The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1851-01-28
NEWS BY THE M ILS,
Affairs ~ the state Capatal.
sUh ALBANY coRRRsP RNcE.


ALBANY, Ian. ., 1851.
Important Lac CAUSE.-THE Censtituttonat,ty Of
the assessment Lac, &c.
The regular course of the calanoar o. the Court
Of Appeals was interrupted for the purpose of dis
posing Of the cases which involved the constitu-
tionaly of the assessment system, as it prevails in
the cities Of this State, and which were deemed
to present questions Of unparalleled magnitude. -
There were before the court cases arising in New
York, Brooklyn, and Albany. The counsel who
repeated those from the last place declined argu-
ing them out OF their regular order The New
York case was an action brought by the corpora
ton the recovery of a sum assessed on house
and lot in John street, for the widening of William
street. That from Brooklyn grew out OF an assess
men on the owner of the adjacent property, for the
grading of Flushing avenue. The Supreme Court,
IN the Brooklyn case, had declared the assessment
laws unconstitutional. The New York case came
up q mere pro forn,d decision, obtained IN order
10 procure the judgment OF the court of the last
resort
So far as the constitutional question was invol.
we'd, the two cases were argued together, Judge
lieardsley and John &. Spencer appearing tor New
York and Brooklyn, and Messrs Crist and Mott for
he parties assessed Both sides of the argument
were sustained with signal ability, but il would be
un lust not 10 refer specially Mr.. Crisis well rea-
soned speech. Setting out with the proposition
that money was property, in the sense of the con-
sttutlop, which provides that private property
should not be taken tor public use, without lust
compensation, end that a provision which takes
money from an individual is equally withn the
prohibition with one which takes land. he procee-
ded 10 lay down, what was not disputed on the
Other side, that there only three ways by which
man can be Invested of his property, viz; lst by
due process Of law, which means suit at law, and
which an assessment clearly Is not I'd, by the
taxing power, which can only be resorted to by
laying contributions equally, in proportion to the
property, on all persons within the State, county,
city, or district taxed Sd, by the right OF eminent
domain, and which, in the language Of the consti-
tuition, requires Just compensation.
The icea that party, whose land or money is
taken by the public, can be compens ited by magi.
nary benefits repudiated, and the only case in
our Court of Errors supposed TO give sanction TO
that idea, is Livingston VS. Meyo, Of New York,
Sth Wendell, and was shown 10 have been decided
on other principles.
IL s impossible to overrate the importance of the
question under consideration, to the property of
New York. II is the system of local assessment
which has sent hundreds and thousands of our
citizens TO seek residences beyond our municipali-
~; and il understood that the new streets
and avenues would be graded at public expense, il
requires little sagacty 10 oresee that the result to
the city treasury, from the increased taxation and
prosperity which our population, thereby augmen-
ted, would create, would far more than counter
balance the additional charge which the public
works would occasion to il, while the increased
economy from system OF contracts where the
work was paid for as il advanced, instead of being
levied by nts, would save annually 10 the
PEOPLE of New York, hundreds Of thousands OF
dollars.