The New York herald., 1868-04-08

of it is thus ascertaned to be legal and just except
one item. to wit: $780, June 4, advertising senate
Board has been provided with no adequate evidence
lustifying its allowance. The aggregate claim allowed
70 the Tribune Association thus ascertaned nciuu
ing an item or $14S, enormously entered 10 the cia
against the county, is fixed at 49, 800 SO.
JOURNAL OF COMMERCE..
Tne Board or Audit decides the claims OF the jour
nat Or Commerce against the city and against the
The FIRST Of these claims is for advertising during
period OF thirteen years. commencing In 1854 and
ending on the 3lst day OF December, 1855. The
amount Of the whole claim against the city during
ary ! 1887, is $500 50. But payments have been
made thereon which, with interest computed in the
m as on the debit SIDE OF the accoan
the city is the sum OF $s6s IS.
II is sufficient ground for the disallowance OF the
Claim by TINS Board that suit was commenced
thereon IN the Supreme Court against the Mayor,
Aldermen and COmmonalty OF the city early In
1857, and that the same has not been discontinued,
but is still pending undetermined. But inasmucR
as that objection might be removed by the
Slscontnuance ssS naa nc OF the suit and the pas
expedient to consider the claim on its merits. A
careful examination OF the account discoses that the
items which accrued previous to the 25th OF April,
1858 tat being the date OF the passage OF chapter
~ OF tne laws OF 1858 regulating the selection OF
York.
The second section Of that act contains the follow
Ing prOvisOn:-
taI in the city county Of New York shall
The %
and p the .s% city, who shall designate four
In their discretion, not TO exceed ten in all
We are confronted in the outset by the objection
that the Journal Of Commerce is not one Of the daily
newspapers selected by the Mayor and Comptroller
as an official paper under the provisions OF the
tion Just cited: such selection is indispensable to
the right to charge the claim on the city treasury,
then 1t must be conceded that all that part Of 1t
which accrued subsequent to the passage OF the law
have been paid being in excess OF the amount which
had accrued previous to that time, and not having
been applied to any particular portion Of the &C.
clearly without the sanction Of the law. Can the
claim be sustained on any legal or equitable grounds
1t has been argued in some Of the cases similarly
situated, that by chapter 1853 OF the laws OF 1862
Is enacted that the Mayor, Aldermen and Common
plus revenues of the sinking fund to the iund known
rs the general fund Of the corporation; that these
revenues are derived from real estate ferry leases,
&C, &c. the property Of the corporation and not
included In the revenues derived from taxes
ments; and that the Common Council has authority
vertlsing in papers other than those designated by
the Mayor and Comptroer despite the provisions OF
chapter 227 Of the Laws Of 1853, prohibiting the
application OF taxes and assessments to that pur-
pose. This Board has been furnished with an
opinion sustaining this argument, given by the Cor
p0ratOn Counsel in 1854. But there is insuperabe
difficulty in the practical application Of the argu-
ment, because the revenues raised by assessment
and taxes have been mingled with the surplus reve-
nues Of the sinking fund. No separation and specific
appropriation OF these last named revenues for ad-
vertising have ever been made. 1.-THE Common COun-
plying the revenues derived from the property Of
the Corporation TO payment for advertsingn any or
all Of the newspapers published in the city, 1t ought
to appear that these revenues have been so apprO-
priated clearly and precisely.
Appropriations, preceding the expenditure of
these revenues Tor printing are required by section
thirty of the city charter which contains the fol-
lowing cadse:-"NO money shall be drawn from
the treasury except the same shall have been pre-
drawn"
The thirty fifth section of the miscellaneous pro-
visions Of the city ordinances also applies to the
question. That section Is in the following words:-
shall not be lawful for the several departments of
S By s
Gil to an amount exceeding the several appropriation mad
have been made by the Common Council. ''-
Clearly it the intention Of the Legislature to
restrict the number Of official newspapers In the city
and county OF New York, and the power OF the Com
mon Council in respect to their selection, well
the sums to be expended for advertising. The City
Tax Levy acts Of 1865 and 1886 contain the following
prohibition, which Is applicable to advertisements
and every other object and purpose Of expenditure
and liability for which specific provision is made
The said several shall be applied only the objects
and neither said Corporation nor sny member or ocet
Nor any head Of pa s or os.
specified to an amount beyond the appro
In the act of 1895 s found this further provison:-
pointed By the Mayor Comptroller city Of New
'S % ssa y
e a 81 q SI
the proceedings Of the Common Council the Board Of Super
II By % S
and other public officers in and for the county Of
The following extract from section one of the City
on dis the pont Of tSe legislative con-
portion which shall raised by ian
advertising the shall be
Counsel of said city, or any two of them.
The obvious purpose Of the Legislature, as express
sed in the acts just cited has been to relieve the city
and county OF New York from the burden of heavy
expenditures for advertising, and to accomplish this
by conning the power over the selection Of Official
10 ecs dnd IN be 9S
1865 and 1868 provided the aggregate Of $21OOO
for advertising; all of which has been expended and
yet there are now pending before the Boards OF Audit
claims which accrued previous to January l. 1857, Of
twentyeight papers other than the nine designated
by the Mayor and Comptroller under the provisions
OF the acts Of 1863 1865 and 1866, amounting in the
aggregate to sls3 564 81. The claims for unpaid
balances to the nine official papers amount In the
OF seeking by ingenious argument to evade the obvi-
intention Of the Legislature it Is rather the duty
Of the Boards of Audit In disp0sing OF these large
and numerous claims to sustain and give effect to
that Intention
It is urged that the Boards Of Audit are authorized
by the laws under which they are constituted TO re-
port an allowance, Notwithstanding the want OF an
appropriation fund to satisfy claims like the one
under consideration. Grant IL. But II cannot be
properly urged that the Boards should not take the
want Of an appropriation into account and give 1t
complete effect when required to fulfl the plain In
tention OF the Legislature where 1t may be done
without contravenng other provisions Of law or i'm
peding or suspending the public business
Whatever questions may be started as to the con-
stitutional power of the Legislature to impose re-
strictions on the municipal government OF New York
city In appropratng and paying out the revenue de-
rived from certain productive property belonging to
the city, doubt be Justly entertained that the
revenue afforded by taxation and assessments is
peculiarly subject to the control Of the State Legsla
ture. All the claims considered and allowed by this
board are to be paid out Of revenues derived nom
taxation. Indeed, the whole jurisdiction OF the Board
Is I'm aid Of and dependent on the taxing power Of
the State. The Board can render no Judgment what
enforceable against the property OF the city
In an action at law equity before the courts. The
claims which are allowed mist be reported to the
Board Of Supervisors, who are required to impose