FAIL TO SHOW BIAS IN CITY BUS DEAL

The New York Times
November 21, 1922

Transit Testimony Indicates Change in Specification Was Not Due to Politics.

WITNESSES REVISE DATES

Say Requirements Were Altered Before Refusal of $10,000 Fee to Salesman.

Efforts to show that the change in the specifications for the "trackless trolleys" by the Department of Plant and Structures was due in some way to political influence were unsuccessful at the hearing in the Transit Commission's bus inquiry. These "trackless trolleys," which are really motor buses with the power furnished by a trolley, are in use on Staten Island and are operated by the city.

The outstanding feature of the day's hearing was testimony that the change in the specifications, instead of immediately following the refusal of the Atlas Bus Corporation to employ William Crompton as its sales agent on a retaining fee of $10,000 or $12,000 a year, preceded such refusal. Witnesses last week testified just the contrary and the inference was made that the refusal of the company to employ Mr. Crompton, who was said to have represented himself as influential with Mayor Hylan and other city officials, was the cause of the specification changes which prevented the Atlas Bus Corporation from being the successful bidder.

A. R. Cosgrove, Vice President and General Manager of the Atlas Bus Corporation, testified that reference to his letter files proved that his talk with Mr. Crompton was in May, 1922, instead of in September, 1921. Mr. Watson, President of the company, and Mr. Crompton both testified that the talk took place in September, 1921.

"When you first made a statement about this matter you said that the interview took place in the middle of September, 1921, didn't you?" asked former Justice Clarence J. Shearn, special counsel of the commission.

"I was speaking from memory and my files wouldn't prove it," Mr. Cosgrove replied.

Denies Offering to Cut Bid.

"Well," said Mr. Shearn, "I am free to say that I think that the date as given by him now is correct, although all three of them—Mr. Cosgrove in his original statement, and Mr. Watson and Mr. Crompton in their testimony—fixed it as September, 1921. But it would appear from the correspondence that it was in May, 1922. If it was in May, 1922, it is very clear that there was no relation between Crompton's visit and the changes in the specifications on these trackless trolley cars."

Mr. Cosgrove testified that his company had sold the city seven or eight "trackless trolleys" for the city's initial operation on Staten Island. He said each of these had a 140-inch wheel base and the price was $8,000 each. He denied that he had told employes of the Department of Plant and Structures that he would cut the bid $400 on a contract to supply fifteen more "trackless trolleys," which was obtained by the Trackless Transportation Company.

"You have not come over here to whitewash the department, have you?" Mr. Shearn asked.

"I have not come over here to whitewash anybody, Judge," replied Mr. Cosgrove. "My hands are absolutely clean. My transactions with the City of New York have been clean and aboveboard. We did what we were paid to do. So far as I am concerned, I have no quarrel with anybody and I have no desire to whitewash anybody."

Rebuked by Counsel.

Professor Morton Arendt of Columbia University, who was employed as an expert advisor by Grover A. Whalen, Commissioner of Plant and Structures, testified that he prepared the specifications, which permitted a wheel base not less than 140 inches. Professor Arendt said that Mr. Cosgrove complained to him of the change in specifications, but said that this had not prevented the Atlas Company from bidding, and that he did not think the change imposed a serious hardship on the company.

Professor Arendt objected to some of the questions asked him by Judge Shearn, and was once rebuked by Judge Shearn for smiling at the spectators.

"I think it is his habit to smile continually," said George McAneny, Chairman of the commission. "I have noticed it myself."

"I even smile at you, sir," was the retort of the witness to Mr. McAneny.

Judge Shearn asked Professor Arendt to explain the following paragraph in a letter he wrote to Mr. Cosgrove, if the latter had not complained that there was discrimination against him in the change of the specifications:

"I am very certain that it is far from his [Mr. Whalen's] intention to prevent you from bidding or to do anything which would make it difficult for your company to receive equal treatment with other competitors."

Professor Arendt insisted that Mr. Cosgrove had made no complaint to him and that he wrote the paragraph to let him know that everything was fair.

"Can you give any other explanation for introducing this subject in your letter?" Judge Shearn asked.

"Perhaps shooting my mouth off," Professor Arendt replied.

"What is this—Columbia University classroom language?" asked Judge Shearn.

"No, language I thought you might understand," was the reply.

The hearing was adjourned until today.