The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-03-10
MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS.
Meeting Of the Board of Aldermcn-The Pro.
posed Extension Of Church street.

Meeting Of the Board Of Aldermcn-The Pro.
posed Extension Of Church street.
AT the meeting Of this Board yesterday afternoon
petition was read in which the periodical pumping
OF the Trinity church treasury IL aimed at by ct
zen who "can prove, without imposing any burden
on the city," the correctness OF the claim Of some
parties to the "King's Farm and Garden" The petit
tion-an exceedingly ambiguous one, by the way
was referred to a special committee, comprising
Aldermen Ward, 0'Bren and White.
Resolutions were adopted directing the clerk to
procure copies OF the bills before the Legislature,
relating to the city Of New York. TO pave Lafayette
place and sixth avenue from Forty-sccond to Fifty
ninth street with Ncolson pavement The latter was
passed over the veto Of the Mayor
Alderman NORTON then called up the resolution
referring 10 the Church street extension, by which
the Legislature Is pettlOned to set aside all proceed
ings OF the courts and Common Council in favor of
the extension and moved to amend the opening
sentence, which reads, "Whercas the extension OF
Church street IN ON Improvement uncalled for by
citizens and property owners generally BY striking
ment was carried, when member from one OF the
rural districs offered as all amendment to insert
aud proceeded to note his amendment on the
original paper. Alderman Norton objected 10 the
deacng OF the original, aud requested that the
''up town. member hand hts amendment TO the
clerk IN writing. lie was IN turn, advised
by up town. not to- get into "cast
move the Broadway bridge the gentleman from the
srural DISTRICTS opposed the measure because the
citizens had not asked for IT, and he now challenged
the gentleman TO show what citizens were in favor OF
this Church street job. IL Thompson street and
Laurens street be widened and this job carried out,
the tax on the citizens Of his alderman Nortons) dis
tict would be immense The assessment list for the
Church street job already showed that the tax To be
collected would be s3 900, and he thought he
presented majority Of the citizens Interested In the
Tnniler. and he could not nnd any among his const
tucnts in favor Of IT,
The gentleman who proposed the "muchn amend.
mcnt replied that he was In the Board In 1864 when
the matter was brought up, and then there was n
"iarge long, extensive list OF names to petition for
the inlproy cement sent into the Board by Mayor
Gunther. voted In favor OF II In 1864, and don't
wish TO change my vote no different"
Alderman NORTON stated that tie petition made In
1854 for the widening OF the street. instead OF the
extension and that tile only parties who now favored
an extension were some heavy property holders who
by the cut would obtain good corner lots. ExMayor
Gunthcr he said was one OF the heaviest property
owners the line of the proposed extension and
his property would be vastly improved by the altera
ton, Which stops very near where MIR. Gunthers pro-
pcrty ends. if the street were cut through TO tho
Battery It might he an Improvement; but extending
narrow street TO end In another narrow street could
not be show To he an improvements. II II were he
would be in favor OF II: but "a II Is, he opposed H.
since IL imposed enormous tax on his constltu-
ents. II the extension were such q great benefit
10 the city the tax should I've made on the
entire county. But be knew the residents of the