New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-08-26


| a. The exterior hae Of the city, and dspsstsg ~
| ,,ne with the Stree. Commissioner. In February,
1895 memorial Of the Corporation was presented 70
the Legislature, the contents Of which sse sufssenuy
act forth in report Of s. ect Conmtsee OF ne AZ.
sembly Of the 22d Of April. II stated that ~ Ne
present plan the exterior line Of eastern secnos o.
the city requires the dfpacng Of great eIteat sn1
depth Of water; and immense quantities OF eah wouo
and bulkhead corresponding with said line, the eI;
pense Of which would be ineIpsdient; and prayed
that law might be passed granting authority 70 ar
range, regulate and alter, in such manner - they
ThiteeLth and Twenty third streets, the First avenue
and the East River. The Committee recommended
that the prayer be granted and Introduced OH 'oi
that purpose.
of which are merely these "Tha, il should be law
ful for the Mayor &C., TO adopt such P'sn as tney
might deem eIpedient for regulating ana laying OUT
that part Of the city which lies between ihteentn
and Twenty. third streets the FIst avenue ana the
East River; and to designate and direct where the
"peimanet exterior line street, eastward OF sncn
part of the sad city shall be in place OF that part OF
"Toupkins street which now lies or u Ia out u 70
eastward thereof on the present map or plan Oh 'ne
Getty"
"such plan as may be adopted for tue regulation
and laying out of the aforementioned part OF the
city, Or for the ay 90 Of
the map Or plan Of the said CITY, session Laws
Soon after the passage Of the act and bya resolu.
tion approved the Both Sept 1883 the common ESun
1882, by Benjamin Wright, be adopted, and the exte-
nor line or street there laid down be approved OF &C.
cordiDg to such plan; provided nat lne gram OF tue
st of August 1906 to Flack and Gouverneur be sur
rendered and cancelled according to the terms OF
certain instrument between A. n. bruen ana Matthias
Rruep and the Common Council dated the 18th Of
April, 1885, deposited with the Greet Commissioner
This surrender does not appear to awe been made.
In relation to this act of 1885, appear u that
tho Jeoissture did not intend togrant, and it cannot
be construed into a grant or authority to 60 beyond
| TompkiDs street. A. . e
w,iabts plan in February, 1885, md the resolution Of
S. pte mber, 1885, demonstrate that the Corporation
sought only and the Legislature sanctioned only, an
alteration in the map of the city and CT the exterior
line 1sd by the .ds Within he II, Ses 80 I ''''
9. II was necessary to apply the Legislature for
an alteration Of the map of the city, which, when once
made, was unchangeable, except ~ legislative power
This was provided in the statute 1907 and continued
to he tbe law whenever new streets were laid out
3. There is not word in the act giving right to
spv coil under water beyond T'mpkirs street, upon
any construction which the wordi will bear. There is
NOT phase which authorizes tie city to grant such
other so-nor is there q word which could operate to
transfer the title Of the State eitar to the Corporation
or TO any grantee. When we extmne the acts OF the
Legislature which profess oT operate 10 transfer
tile. we find that they may be thu. classed:
| Where they expressly grant light of SOIL as in the
statute of 1867 and Others where they confer the right
| of the State through the Cooperation or upon some
Act done by IT, to indviduassrch was the statute OF
I79S giving the intermediate spaces up to South and
West streets to the owners, upon fulfilling the dres,
tons of the Corporation as to hlng them up, ana
Otberwise and where they act Is the statate OF 1870
does by vestng the GRANTEES OF ne ety. %hose gran,
beyond it I'D to q new lne-suci was the act OF 1896
ar to Tompkins street. See alsc the law Of April H.
1887 to the Thirteenth avenue, and that OF May Is
| 1876 as TO Eleventh avenue.
But in every case there is SOMETHING to indicate tie
int nton to transfer the title of the people, and words
legally sufficient to effect such transfer. In order TO
conclude that the Corporation nave he power under
this statute of 1895, must conclude as matter OF
law, that the power to change the map in CERTAIN
particular passed expressly without the slightest view
Of granting land, is TO operate ss conveyance OF
| the large space now claimed, without word similar
to what the State has always employed to transfer ito
| title. ,.
am brought to the conclusion that the establish
nent Of the exterior lines as proposed IN the ordaace
Guho1.ed and that the grants Of the Corporation for
any "trip beyond Tompkins street, would be invalid.
The result therefore is, that adjudge the rights Of
the parties upon the basis of Tompkns street being
actually the exterior street Of the city, at all the points
| involved in this controversy.
After bringing to a decision all the other points,
Judge Hoffman makes the following explicit and con-
elusive judgment as to the Tompkins street exterior
l line:
H. That the ordinances of the 23d day Of July and
the 9th day of November 1850 establishing an
terror line Of street on the East RIVER illegal and
,ibo oythority that the land under water from and
beyond the eastwardy side OF T'mpkins street, which
is comprised within the limits Of such ordinances
remains in The people Of the Stae Of Ner- York. and
that the Corporation Of the City Of NewYork has no
,ght or poer to establish such exterior line, or 70
take, use, or grant any such laid comprised within
| the said limits
So the case rested until the General Term OF the ST.
perior Court in July, 1857, only last month, when it
came UP on appeal, and all tie points were fully
argued and passed upon by the full bench, Judges
| Duer, Slosson and Woodruff. Judge Hofman's de-
cison ss to the point that neither he Corporation nor
any person except the people of the State had any
shadow of right whatever to any territory beyond the
line of Tompkins street was July affirmed And il lie
worthy of remark that the Judges in this case are the
very soundest and most able open municipal rights
| Al privileges Of any in the county
This copcusively demoishes anything ike & real
title to the ground represented the white space in
the above map. But it is worth while to show how
the pretense of title was obtained. The fret thai
we hear OF Mr.. Lowber in connection with the prop
ety, in public way, is in 1928, and as bis OWE
,tory will best tell what We wish to explain, we will
quote from the testimony taken before Recorder Til.
lou il 1862 in regard to the corrons alleged against
| the Common Council Of 1852. The witness We row
| bring forward is Robert W. LOWER:
Citv and County Of Nep York. ,I-Robert W. Lowoer Of
said city, bcr duly swo this 18th ds OF April 1885, deposes
aux ssys follows reside at No 10 Eighth street, and
manufacturer About the l Of February 1851 agreed with
for he property known suyvessnt Cove on the
East River at which time there was contract existing De
tween Hezekah Bradford and sysnu Gedney then suprin
endebt Streets for all the street dir and garbage taken from
four OF the Wards neare, the immediate pOPey hi.
contract pay the Superintendent cents cart
load for the dir. delivered from which deduction Of cent
pei load be allowed OT the services Of Dodae Barnard
| az Inspector.
This contract assumed by sndfrom the let February
1851 Mr. Geduey paid BY per losa for all the
Il -. 4 H. Ist nEaA fha mn