidder that the several matters stated therein are in all respects true.

(e) Each agency shall keep a proper receptacle for the receipt and safe-keeping of bids. Upon the receipt thereof, bids which are duly presented shall be deposited in such receptacle. No bids shall be removed therefrom nor shall the sealed envelope in which it is contained be opened, except as pro-vided in paragraph (f) of this section.

(f) The bids shall be opened and read publicly at the time and place designated in the advertise. ment, in the presence of the Comptroller or his representative and of such of the bidders as may

to be present. The opening of such bids shall not be postponed if the Comptroller, or his repre. sentative shall. after due notice, fail to attend.

(g) This regulation shall be published in Tas• CITY Raman daily. All advertisements for bids by an1 one agency appearing in any one issue of THE L1TY RECORD shall be published in sequence by date of opening and shall refer to this regulation as advertised in Tax CITY R=co1D. Such reference shall immediately follow the name of the agency. 1 9. Purchase orders in excess of one thousand

dollars. (a) Medical, surgical dental, laboratory supplies

and implements and loon supplies involving an expenditure of more than one thousand dollars mad be procured on purchase orders based on competi-tive bids received after advertisement in at least three successive issues of THE CITY Racoap.

(b) Rentals of equipment involving an expendi-ture of more than one thousand dollars for other than snow removal purposes may be effected b the Department of Purchase on purchase orders based on competitive bids received after advertisement in at least ten successive issues of Tax CITY Rzcoao. Rentals of equipment for snow removal purposes shall be effected in accordance with aectioor 155(3)4.0 and 782a-2.0 of the Administrative Code.

This examination Is open to employees 4 the Bureau of Franchlees, Board of 1Catlmab

Salary: $3,000 per annum and over. Applications; Issued and received from 9 a. m

Dec. 13, to 4 p. m., Dec. 29 1943. Fee: $2. Fees are not refunded to persons rib

are absent from examinations; refunds are mad only to those candidates not permitted to tak examinations by the Commission because they lac the necessary requirements.

Vacancies : One expected. Date of Test: The written examination will b

held Saturday, Jan. 29, 1944. Eligibility Requirements: Open to all perms

nent employees of the Bureau of Franchises, Boar of Estimate who have served continuously for period of not less than one year as Law Assistani Grade 3, next preceding the date of the writte test and who are otherwise eligible. Candidate must be members of the New York Bar at th time of certification for appointment.

Duties: Under general direction to act as lai assistant to the Director of the Bureau of Fran chises; take charge in the absence of the Director

lprepare drafts of franchises, contracts, forma egal memoranda and opinions; attend conference

and negotiations; perform related work as required Subjects and Weights: Record and seniorit3

weight 50, 70 per cent required; Writtent weigh 25, 75 per cent required; Practical, weight 25 70 per cent required; final average, 70 per cen required.

Applications mailed and postmarked up to and in eluding 12 midnight on the last day for the receip of applications will be accepted by the Commission

See "General Examination Instructions" whicl Is to be considered part of this notice.

MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMIS SION, HARRY W. MARSH, President; FSRDINANI Q. MORTON and ESTHER BROMLEY, Commissioners

WILLIAM J. MvnAV, Acting Secretary. d13,29

SUPREME COURT-FIRST DEPARTMENT Piling Final Report

SUPREME COURT—BRONX COUNTY

In the Matter of the Application of the Corpora tion Counsel of The City of New York, for thi appointment of Commissioners of Estimate an( Assessment to ascertain and determine the corn pensation which should justly be made to owner; abutting on GARDEN PLACE AND VERNOI PARKWAY for damages caused by the closint of Garden place situated in Blocks 5084 anc 5087 and of Vernon parkway situated in Block- 5085 and 5111, Borough of The Bronx, City o: New York.

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE supplemental and amended final report of 'the

Commissioners of Estimate and Assessment in the above entitled matter will be presented for con. firmation in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Judicial District, at a Specia: Term thereof, Part I, to be held in the Bronx County Building, in the Borough of The Bronx, in the City of New York, on the 7th day of January, 1944, at ten o'clock in the forenoon of that day; and that the said final report has been deposited in the office of the Clerk of the County of Bronx, there to remain for and during the space of five days, as required by law.

Dated, New York, December 27, 1943. EDWARD R. COHN, JOHN L. BUCKLEY,

Commissioners of Estimate and Assessment. JULIUS ISAACS, Clerk. d27,31

Application to Condemn

SUPREME COURT—NEW YORK COUNTY

In the Matter of the Application of The City of New York, relative to acquiring title to the real property required for the opening and extending of HARLEM RIVER DRIVE from the south erly line of West 143d street to the northerly line of West 145th street and for park purposes, for the public park bounded by West 143d street, Lenox avenue, West 144th street and Harlem River drive, and for the public park bounded by West 144th street, Lenox avenue, West 145th street and Harlem River drive, in the Borough of Manhattan.

PURSUANT TO THE STATUTES IN SUCH cases made and provided, notice is hereby given

that it is the intention of the Corporation Counsel of The City of New York to make appli-cation to the Supreme Court of the State of New York, at a Special Term, Part III, thereof, to be held in and for the County of New York, at the County Court House, in the Borough of Man• hattan, in the City of New York, on the 6th day of January, 1944, at the opening of the Court on that day, or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard thereon, for an order to condemn the real property hereinafter described. and directing that the compensation which should justly be made to the respective owners of the real property to be acquired in the above entitled proceeding be ascer-taied and determined by the Supreme Court without a jury, and to have the cost of such improvement assessed by the said Court, as herein. after set forth in accordance with the resolution of the Board of Estimate adopted on December 2, 1943.

The nature and extent of the improvement hereby intended is the acquisition of title in fee by The City of New York for street and park purposes to the real property which is more particularly bounded and described as follows:

Parcel A (Park) Beginning at the corner formed by the inter-

section of the northerly side of West 143d street with the easterly side of Lenox avenue as now laid out; thence northerly and along said easterly side of Lenox avenue 199.83 feet to its inter-section with the southerly side of West 144th street; thence easterly and along said southerly side of West 144th street 654.53 feet to its inter- section with the westerly side of Harlem River drive as laid out on a map dated November 24, 1941; thence southerly and along said westerly side of Harlem River drive 224.24 feet to a point of tangency; thence continuing southerly along a curve to the right of radius 1,483 feet, central angle 1 degree 5 minutes 59 seconds, length 28.46 feet to its intersection with the northerly side of West 143d street; thence westerly and along said northerly side of West 143d street 809.20 feet to the point or place of beginning.

Parcel B (Park) Beginning at the corner formed by the inter-

section of the northerly side of ,'Vest 144th street with the easterly side of Lepox avenue as now

Third—That The City of New York, and all they parties interested in suchroceeding or in ray of the real property affected thereby having ray objections thereto, shall file such oijections a writing, duly verified, in the manner required y law for the verification of pleadings to an ction, setting forth the real property owned by he objector and his post office address with the lerk of the County of Bronx, on or fefore the 0th day of January, 1944, and parties other than he City of New York, shall within the same time erve on the Corporation Counsel of The City of lew York at his office, Municipal Building, Room 559, in die Borough of Manhattan, City of New 'ork, a cop of such verified objections. Fourth—That on the 18th day of January, 1944,

t 10.30 o'clock in the forenoon of that day, or as

SUPREME COURT—SECOND DEPARTMENT

1f111ng Tentative Decree—Notice to no Objections

SUPREME COURT—KINGS COUNTY

In the Matter of Acquiring Title by The City of New York, acting for and on behalf of the New York City Housing Authority, to certain real property within the area bounded generally by ROCKAWAY AVENUE STONE AVENUE, DUMONT AVENUE and SUTTER AVENUE, in the Borough of Brooklyn, City of New York, duly selected as a site for the BROWNSVILLE HOUSES (Project No. N.Y.S. 4) and duly approved according to law.

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN TO ALL parties interested in the above entitled proceed-

in as follows: First—That the above named Court, after con-

sidering the testimony and proofs submitted on the trial of the above entitled proceeding, has com- pleted its estimate of the compensation which should be made by The City of New York to the respective owners of the real property acquired in this proceeding, and that the tentative decree of said Court as to awards for damage was signed on the I5th day of December, 1943, by Hon. Charles C. Lockwood, Justice of the Supreme Court, presiding at the trial of the above entitled proceeding, and was filed with the Clerk of the County of Kings on the 15th day of December, 1943, for the inspection of whomsoever it may concern.

Second—That The City of New York and all other parties and persons interested in such pro- ceedings or in any of the real property affected thereby having any objections thereto, shall file such objections in writing, duly verified in the manner required by law for the verification of pleadings in an action, setting forth the real prop-erty owned by the objector and his post office ad- dress, with the Clerk of the County of Kings, on or before the 15th day of January, 1944, and parties other than The City of New York shall within the same time serve a copy of such verified objections on the Corporation Counsel of The City of New York at his office, Room 1559, Municipal Building, Borough of Manhattan, City of New York. Third—That on the 17th day of January, 1944,

at 9.30 o'clock in the forenoon of that day, or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard, the Cor-poration Counsel of The City of New York will

soon thereafter as Counsel can be beard, the Cor-poration Counsel of The City of New York will apply to the Hon. Charles B. McLaughlin, the Justice of the Supreme Court who signed said tentative decree, at a Special Term, Part II of the Supreme Court, to be held in the Supreme Court Building, Room 300 (Special Term Part I), 60 Centre street, in the Borough of Manhattan, to fix a time when said Justice will bear the parties who will have filed objections to the said tentative decree.

Dated, New York, December 15, 1943.

IGNATIUS M. WILKINSON, Corporation Counsel, Office and Post Office Address, Municipal Building, Borough of Manhattan, City of New York 7. dlS,j3

apply to the Honorable Charles C. Lockwood, at Special Term, Part IV of the Supreme Court, to be held in the court room of Trial Term, Part III, Supreme Court Building, in the Borough of Brooklyn, City of New York, to fix a time when said Justice will hear the parties who have filed objections to the said tentative decree.

Dated, New York, December 20 I943. IGNATIUS. M. WILKINSOI'I, Corporation

Counsel, Office and Post Office Address, Municipal Building, Borough of Manhattan, City of New York 7. d20,31

Application to Condemn

SUPREME COURT—KINGS COUNTY

In the Matter of the Application of The City of New York, relative to acquiring title to the real property required for the opening and extending of East 40th street, from Foster avenue to Far-ragut road, Borough of Brooklyn, City of New York.

PURSUANT TO THE STATUTES IN SUCH cases made and provided, notice is hereby given

that it is the intention of the Corporation Counsel of The City of New York to make application to the Supreme Court of the State of New York, at a Special Term, Part IV, for condemnation pro-ceedinga, of said Court, to be held in the County of Kings, at the Municipal Building, in the Bor-ough of Brooklyn, in the City of New York, on the 30th day of December, 1943, at 9.30 o'clock in the forenoon of that day, or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard thereon, for an order to condemn the real property hereinafter described and directing that the compensation which should justly be made to the respective owners of the real property proposed to be acquired in the above entitled proceeding be ascertained and determined by the Supreme Court, without a jury, and to have the cost of such improvement assessed b the said Court, as hereinafter set forth, in accordance with the resolution of the Board of Estimate adopted on October 8, 1942.

The nature and extent of the improvement hereby intended is the acquisition of title in fee by The City of New York for street purposes to the real property which is more particularly bounded and described as follows:

Beginning at the corner formed by the inter-section of the west line of East 40th street with the south line of Foster avenue, as these streets are now laid out on the City Map, thence easterly along the south line of Foster avenue 60.0 feet to the east line of East 40th street, thence southerly deflecting 90 degrees to the right along the east

equipment connected therewith; perform relate work.

Subjects and Weights: Record and seniorit weight 50, 70 per cent required; Practical, weig' 50, 70 per cent required.

Applications by mail will be accepted if mails and postmarked up to and including 12 midnigl on the last day for the receipt of applications ar received by the Commission not more than fii days thereafter.

See "General Examination Instructions" whfe Ia to be considered part of this notice.

MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMI; SIUN; HARRY W. MARSH, President; FERDINAN Q. MORTON and ESTHER BROMLEY, Commissioner

WLLIAM J. MURRAY, Acting Secretary. d21,j7

PROMOTION TO LAW ASSISTANT, GRADE

line of East 40th street 775.0 feet to the north line of Farragut road, as now laid out on the City map, thence westerly deflecting 90 degrees to the right along the north line of Farragut road 60.0 feet to the west line of East 40th street, thence northerly deflecting 90 degrees to the right along the west line of East 40th street 775.0 feet to the point or place of beginning.

The above described property is located in Blocks 4986A and 4987A in Section 15 of the Kings County Land Map.

The Board of Estimate by resolution adopted on October 8, 1942, determined that the entire cost of such proceeding shall be placed upon the Borough of Brooklyn, to be payable with the taxes of the Borough the first fiscal year next succeeding the confirmation of the assessment.

Dated, New York, December 16, 1943. IGNATIUS M. WILKINSON, Corporation

Counsel, Office and Post Office Address, Municipal Building, Borough of Manhattan, City of New York 7. d16,28

REGULATION ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF E T1MATE ON' MAY 21, 194! (CAL, NO. 81).