the city from making objection to such claims, and providing for their proper audit.

There can be no reasonable objection to No. 6, that the costs, counsel fees, etc., be audited by the Board of Estimate, but even in that case we claim that the Comptroller should see that the voucher for such claims accord with the decision of the Board of Estimate. It is significant that in the law and adjustment division claims under the head of personal injuries the city was requested, during the year 1909, to pay over $4,470,000, but the amount actually allowed, under the careful scrutiny of the Comptroller's department, was $158,925.48.

Similarly under contracts and miscellaneous claims there was asked by claimants $1,937,000 and there was allowed $312,225.

Exception No. 7, reads as follows:

"Amounts expended by each of the following departments, certified by the head of the department, for the following purposes; Health Department for the cure and prevention of disease: Department of Water, Gas and Electricity for prevention of pollution of the water supply; Departments of Fire, Health and Tenement House for executing orders, the expenses of which are liens upon the property affected." This once more opens a door to almost unlimited extravagance.

I pass No. 8, which has to do with principal or interest on corporate stock, bonds, assessment bonds, revenue bonds, special revenue bonds and notes of the city, and come to the ninth exception, which reads:

"The compensation of officers and employees in a city or county department, board, body or office, when certified by the municipal civil service commission."

Please remember that we are now talking about the limitations of the Comptroller's duties, and he is prevented under this clause from auditing the payrolls and pay vouchers of the city. The certificate of the Municipal Civil Service Commission is issued to show only whether the incumbents whose names appear on the payrolls of the city are included in compliance with the civil service law and rules. I understand the civil service certificate does not pretend to apply to the correctness of the sums payable, and even the heads of the departments are not required to certify to the correctness of the amounts. I think experience has shown that payrolls, which amount to about $90,000,000 a year, are frequently incorrect as to amounts, and include frequently unauthorized payments, and yet under this rule the Comptroller is prohibited from examining them.

I have just been informed that there was recently a case in the County of Queens where a man's name was included twice, on two payrolls.

In order further to restrict the powers of the Comptroller there has been added a sub-section on page 122, reading as follows: "The power hereby given to audit claims and demands shall not be construed to authorize the Comptroller or a subordinate to dispute the

amount of a fixed salary, nor to question the due performance of his duties by an officer or employee, except when necessary to prevent fraud." Under the present law, examination and audit are prescribed, but under the proposed new law the Comptroller is prevented from examination and audit in these exceptions we are now considering. Now then, we ask this question: How the Comptroller could possibly prevent fraud" without the power to examine the payrolls and vouchers?

I am credibly informed that these nine exceptions and restrictions to the powers of the Comptroller in connection with his duties as a disbursing officer of the city, so limit his control as Deputy Comptroller MATTHEWSON has stated, that 95 per cent. of the aggregate annual payments are withdrawn from his audit and examination.

Here is an elected official of the city, chosen by the people, and termed a Comptroller, called in this charter a "chief fiscal officer" and yet, heads of departments can say to this chief fiscal officer of the city, "Sign this warrant, for under the charter, Section 304, it is mandatory upon you to do it without examination or audit. Yours not to reason why, yours but to sign and sigh."

Am I stating this case too strongly? If so, I am ready to be corrected, but as I have read this and attempted to digest it-I have not read the entire charter, I do not claim to have done so,—but if I have read this Section 303 and Section 304 fairly, and have reasonably presented the natural interpretation of these things in plain language, then I say it is perfectly absurd, and it is time for an indignant protest. No such absurdity, or laxity, or opportunity for extravagance would be permitted by any of the business concerns represented by the members of this Chamber, and why should the City of New York be subjected to the dangers of outrageous, and possibly corrupt extravagance, which might ensue from such laxity? It is a true and witty saying that the Comptroller under this charter is not much more than a "rubber stamp."

We have not time to discuss the further opportunities for extravagance under the powers of the Commissioner of Charities, or in the Street Cleaning Department, except to say that under the latter head. in Section 1032, it is provided that The Commissioner may hire horses, vehicles, vessels, machinery, tools and equipment at compensation by day or trip for successive days or trips where the aggregate compensation therefor exceeds one thousand dollars, without advertisement or public letting." He must advertise for outlays that call for less than $1,000, but can make contracts that exceed $1,000 without such advertising or public letting.

Enough has been said to show that the citizens of New York should take positive and immediate steps to see that this charter does not become a law. Its faults and weaknesses must be made so evident to the public and to the Mayor as to make it impossible for it to be

enacted.

This is a time for plain speaking, and we shall be false to us send it back with an indignant and righteous protest. our city if we supinely and lazily refuse to strike a needed blow. Let

I remember many years ago a distinguished citizen of this city, whom most of you would remember if I should mention his name, said, "How rotten has an apple got to be before it ceases to be an apple?" and I ask you in this matter, “ How rotten has a charter got to be before it ceases to be a charter?" [Applause.]

THE PRESIDENT.-Gentlemen, this is a very important subject, and its proper consideration necessarily takes some time, but I must beg of you, who are to follow to be extremely brief in your remarks. I am reading from a list of names that have been sent up to me of people who would like to speak upon this charter. Mr. E. E. OLCOTT :

REMARKS OF EBEN E. OLCOTT.

Mr. OLCOTT.-Mr. Chairman and members. I came here to listen, not to speak. I have not read the charter, but I have looked into some of the provisions. So much has been said by Dr. ABBOTT, by Mr. IVINS and by Mr. MARLING that I think any of us can see the immense importance for the exercise of the greatest care. As far as I have been able to look into the matter, there seems to be a great many points that should be most carefully considered, and this one regarding the Comptroller's department seems to me almost beyond belief, that the Comptroller of the City of New York should not have authority to look into the merits of 95 per cent. of claims ranging between three and four hundred millions of dollars a year. That the fiscal agent of the city should be so deprived of power seems to be a strong enough statement.

In regard to the Board of Education, as I look back with pride to being a public school scholar in old Number 35, presided over by THOMAS HUNTER, when we had the pleasure and advantage to be derived by the presence of such men as RoOSEVELT, GERARD, and KNOX, as trustees, it is appalling to think of their places being filled, even after an interval of many years, by men who shall go there and receive a salary. What we need on the Board of Education is leading men who have had the advantage of education either in our schools or elsewhere; prominent men who will give their influence and time gratuitously.

In connection with the Dock Board, I notice that it is proposed to place the ferries under an entirely different commission. It does seem to me that the whole water front should be administered by one

man as it is now.

And so, throughout the charter, there are many things to be criticized, and I trust that our Chamber will be able to take effective means to see that these matters are strongly presented to the Mayor and to the Governor.

THE PRESIDENT.-I will not call any additional names, but will simply state that the subject is open to discussion.

ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS.

JAMES G. CANNON.-I would like to offer the following resolutions, Mr. President, and move their adoption:

Whereas, There is pending in the Legislature of this state a Bill (Assembly Introductory No. 1261) to provide a new Charter for the City of New York, nominally introduced March 31, 1911, but actually not made public in its present form until July, upon which hearings are to be held by the legislative committee beginning August 21st, and which it is contemplated enacting into law at the adjourned session in September; and

Whereas, The proposed charter, notwithstanding numerous improvements, contemplates radical changes, apparently without warrant in experience or sound judgment, such as:

The absence of provisions for removal of elective officials for unfitness; the increase of offices and of salary charges without commensurate benefits; the practical abrogation of independent audit of expenditures by the Comptroller; and it also proposes numerous changes of debatable value, such as the substitution of a paid Board of Education with diminished powers; the creation of new departments; the re-distribution of fiscal functions; all of which are of such far-reaching importance as to emphasize the need for careful deliberation; and

Whereas, The time afforded the citizens of New York to examine the proposed changes is short, and occurs during the vacation season, so that the subject can not receive adequate attention and such mature deliberation as the revision of the organic law of the city should have, and

Whereas, In the opinion of this Chamber no exigency exists requiring or justifying such undue haste, in a matter of such importance to the city since the imperfections of the present Charter are not an immediate menace to the general welfare of the city; therefore, be it

Resolved, That the Chamber of Commerce of the State of New York in special meeting assembled, recommends to the Legislature of the state that the proposed bill be not passed at the coming adjourned session, but that it be referred for further consideration and hearings to a joint committee to be composed of members of both houses of the Legislature, and an equal number of unofficial citizens of New York City, chosen by the Mayor thereof, to the end that the measure may be carefully studied and perfected so as to render it a model Charter for the metropolis.

Resolved, That the President of the Chamber transmit these Resolutions to the Legislative Committee at its hearing.

The preamble and resolutions were received with applause and were unanimously adopted.

The Chamber then adjourned.

Special Meeting, Thursday, October 5, 1911.

A special meeting of the Chamber of Commerce was held in the Hall of the Chamber, Thursday, October 5, 1911, at a quarter past twelve o'clock P. M., pursuant to the following resolution adopted by the Chamber at its regular meeting held June 1, 1911:

"Resolved, That a special meeting of the Chamber be held on Thursday, October 5, 1911, at fifteen minutes past twelve o'clock P. M., to elect Commissioners of Pilots to serve for two years in place of THOMAS P. BALL and A. FOSTER HIGGINS, whose terms of office will then expire."

PRESENT.

CLEVELAND H. DODGE,

A. FOSTER HIGGINS,

Vice-Presidents.

SERENO S. PRATT, Secretary.

And twenty-five other members.

In the absence of President HEPBURN, the Senior Vice-President, CLEVELAND H. DODGE presided.

JAMES G. CANNON, Chairman of the Executive Committee reported that the committee nominated THOMAS P. BALL and A. FOSTER HIGGINS for Pilot Commissioners to succeed themselves and he moved that they be elected.

No other nominations being made the chair appointed CHARLES T. GWYNNE as teller, and a ballot was taken which resulted in twentyeight votes being cast, all for the candidates named.

The Vice-President presiding thereupon announced :

Messrs. THOMAS P. BALL and A. FOSTER HIGGINS have been elected to serve as Pilot Commissioners for two years until October 5, 1913, pursuant to Chapter 467, Section 11, of the Laws of the State of New York, passed June 28, 1853.

The Chamber then adjourned.