New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1867-11-22

TO BY you IN support OF this charge, which Is presuns
e ~ e of aiy a SUPERVISOR" Is in the questions In
volvea similar TO that mentioned IN the pafagaph pro
ceing married. first In Dol OF tnesS cases my Sioit wa
not 10 Goprye the public Of their uncouped ngt bu5 "a
project thp public officers fron BENG ulsasouaDy hler
rupted IN the discharge Of taer Lesiar duties ., ~.
local Governments which were calculated 20 damage tDs
city and tie citizens and enrich only me projectors ane
their friends" In support Oh thls ehk lou tees ~ y
ofi0 action IN the matters OF the widening OF anhst
and the extension Of Ch'9ca-st as 10 inc, inc r. &
II have recollection 81 having nteile,t ~ qiy I
ner f9 or against INC prJcst; ne I @ n -
Commissioners were aiTonted Oy ne ouie'e az
n 5th OF April 1860 TIE Common CouDSl on tne 1ist NJ
May following revoked the resolution directing the wIo
Commissioners the subject Of their duties The state
ncnt that 81 boldly ayownd my Intention 10 push 1s
measure on ana Wen 10 An"S 'e So' Sut 20 ',~,s
special law the suiccts utterly fac nor ga prspaIs
As 10 the extension OF Curchst. did my simple sn1
byious duty Cooperation Connseli no more ana no
entry into office In che performance of my official duty
moved before the General Term Tor the Oh
sol worn opposed 10 me- representing yaTiOus objections
assocalon had been organized 20 ioahag'pae "ist
mn trong the city; every means had been adopted 70
ii me assIos of the citizens against the project
and vet t turned out the hearing that majority '.
amount OF the parties Interested IN the assssont 80
award could not be got join in the objections was
assisted In that argument by MI Fullerton
WHO was specially retained on the part s.ossnsnts
aud awards raised BY the various abe COUNSEL NGle 70
by one disposed OF in Court. think II was ciear ~
every one that injustice had been done ~ tue leP"n
by the Commissioners VINO were legally authorzee ~
decide upon tie area Of assessment Indeed 10 improve
ment can be made Tie ancient portion OF the cIsyt
however indispensable meet the growing reQuiremenn
OF busnt - unless the valuable iahd tahe e pau oi
adjacent and principally benefited would be maqeqnAss
WHISPER Of fraud ard The presiding Judge expressed E
establishment that after much OF pnOlc rumoIs %
fraud no proof or even sngges!ioh OF I,G. n -, -
extension Of ChUrchss does not, iny Judgment 1oIiec
express existing public Opinion. %en see|S 10 " }s
equd{ G eI Tonnse TO tie Corroaon not ths
| Agsoc f4tio
natter or cojdy conducted nv case should lave grossly
failed my duty. As to The costs IN tat matter hset
the bD consulted GbOat IL, or knew IS ~
tents, unti long after II had been put on he Ihese A
OF costs street opening not prepared by s
but rs the Comnssoners No part Of tines. eoSI DsloSs
come 20 ne. In This case my only connection Wt ~
bill reduce II by requesting the Co9mlssoneEs
strike out charge OF OO which seemed 70 nye DSe9
meant Tor me- ana 20 Nhich Nao ot Nv ~ ~" ~ 49,
5000 FOR copy Of the report which dld not geem TO
CURED 10y law. These tes, ald some Others Oyeele
on my mt perus1i OF me OI' anu DtlOie any JIM
tons HterpOsed. with The views tlen eNpFesd
by the Commissioners colcureu, ana struck Ou thS
items objected TO- and tIe Lh 80 tenuVeu "hs ptscu'
10 Judge iugahan, who, after examination VI Wthes,eA
! Fullerton on behalf Of the Commissioners gave dire.
tons to the taxing Of the ISIS Dy the Coaniy Ci
may not DE correct have no time 70 acue tat q5es
ton, merely stating that It Is not true tlat dgedett
suUDted pressed the charges In IT, On the contrary
lett the completely ~ the hands oi MI Fullerton
ard the Court, resting secure that WIN so many aDls
counsel IN opposition, and our able Judge On TIE Dehcn
VIL9Y9ur seventh charge IS: "Overchargng for ser
vics performed ia violation OF the law" The specihea
ton is that took 1000 from tho Treasury for my
represented 10y OF the abest counsel IN the city
These cases were IN many RESPECTS, Gssil LII 70
CURED separate Investigation The amount Glfecty is
VOWED about two millions OF dollars; indirectly we
liability OF taxation II Bank stock 10 ne amount q PROV
ably seventy inlohs III tns C0u,tY "a' -. quooo . =
was probably the nUtt important case IN snouDy ALS
effect ever argued American Court. TIC great Cd
jeci was fu ard speedy dcermlnauon OF me i.eE ~
that tie for the year OF 1867 could be arranged
accordance with the decision The cases were % uhsal
energy on bon SIDES ana Win uiusual $500, ~
the Court OF Appeals, and thence 10 the united sayet
, otler counsel retained on the palt OF the Super
visors, and by myself. We won the cases, ana me
next wear by nearly 100000 The counsel for the sU
| peryisors, Mr.. Charles OConor. Waldo HutchngS
JuC.e Parker OF Albany, and myself received Tor col
Iabors and success S35 600 of which received SlO04
! There never litigation SO important, conducted
wtn greater success, aud 80 less expense FOR legal
services Now my right 10 charge and receive thf
amount do nor propose 70 sp ,"S NE n,dcr t ~
press sanction Of Mr. Charles OConor aud waldo huten
iugs tho former OF whom with mat Lndn ,,s
! trouble OF a thorough and exhaustive examination o.
he whole question, which resulted IN NE advising N;
that was usned taking the fee In this case which
had honestly earned. His written opinion IS IN NY Lanas
fGe public viii which Of these opihions they pre-
fer NJ osopor H. believe member d Of , tne d Nv
20 refer you him Tor further information on TINS SUD
| VIII Charge eight is: Advising disobedence TO law
20 public oiicer OF the Corporation" This charge
day of May 1851 Read and say IN what part you bsd
pretext Tor your complaint The following Is copy ID
10y i'''''' CRY ., ssy.yosx Law 2 %g 5Sg
OFFICE oy COUNSEL To CORPORATION May D. 100"
TO- Rc'Eo B. Gosset s 9s 8. , lit Of 3. Judgment. r..
l sgSSr M % in he re ICES aud l. o. YOU desired
opinion TO bow r tue Pyes Of s-d usuelb a. aaes
lead Of Judgments, che c , e' t'hai1r 30 Law o. $50 SO
, 5 o ia eS o a ' ss q csT s Of ~
IaysGE Toe question aheber 'o eeeH,' Of any o. s
lsesssy involved q the records q the cases IN detail
ls & @ e 10 asn the intention # the Legislature, or ~
ven questioned taer restriction NOT wholly nysnd BY re.,o,
So Laws Of 300 nay opuoa any qgoa could bss.
SEc The si several sums i be applied oas to nc osc -
purposes fr which TIE s'oe are hereby tnPr9d shl IL 50
fea gartrer, orAl ,ha incur iaby for so'
pr,a ard Common Council Of the Ctg Of Ne '.l0. se aets
ru b,d from creating oLee " department or Increasing Va
Sc 3 re ,sd several shall he spilled on the OBJECTS aa.
corporation any oa. DEL ae ohesT % "s,n ts.Isd 30.
auho directly or indirectly any expenditure Or spsaat',ss
enu-,s liabilities contracts shall exceed ht
80 appropriated purpos Tor other purpose Or 'sa
SIC To- he Mayor Aldermen and comnoaily Of the City Of Ns.
i or liability any Board Department ofeer Of sla
% I'D, s % say col,ast made or expenditure
bay Incurred by any beard department or oesr o. ' s5P", o,s
atel object purpose; and 10 lpsment IN ssy a.
UPON contract san be elte'ee BY default q ohrr. Any Cosn
said corporation except gFo proofs ~ opep eoa t.t ~
m e Cy Iaau! 20 b ,s ci NH m h. Funded AID ~ eAs.
men Der officer thereof co act expressed OF IN
M exceed ho appropriated by tbs act for tho purpose and
Liabilities judgment shall %
| trfrl 10 rs such action.
furnished
~ bat on the liability ~ the fT injuries 10 tie IersoB &c,
a. winch the act have. my OPINION ref-f
pe These have enumerated tue schedule Lern'O sans'A
married. schedule Schedule enumerated Judgments
tee, before these that the
ofcarter $50 sbch became lew that da apply Ia scleds
enumerated certain judgments obtained In sections on contact
which the only defense mtgpoed by ne city or The oa oGtcn
Judgment the appropriated 70 the object Tor Which tie
plaintiff contributed his goods had heen eHeaied Ha
,efs warranted Ly section chapter 20 Laws m 6N 10 n
either by the direction Of the cu IN motions by the report