New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1854-01-31
Before Judge ROOSEVELT
QUESTION OF ASSESSMENTS UNDER THE LAW |

QUESTION ASSESSMENTS UNDER THE LAW FOR PAVING
AND REGULATING STREETS.
John C Thuring W. The Mayor &c. OF New-York
If this suit can be sustained Il be in violation of
% al 5 d.. he ~a Of three ss aI he 90 aS
hs at the co Ter Of si.h.y and and tas
1 For res'1s Fort. 1n,a 10. s Gs % wA s %
regulating Tsnhsy the other two with frontage Of 81 feet ware
Ss xot sns well done. nor he sess
lees was less benefei.l TO him than the sum. assesd and yet
-: grant
thus securing whole benefit Of the work him. and
POSING it. uSoO ossI This 1sy soss ss
b, relating sy to the City Of York
as s OF "is hs or more than f yss been
GSd hs Co They were 90 s,s also wa. s
made expepss and Of its proper snoos the owas"
and & S purpose aeS sfa
,s ., 'a Tsq t hs e S
wa done Bus by an act passed As eonss,se my
Of developed she Lss.stsls ia 1870 de-
ofhe premises ward Now hese
W.Id at h periods in 2u..SI a, Tho gSc ss,s
the OF wohs under the actual selling prices of the day
sda and even aesos-ihs sixth lot and that
nc higher than " was sd a Ss as oc a
o Eishei-st each but both Aao;h.r ll
avn ~h s: hS.:S' 5
by the improvement raised In value TO more than each aud
tir Pesicas wOrheuess under This c urged
why they should be assessed n0tss or @sr. prop
the sshssares the hosses certain
s;ss A.s Sss not With H. is,
.S but Tor the purpose Of ealing Es ca q &, Es:
al s ana ;ssSa1s sss
i .sOwn} common rishs ,ovisoss Doubtful
be 'ii
ra1 ES ia Or the IT x SSI
msnt o. their socord go IN e Of tas evidences and take no
and pcsn sustained b. sool nnanersbe su,hor
ei.u.e" Ct thu .,ae sats, AID so~i when
independent atsi matters Of defense which deyos upon
penalty per- cIs ~ Nov 80 Bn;su 1,,ss.msai. a.
called ia this CITY hsd sia the duty Of sae coat
on .SS1s eoar' Of %.as
ALLY and aP.rti.y ascodas :. p; best Of thai,
,ad s' s ss sa m sna 30 a o
lie Cornell ti.i he Psaa ~ r:SIias By he
the um: sefsd dc made no oosc1n e the Sasau
sIs hs psr%tted the doss. ofhs Assessors to Be ratified
cOuoa Council although he knsw-r 80 the lay IN
esve upon him, well all other owners He offers 40
Ss ss osnd 'G eas Belief Ths csla Ss
ad has urd'ton tu. they rendered he says a.
and favor of party who h9psh notified omitted MAKE
s W. T s ssUs much R %oPs
And The @ Ts more sp 2 % IA
could lave him. had they no.n the low ysu1.on othe
the He does not pretend tbs. he has bu. d.
ss 5. Ss' mt Thy az
snnn the entire Judgment tseems 70 me too for gamsn
Seeae. sSsii for any purpose qa
mL be the question of ho@ much" and espe
when notified his objections
he had presented bn allowed jGdmsnt to against
defa1t principle Of the plaintiffs
action Justices Court which the defendant thera might
pleaded the statute OF limitations
but did not spes-wosd the JUDGMENT .s.n.' him. taoasn or
whole be enoned By this Court grounds such
sussest.d in this painl And Ii not where the ddsr'
principle between the eases! The common aw declares
sba be sued for debt after he has paid IT, aud the
equally declare action shall at time bro gat
on a usurous demand and valid demand unes.
within years. and the Justices In h. case wo1d
the statute declares nsnt on
the Council shall % In this The business Of the
District of the State tB proper and necessary ls
already sufficiently overwhelming without encrethins
which Legislature justly 70
stecirl tribunals limited jursdeion and when one Of
ttcse tribunals which e,nfessdly had 1sdc
ton judgment which the Lessiatafs has declared
shall be binding Conclusive not disposed lightly tre
such jadaest uay especially when tho only eject VII DC
person have hs property expense
Compliant dismissed with and preliminary injaacn dis
solved.
RIipbslet Mott agt James Thsyef and others
Suit TO est the right to water fronts on East RIVER De
Twenty thd Plaintiff having entered
be made; and dsfendan' sy the
81 allowed would dkposess them entirely Of tae wsle
the river The commenced lest term ana