The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-02-01

CANAL AND WALKER STRkKTs-RRPUsAL- TIN
COURT TO coNFIRA TH1 COMMISSIONERS RKP0Rr
SUPREME COUNT SPECIAL TERN.

Important Legal OFanlsm.
CANAL AND WALKER sTRksrs-RRSUsAL- TIN
COURT TO CONFIRM rHx COMMISSIONERS REPORT
SUPREME COUNT SPECIAL TERN.
Decision by Hon. Judge Roosevelt
JAN. 3l.-In the Matter of Canal and Walker
strests-It is nearly five years since this pro-
ceeding, in its original form, was commenced. In
yolying as il does, interests affecting great num-
Der Of persons and amounting in value to more than
q million of dollars, objections well or ill founded,
and more or less numerous, might naturally have
been expected.
The delay and embarrassment, however even with
this explanation. seem unprecedented. They have
been attended with the usual consequences great
accumulation OF expense.
On the 10th of June last, for reasons then stated,
and to meet the wishes of the directors, who then
appeared, the Court referred the estimate and
ment previously made to entirely new commission
ers, admitted to be satisfactory by all parties, to re-
consider the whole subject. They have done 80. and
now present an amended and supplemental report.
The counsel for the city move its confirmation; and
to this motion II Is objected that the parties have not
had the opportunities Of examining the work OF the
commissioners, and preparing themselves to oppose
its confirmation, which the law allows BY the act
Of 10th April, 1885, the commissioners required,
''beore they make their report to the c0urtthat Is
their first or original repot"to deposit an abstract
in the Street Commissioners office. for inspection
for at least sixty days. and to give at least sixty days
notice by advertisement and handbis Of the time and
place of its presentation to the court.
This in the case of the report now made, it is con-
ceued, has not been done. Inc act says, anu upOH
that provision the Corporation Counsel relies that
''of any supplemental o. amended report, notice
" of at least twenty days" shall he given. He has
given forty. Is that enough mot enough reason
ably and conveniently, for it is beyond the province
Of either the counsel or the Court 10 make the law
but enough within the letter and true intent and
meaning Of the act of the Legislature Is this, then
q supplemental and amended report! A bare in
specton shows that il is But that is not all that is
required. Is it supplemental and amended report
merely! Or is it not, in part at least new report /;
and not only new report, but a report on new and
distinct matter involving new and distinct interests
and affecting parties who had no concern in the pre-
vous awards and assessments!
After the order Of the Court already referred to,
made in June last, the Corporation, deemng the i'm
prOyement of Canal street, originally contemplate
ed (not the proceedings to carry 1t INTO enec 70 De
materially defective, determined to make several i'm
portant changes extending the new street among
other alterations. through the block between Dvi-
sion street and East Broadway and taking parts of
this change, that they applied to the Court in
II. So material did the Corporation consider
August last, on the full notice required in origi
nal applications for a new appointment of COM
missioners, to be newly DESIGNATED and newly
sworn-the same persons it is true but new commits
sioners-thus clearly and, think, very properly
treating the act to the extent Of the exchange
directed by them, as new and original pro-
ceeding; and what ground is there in reason, sup
posing the words of the law to be in themselves du
bious for denying to the owners of lots in question,
whose private property is now to be taken for the
public USE" the same opportunities for investigating
and objection. in respect to the compensation" to
be awarded to them, allowed, and necessarily
allowed, to all the owners of lots embraced within
the lines as originally drawn! And the same ques-
ton may be raised to all the owners oflots, newly
assessed and more heavily assessed, in consequence
of the added cost of the premises to be taken.
The constitution permits the taking OF private pro-
perry for public use but ON the other hand the in
junction is imperative that it shall not be taken with
Gil nor the Court nor the Legislature ITSELF can over
ride this provision. And, accordingly. the whole
scope and tendency of the amendments, from time to
time made in the street laws, have been to guard
more efectually the rights of individuals whose pro-
perry may be taken under them, either directly or
which in effect Is the same thing-by means OF
partial and heavy assessments charged upon it.
The safeguards in their general spirit and aim
spring from the constitution itself and participate to
a degree in the sacredness Of that instrument. The
Court does not feel disposed, even where no actua
wrong may have been done, either to overlap or
overlook them. The parties to be affected by these
strict proceedings are first to be heard by the Court
in the naming and appointment Of the commits
siOners; they are next to be heard by the commits
sioners, in making their awards for damages, and
their assessments for benefit; and they finally to
be again heard by the Court before the dOings OF the
commissioners are confirmed.
For these purposes ample time is to be allowed,
and ample notice 10 be given--time and notice not
left discretionary with the Corporation, with the
corporation COllscl, OF WIFI tDeCOurt Dul IlAeu anu
prescribed, in their manner, and in their minimum
duration, by the law itself Such opportunity and
notice, 40 far as respects the new parties and new
interests introduced in this by the change in the
proposed improvement, have not, in two respects,
been given and the report therefore at the present
time, cannot legally be confirmed. The abstract
appears to have been deposited for inspection in the
Street Commissioners Office for the period OF thirty
days, and notice Of the fact duly given by the
fun period Of ten days. Bat as new notice of
presenting the report has to be given for sixty
days, it would be safer without involving any
increased delay, to deposit the abstract de moro
for the full period and repeat the ten days notice
for objections to be presented to the commissioners,
incorporating it, rs usual in the same advertise
ment which notifies the parties Of the final hearing
before the Court.
have arrived at this conclusion with reluctance,
on account Of the increased delay and expense but
without hesitation as to the true construction Of
the law. both in its letter and in its spirit. Rea-
sonable doubts, however, would alone have required
o new notice. Assessments Of questionable validity
in a case affecting many distinct interests, must
inevitably lead, as past experience shows, to tedious
and expensive litigation. harassine TO the parties