The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1856-02-06

Confirms son OF the Cammissi0ner's Report
I'm Favor Of the Project.

THE CENTRAL PARK.
Conformation OF the Cammissioner's Report
in Favor Of the Project.
SUPREME coURT-sPECIAL TERM.
In IL Aaaer Of The Application Of the Mayor, &c. of The
ciy Of Nsw York. ,eIass The opening and ayiag Of
pubic Place Lheon sch aud IO6M streets and the
Iyh and Eighth areNues, in The city of New York.-BY
rns CORR HARRis, J-Evsry citizen holds bis property
subject 10 the wants Of the government. THIS Is In
variable condition of society II money is required 1T
Ia taken by tsxstonf property, by the right of eni
nent domain. Such power ID . necessary inoi1en. of
sovereignty Its exercise especially in a country like
OUR, whose growth and ex expansion is constant surprise
tven 70 ourselves, il often indispensable.
The public inte ess could not be Sufficiently advan ,ed
Without it, Individuals not to be permitted to In
epoe their viii or caprice their sslf inter
est, 70 thwsrt useful Improvement prevent the do
vtlcpnsnt u g,eat public advantages.
Whether or not the pubic exigency requires tina
money shall be raised by tax proper shall be taken
III public use ss question referred 10 the sovereign
wi OF he state, ~ expressed BY legislative suthoIy
y Enough That tue pablo de nAnds it.. OF tnis qass
ton The Legislature the exclusive judges Iis 10
more thu prcyioce Of The idciL poxer to determine
It inquire whether the pub, gsaey red aires thai
money should be raised by tx.
Nor osn o. nous Ia tho poeiuon maintained upon the
Argument OF tbi case that this can only bs right
fuzzy exercised In Of absolute necessi scrcs
appisafi OF such principle would completely auobi
Ia the power. IL would not be easy 20
which would be absolutely necessary to take privats
property for tuoic USE But tbs term when app lei TO
this suoeSt has such restricted meaoiag IT, in the
judgment Of the Legsaur the puoic convenience
guiies that the property o. Ia v should be taken
r. them snd devoted the pu ,c use ths tes
sufficient legal necessity to authorize tns exercise of
this power.
The mode In which this power Is to be exercised is
sufficiently guarded to protect the citizen ags1 uj
tice He is protected Ia the ea )ysnt Of property
unless tue public reeds 1t For this prosecton he pays
nusy t.ya f,ha n,,h ~oaN
he must surrender It; but thsn only being aid
fair equivalent in mony 81 his taxes hs pays
he gives up bis property contributor 80 much IN pre-
and is entitled TO adequate clm aenssd,n. He sells his
property 70 the public individually Il IL true, but for
1t Is in thus wsy that from the very beginning Of
governu en property has been obtained Tor public n-
provemens such turnpike roads, canals railroads
and other kindred objects In many thu APP
ton has had is origin in private enterprise and Tor pr
va,e GAIN It has always enough 30 JUS
tiy the exercise OF the po0e that the enterprise would
result in pubic utility
by an act CT the Legislature resting to this subj act
passed In July 1858 IL declared that the tract OF land
mentioned 10 tie title OF this proceeding should be "a
pub ic place, In the manner Il the had
been laid out py the commissioners appoin in 1907 f
the purpose of laying oat reet &c in the city of New
York. and the Cor af New York auth ,rized
to take the land for oc rs and for public square
The act provided for the appointment of five comi
ers OF estimate aud assessment and made the existing
and places in the city Of New York applicable to ae pro-
OF the wisdom expectancy of the measure It is no..
my province on this occasion to speak 1t il enough
that the legislature have declared that 1t was
ny the pubic int est and for the public convsnencs
But may perhaps allow myself here to say snst if the
spprehersons Of the most dstrustul SHOULD bs
the enterprise cannot very disastrous
profitable The most incredulous viii not DOUBT that
should the ger GRAFTON who. half century hence will
pcsiess this American metropolls-hen perh aps, the
metropolis of the worli-thnk it expsdeot to wshdAv
this tract Of land from the to xnich it Is
devoted it might then be made to produce
cetdng by many times the amount of the present ex
penciture.
Commissioners appointed pursusn. to the a,t in
November, 1853 or the eminent fitness Of ts commits
sion, and the fidelity with which H. has discharged its
portant trusts all the parties who have appeared upon
this hearing have borne their unqualified aud emphatic
testimony. Nearly two years occupied by tbs
missoners In preparing their appraisal and
On the fourth Of October last the result submitted to
the public and opportunity given to present objec
tons Parties dissatisfied with the deosions of the
ons presented the decisions Of the
were reviewed. and up'n such review sach corrections
The result now to this court in tn, report
Of the commissioners. The only question to be de-
tern iaed s whether the report shall be confirmed
who her 1t contains such require that ir shord
be referred back to the otner commissioners
reconsideration This IL the extent OF the power vesed
in the court upon this proceeding l am to consider,
therefore, the urged against the con OF
the report. These grounds Of objection may generally
divided INTO two classes First those presented By tbs
condiy those presented by the Of property
sessed tor benefit to be derived from the improvement
The number Of city lots taken for the improvement IA
about for which the uissionsrs have awarded
upwards of five millions of dollars or The owners o.
these lots out about one In forty have appeared to object
to the award The very fact that of every
forty owner, of the large tract Of land embraced in this
proceeding have net deemed for their interest OBJECT
to he report certainly furnishes very satisfactory EVIL
teIce hat the commissioners have with eminent sue
cese addressed themselves to the accomplishment of the
great task they bad assumed Of ascerainng the true
value OF no vast an amount Of property.
lie difficulty Of their work evidently very much
nv ma tn he al Inv
them were, for the most part, wholly unproducHve
Their value was rather presps,ti and conjectura
prepIy than any other that the opinions of
discreet men, will DO found to take the widest range It
ers here ana here enc should be found who honestly and
sincerely feels that he has suffered uiusce the hands
OF the commissioners. l am myself not without
price has in fact been allowed.
Among the most earnest of those who oppose the con-
frmasion Of the report, soms who in De ,enbsr,
1852 purchased at pub ic sale by Corporation Of
New York. aportion Of the ots-none taken entirely
for this Improvement. am entirely satisfied that the
prices bid upon that sale we're gsaer far above any
reasonable appraisal OF the lots rhs sale amounted to
resrly hslf million dollars vi the purchasers nearly
bsf abandoned heir bids before paying any hing others
paid their ten cent upon the SALE bat
mated their purchase preerrng rather TO forfeit what
money for the land 1t also stated upon the hearing
thata large amount Of the purchase money had
nitted TO the purchasers BY the Corporation
The appraisal Of these lots by commi ssioners is
think about fifty per cent below The prices bid at the
Corporation SALE In instances the award il less
than the amount due to the Corporation upon the
bonds and mortgages executed to part only Of
the purchase money To such purchasers the decson Of
the commissioners may well and unjust r.
with degree Of psusoility that thy insisted
that having paid these prices TO the Corporation now,
WI the Corporations against their consent about
AXE the property should not be heard to seny that
it "a worth what it received upon It's sale
But 1t Is obvious that the commissioners could adopt
such rule of discrimination. 1t their single
duty 10 fix what they believed to be the present real
value OF each lot taken without regard to the amount
able relations between these purchasers aud the
the corpora lon when The lots shall taken, need
low consider.
1t may we'll be that In some instances the Commits
tionss may have erred ia their Judgment the value
q property taken Tor ths great Improvement Il would
indeed, b surprising If they had not Bat n. ut
liberty to DENY the motion TO condr their report upon
the mere apprehension that they have thus erred
They hAyA hAd An Of u In