The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-12-18

XnA New COuney - nxa.~~g~~
10 THB xpgrOR o. fHK HERALD.
Watkins, d, II, 1885,
TAe usdenAgned, Supervisor Of the town Of Dir,
IN the county Of Schuyler, has seeu the following
item In IL HERALD Of the Sth instant:-
scnuyLR COuxrY-The Su ,srvisors Of Schuyler
county Instituted suit 70 stay the Commissioners from
srssnf inc county On 'os r
BY the board but Judge ShAnkland overruled them AL
asd declared against the application.
Although Il u true, ~ stated above, that Judge
ShAaklasd did deny the Injunction referred 70, Jet
your statement does net include the reasons for such
denial, which are important for tho public TO know,
70 enable them to judge truly in the matter.
Your reputation a. truthful journalist induces
the bssf that you will either publish tho following
decision Of Judge Ehsnkland entire, or give the
- you choose. II IL important that thu public slonld
know that II was tie hcsdlong course Of tbs Building
Com@iseiouors-so not0ri0usly beyond the pale Of
M law-that the Ynbiic wns safe from they acts,
the Building Commissioners & Co. had acted In con-
fornity with the statute. W. f B0oTHn.
Supervisor Of the town OF DIX.
SUPREME COURT.
1as gssra q ssg.o'; n e az M Sss n e"y. and
Hsiass, BsSa r Sears, xads.es 1tsss.@s, SasAss
By sa.s1I.sD The pl.nsirs And foa, Of lie seven
Supervisors OF the county Of Schuyler and in the
name Of the whole Board q supsrvisoIs ana q sv
commence this suit against the defendants, avs or
whom commissioners to superintend the erection of
county buildings In said county named in the 10th
ton Of said act and the other defendants the par
who have contracted to erect said buildings The
rebel s.led Is perpetual Injunction against the cree
legislature Is aud also the ground
that the site OF the buildings has not bcea located
a44- L.. .xlo
ao that the Building Committee have not given ap
proved bond required by section - Of said act nso
- To- s , sh ap
and that the Building COMMITTEES cannot make con
tract for the erection OF county buildings until the
supervisors have appropriated the funds, &C. The
reason why an Injunction ia asked Is that the threat
eIed tax the property Of the taxable inha6
tants casts cloud on the plaintiffs property, &C. /
asked for temporary order OF injunction during the
litigation Most Of the questions raised by the
plant Of too serious character 10 be decided by
this motion, especially they have not been fuly
argued before mo. allude particularly to the cons
tutiousl questions, viz list. Whether the courts
inquire as to the existence OF fact necessary to confer
upon the Legislature power to organise county
I'd. Whether, can, are bound by the last State
census the number Of the inhabitants whether
It be shown by other proof that the requisite
Der resided within the territory composing the new
county 1t the time the act was passed and various
other questions Of tho like character. shall, there
fore, pass over those questions and place decision
other points In the casc and such admit the
sutionsty of the law lhold that the deed executed
Is required by section eighteen OF the act 1t s
.good uncncumbered title Those words title in
fee simple But the title executed By Mr. Cook limits the
use to the county for the purpose OF court house. jail
md clerk Office only and reserves reyerson to himself
and heirs in tho site is altered The Building Com
msioners had right to in the matter entrusted
to them until the Supervisors had approved Of their bonds
provided for BY section ~ not how good the
bonds and snreties srcuntl the Supervisors shall ap
prove 1t, IL s NO bond. am also Of opinion that the
said Building Commissioners enter into acontract
for erecting the county buildings until the Supervisors
have made appropriation for that purpose, have
acted in relation thereto The twentieth section Of tho
net commands the Supervisors to "lrvy, collect and
pay into The treasury Of The said comfy sum not
nual amounts they shall deem most advisable, &C.
The Supervisors have discretion TO the amount to
be expended within the limits of $1,000 and this dis
cretion cannot be usnrped controlled by the Com
issoners they seemed to have attempted to do by
sSsstraciing Tor buildings costing The bond Of
moneys committed TO their charge, for the erection and
construction of the buildings which implies that tho
Supervisors TO assign to them certain sum or fund
for the special purpose The whole proceedings OF the
Commissioners In letting the contract to bui before
the Supervisors had approved this bond, or raised
the buildings, or accepted the decd for the sites was
illegal and unauthorized. No legal obligation is
imposed the county to sanction the illegal proceed
ings raise any by tax to pay for the erection
such buildings and the Board or Supervisors would dc
great Injustice their constituents IL they
such hesdlong proceedings to characterize tho
acts Of the commissioners But as the plaintiHs are
under no legal obligation to levy any tax to meet the
Illegal contract Of the commissioners and they
stitute majority OF the present board il T.
they win mot do So They in danger OF unjust
taxation even II tho contractors shah proceed in
plcpg their contract for the erection of tho buildings
IN question SHALL therefore, refuse the temporary in
junction asked for Again: I have known an ill.,
junction TO ssue TO stay proceedings which cau
lated to cast cloud on personal property only All the
which have under my observation under this
head OF equity relate TO real estate. Now, tax to
build the Court House &c. IN Schuyler county is TO be
levied and collected in the usual manner 1t will not
therefore, affect real estate unless the owners are not
residents Of the county which fact is not alleged in
pect of those plaintiffs indeed the contrary appears
BET fact Order denied Ten dollars costs to abide
event Of suit.