New-York tribune., 1867-06-22
EvarIs n,., DepuIy -lrct Attorney, ana
Grosyenor Lowery for the Government; Webster apd
Craig the claimsnts

|
Mr. O'GorInan stating that he was ready;
Mr.: Lord asked leave to submit further objection ON
behalf OF Mr. Detmold the OF the premises NO l2j
IAberyst The whole value OF those premises had been
fixed by the Commissioners a $780, but $1,000 OF that
He had lately supposed this decision OF tho
pS os s s c a y s hod p se s
induced 20 make this decision by having produced before
clause providing for the the opening Of this
He understood that the Commissioners were ready 10
this IL their report conld be referred back te
aud asked that be referred as could be corrected
| in few minutes.
| in another way, but reserved final decision on IL.
Mr. O'GorIn,n suggested the United States prop
erty had been taken under similar msapprehension-of
facts. Mr.. O'Gorman then read afhdayits OF various
persons the substance Of which was as follows That the
three Commissioners met on the 10th OF March, lO ana
organized and appointed to meet each DAY at tser OF
special work OF examining titles leases, &e tiat MI
Haskn took part In the meetings regularly down 10 tno
sh OF March 1850 Though N some instances m ne o
nnumerable instances ON Mr.. Hasln, and ne, thongh
except that on one occasion one Charles H. Hnnn
stated he attended at the OF Mr. Has
ciined % but they then requested Hinan 70 asEMr asn
| 10 attend He replied that Mr.. Haskn then. basy,
would communicate their request: That Mr. Haskn par.
cipated in the appointment Of the Officers and one or
sent to him. and especially on the 22d and 2Sd OF March,
1867, notice sent TO him that meeting OF hnai
| character would be had Oh the 25th
Mr. Fullerton these afdavits argued that the ehef
stituon that when private property shall he taken
any public the compensation 10 be made hertioi
when such compensation made by the state, shall
be ascertaiued by Jury or by not less than three
missoners, appointed by Court oi Record as prescribed
by law" II claimed but that decision OF ma
jorty Of these Commissioners all taking part in the pro
ceedngs, sufficient The claim was, rs he uader-
STOOL that Mr. HaskiD one Of the Commissioners beng
absent when Of the most important business, the
for eegst and damage WsIe mags tne as
look at what the common law was with regard 10 this
case in the English reports. had introduced
| into the NewYork rrsleh that was not
OF 1890 which has the words in it upon meeting Of all
the persons" Now the common law rule was that In pr
vate matters all the arbitrators or COMMISSIONER nust
agree but public it only necessary that
majority shall and aet but through this error such
gether,' &c; He then cited many cases to show that
ber who had been duly notified attend regarded
simply OF the weight that his dissenting volce "
agreed to meet each day the meetings stated meet
ngs and required special notice. and apeaed that
| notice had been given 10 Mr.. Haskn repeatedly. Tho
body being once organized the of majority became
the Of every member. He illustrated his proposition
by the of Boards Of Aldermen and Councmen ahd
| by the General Term itself.
Mr.. Anderson answered AT some length, manly cfaiT-
ing that the Constitution was not satisfied unless an the
acted especially ut the last meeting when tho
report was signed He also insisted nat tne fspost WIS
ments for benefit OF over S0oO The assessments mde
on the public parks including the Battery eAceeded
s5OOOOO. The Commissioners had no power TO levy an
the public parks they Deing hen lof uo
OF is2l by which the Battery was ceded TO the city s
expressly provided that no portion OF should vs.
proper test Of the suiciency the description in tho
notice given was, whether the lands assessed would pas
1t would be difficult to find any one who would pass
title under the description IN the notice 10 any portion OK
the land on Park-pace Broadway below Fourteenth
st., Lafayettcplace, on Amty-st Ihe pubnc pafN,
which the city could not SELL which are not liable to taxa
ton which yield and can yield none cannot
be benefited should they be assessed and the repes
assessed;upon such parks being upward OF sSOo.Ooo
Mr.. OGOrInan replied that on behalf OF the motion fo-
lowing and expounding the argument as was made
|
property is liable, under assessments made for city M
proyements, citing various eases III which
had been made for benefit damage and the recent sale
of portion the City Hall Park 10 the United staesto
be Increased by Improvement OF the property.
The Court reserved decision on the subject ,,,..
In connection with the foregoing give the following
opinion delivered at Special Term II viii be remen,
6ered That tine osfSps he Of the costs bo
settled, and that many of the items ~ that b lNhieb
was made in Chainbers the bill and re-taxa-
ton been directed. Mr. Justice Ingraham delivering
If Is objected that this taxation by the Clerk II
this wer question should feel unwilling 10 hod
that taxation by the Clerk compliance with the
statute which requires the duty to be done by the Court
t seems 10 me that where the statute Imposes dty on
erred Clerk but should be performed by one or
more Judges Court and that the act Not con-
piled with when such taxation by any ocsr cut
Court not by Justice OF the Court But as mo
by the Justices immediately after the passage law
and has been acquiesced n feel some hesitation ia
especially as the whole bill Of brought
! before the Court appeal.
O. IL Is objected that charge for drafting the report
and for two copies at the rate allowed in the old fee bffor
attorneys CHARGES for drafting and copying papers - M
this charge made by the counsel On several
Whether made to the counsel while he could charge FOR
such services, or made by counsel employed ny The
proved by the General Term IN February, 1880. -.
In chapter 49, IT provided that no costs fees,
charges should be allowed to the Counsel q the copo
ration for the performance of the or duties before
of T..
&c. in the City OF NewYork, and giving in lieu thereof
an annual salary him his compensation therefor
The act reserved the counsel the right to such charges
for all services rendered before January 1885, and pro-
ho tei @ taxed a pS the clerk at the Usual raes
taxed and allowed for similar services This only applied
January iss and contemplated that the services
d. for before by by ss % hSa Be a
the duties to be performed by the commissioners were to
poyed by them For these purposes the clerical force ~
the counsels office has been largely increased
and the commissioners have authority TO employ
necessary clerks under them. In = the present rass
accordance with these statutory provisions to tax IN
addition the full charges heretofore allowed to the
Coupse the Corporation for Ibis compensation for the
services thus rendered The act provided that te
Counsel should receive no fees costs or any
for Central Park &c. As the law now is In force ~ -
cannot be allowed TO the Counsel OF the
can such charges be allowed TO any other pefssn AZ
counsel unless is intended an evasion OF the stes
above referred II the preparation of these psprs
does not evolyc on the Corporation under
the provisions the section OF which pro.
yides that the Counsel 10 the Corporation shall
perform without charge beyond the ., salary ' nov
sary TO enable the Comniss,oners to eondnce
the proceedings in opening streets &c above Pour
teents and under the previous act OF 1884, which pro-
hbited him from charging for such services ana gaze te
under the Commissioners by clerks, to be employed ny
thc and for which the only charge that can De made
and the is for the necessary ds
burSements making these papers To warrant the o.
Iowance therefore, proof should be fanisied that inc
disbursement necessary, what the service was ttae
rendered. and what Was proper disbnrsemens
therefor costs and charges not to bd
allowed No proof furnished TO the items,