The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-06-18

/ SBIccu upon IL, ana ne nOnRu tue SuulT uuu tIlc
Board would sustain the committee.
The PRESIDENT said the Chair had no evidence
that this was paper which had been before the
committee: 1t came up as preamble and resou-
reporting part had been altered by sheet being
sealed over it, and the alleged state Of facts put
into the form of a preamble or recital tho resou-
tions then followed, as proposed by the minority OF
Mr.. BARKER would then move to lay the resolu-
tions on the table. He would ask whether the ma
jority not ready to sign the reportthe gentle
! men from the Third. the Eleventh. and Second.
Mr. wELLs-Wel, ifyou would sign it, that would
do. We could then bring up both reports.
Mr.. BARKER repeated his explanation. 1t would
have been easy 10 sign it, if they had anticipated
such II proceeding.
Assistant Alderman BoUroN rose to speak to the
resolutions. The Corporation had before granted
the right to certain parties to lay tho track, and
they had had a high legal opinion that they were
| entitled
The PRESIDENT interrupted-Thc gentleman was
now discussing the merits OF the question
Mr. BouToN-Yes; | speak to the resolution
/ What is the question!
| PREsIDENT-There are two-one to lay on the
table and the previous one Of adopting the resou-
tons. (This motion to lay on the table was then
/ put and lost)
Mr. BouToN-I have the floor. By our rules
when any five members require Committee of the
| Whole, it must be had; and |, for one now move
that Assistant Aldermen TAFT, McGowan, Barker,
Mabbatt and Brastow, five Others having joined in
tho demand, the board was declared resolved into
committee on the subject accordingly, and Assistant
Alderman Rodman called. That gentleman not
being present, Assistant Alderman Mabbatt was
| called, and took the Chair.
Mr. B0UToN wished to make few remarks why
| this petition should not be granted. Firsty-That
| previous Corporation had already granted to GER
tain parties the right to hold the railroad, and they
had agreed to do so. This grant the faith of the
city pledged to, and it should be held involate
The question would be. whether all the parties had
forfeited the right: II there were only one who
haHn rIrIf hD ataIa pdp cd
Here there was not only one but four who had not
forfeted-and the Common Council now proposed to
take from them the right which they legally held.
Was it honorable honest. Would any one
sitting round that board, hold it just to de-
priye any one of his rights property with
out any compensation or equivalent! He hoped
not They had expended money in large sums;
prepared the work and had materials brought to
the city at heavy expense, and stored for
the purpose of going with it, AS to their
legal rights. the committee had not only the
opinion of their own counsel, but other eminent
lawyers and judges Of this city; and he earnestly
hoped that in the face of these the gentlemen sit
ting round never would deprive the parties in this
case of those rights. Further, it had been stated
was false. The preamble now stated that they had
not commenced the work as to enttle them to
take advantage of the grant. They hadcommenced.
The Board had had the report Of the Street Com
missioner to that effect, and the works, COM
monced. were now visible. 1t also alleged they had
not agreed to organize. He CMr. Bouton) said that
these parties had agreed and the preamble and
luton were false, every must who did not
persist in standing in the face ofght and reason and
was not wiltully blind, which was blindness Of the
worst kind. Here was not only the right and JUS
ticc taken from these parties, but it proposed
to give them to a new party-by name. But though
they were nOminaily So they were the old New Iork
City Stage Company, identified, in fact with Messrs.
Kip & Brown, ana their associates They did not
come fairly, i'll their own names, but came here be-
| hind bush, pretending 70 be somebody else, to
take from Sherman Pcttigrew. Sc, right wholly,
justly, ard honorably, conferred upon them. The
committee had, by majority, resolved to journ
until tomorrow night. They could very easily have
completed and signed the report but it was done for
| the purpose Of reducing i into smaller compass
| When matter comes before any body of men,
where certain parties had rights, and did
/ not violate the rights OF any others, they did not
see why those rights should not be conceded Many
| members knew that this was not or would not be
majority report. They had had the petition before
them only few days, and had noting to do with the
| action n-action of the former committee
Where was the justice. where was the right, in this
case? This city had lighted its faith to those par
| ties, and it was highly unjust to take from them
that right. He did not believe it possible that
members Of that Board would do it. He
they would not if they understood it; and he hoped
| every member would be well informed upon it. be-
fore it was disposed of, and that they would vote
understanoingy, rs he should be sorry that inus-
tice to any should be done in that Board, from
misapprehcnsion, for: the sake Of private interests
| or any other interests.
| Mr.. WELLS denied that the allegations in the
preamble were false, Several eminent jurists had
said they had forfeited their right to the grant.
/ Mr. J. q. BARKER rosc--It was he admitted. a
long time since this subject first intro
| duccd. He came into the Board under the belief
that the grantees had not complied with the con-
dions. and he induced to offer resolution last
| February, which he would read, requiring the
opinion Of counsel and information of the Street
. Commissioner. on the matter, and the subsequent
action of the committee. Gle then read these reso
| utions) At the time these resolutions were pre-
| sapta1 "A upnnimty ad in fhp SpariaJ (nun-
mittee on the subject. But after this the report of
the Commissioner and the opinion Of counsel came
in. from which he received great assistance, as he
was under the impression that they had all forfeited
their rights; but by that opinion, it appeared that
| no matter how many there were, if only one, if
any came forward they were the true grantees.
Assistant Alderman TRoTrER made some inquiry
10 the rights Of parties to assign or convey.
Mr. BARKER explained they had no right, without
consent, TO assign, until they had organized and
subscribed one-third Of the capital, and then they
might create stock, which was transferable; and
| continued--the report of the Street Commissioner
set forth that the Sixth avenue party had appedto
him. and, consulting the opinion of counsel, he ap
pointed an engineer. There never had been com.
mittee appointed to inyesti gate the matter until
| February last. He proceeded to read from the
printed documents of the Board Of Aldermen, (No.
| - the opinion of counsel. in which the whole
troversy set out and which was to the efeetthat
| Kip, Brown, Smith and Barnes had forfeited their
| right in the grant: but that Pettigrew, Sherman,
Marshall and Townsend had not. All this, continued
| be, that have been reading. appeared on the re-
port. and refused to sign until We could condense
| il. The committee of the whole Board had now be-
| fore them the views of the majority, showing how
| these parties entitled. He had considered it
his duty to read it, nj this juncture and he hoped
| after that statement, and hearing the opinion of
| their own counsel on this matter, which he felt
bound to respect. that they would let that commit
tee proceed with their report, which he doubted not
would be satisfactory to the board.
Mr.. WELLS said there several opinions Of
eminent counsel in court and he moved that the
Clerk read them.
Mr.. BARKER objected They we're mol before the
Board. and it quitc out OF order.
The CHAIRMAN said the gentleman from the Ninth
might make speech and read then, aud that was
the only way they could be brought before them.
Mr. WELLS said they the table, and
world the Board obEge him by residing them
- Ill IL 10 E.-t Ia