New-York tribune., 1871-03-29

4 for
releases Law %p.InS r. y Nc Nor cds !, this 1 sna tSOs S, 1a upsn IL
8 IN non % r rerces EXISTING AZ The time when il male ali
which afterwards e1neushed by new laws tsai there rssn
all remedies n yes n is also an mpsng OF TIE Obligation o s'
The uri point ,rgd this act had been passed upon The
ground Of frauds having been committed The making Of ge s
been committed Insisted that tn Lgsure eon'of
P sa5 oa ans a1alae % s S e;e 9 S aS Sn'R e ss E
the award purchaser by assignment OF hasa Zen '
by way Of eaAge pledge, can he in any wsy afeeeL
MIR. vANDRRPoEL's REPLY. -. =, e,,or
A. j. Vanderpoel replied, ON behalf OF G me S & respect
Of the motion. It seemed TO him. with an 'r u scus.
that the other side had entirely avoided IN m me ease
sion the question presented by the ~ Commisson-
He claimed first that the proceeding on 10 ON that nor
ers i'm imposing the assessment OF s6i7Sy on d Egbtb
ton of the Central Park yipg sts was rregu
lar, Illegal, and void. He continueu' u.,,....
BvD assuming that grounds Of the Central - % o is assss.cn,
% the Ss, hG benz he cGG Of the .S oS%s"a
AMI sS oySortaniiy being beard before 'Ge report % was m Ss
under The direction be in any e'p % se " Tbe statute
pro tae the 9gc%n % "a hS b e KEN unde no obgon 10 obey
directed him not to & he Toa "a, h s bv sEy party in
bat % oe % Conn one authorized to amend Their report
eI S9s sp on aii5s e aaSr Mier%cn and COMMONLY claimed
t he Central PARK liable assessments for local improvements
7rd: While he act Of 1869 asihoI5d soea p, & % % pproyei
should be Just and equitable to be nYq ed upon n b tps cost
S 81 oee While the total expense about s6ooo o
tie Centr sl679 and the Mayor etc. @2o
}ay The authority to reduce The awards
made to the city given Of an intention to reence In m
5 sR ho Fpo Te IN their sd awarded to
The MS & &c. ssSS, for g Of fd4s SGSs'I the sa a % o S This
S t ReT,s' 0S 0 'S a.s aSTf soTe a when the public use
which appropriated ceased he interest Of e M MsyS &
street TIE argument par the Commissioner adopted tn,
view and reigcel the secaenI from St'aJ 80 t 20 & it ib
Of the old HIGHWAYS in Colonial times, lee v iT
as to portion By the chatter ami as residue BY compulsory
position and was dca ahy tbat the Legislature tie to
authorize that apaton and the Court haa te rsenol 70 & M
.f the
be made right Of review existed at the time Of TIE passaye o
tn act Legssure had right extend the lime for aAing a
peal review OF The proceedings to single Judge T9s & con-
sa,oso t 1S 'Gn T % VIII a5 more tRsn in oGy case in which
CoaT ems judgment which has cat Tie
S %tls 81 sTl of Vai' Slc6 ESsHs tsS 6ss ssne
MR. oGORMANs REPLY
II seems 10 me that the questions in this case are bu
two and not very complicated ones ether Ihe hist rs
whether under this law OF 1871 the Mayor Aldermen ana
Commonalty have shown that they Lave risht to ask
for the interference Of the Court II they have shown
that, if their aDilvits, which are fst6o
taken place in Of the proceedings upon ths WIDEN
ing and aigheningOi Broadway cu II becomes your
duty Qor such is the phraseoogy OF the aeO to Nacae
this report and tO refer the same back 10 new COhS
! sioueI5 He continued;
Now What are proved before Honor That
the against tae City Of NcVlgr vas ar in Gle all 'c
.e abstract were favor Of t CITY Of NcTioTS $1,000
that sgIs y 5 10 10 @ no & e Y e T Gl there has bcr notice
l'd dniy 10 % give T It to ~. Now Sir to come TIE C'TPo
ton Cogn,s & ayaS say , D Ic VAS comladei
by 9e - SgPe5 & o. Go91 Of of M se I2 % S.'s 3 % and
Common u that could only be acquired BY sing thr o. the
sIorcrs visieI Th. was protecting tie Maor Aldermen
and Commous The Corporation Cous. was o1eei to DO sst
the State ana he had knowledge Of tbs iuegaty
the fact had knowledge did not IN ais ohae ay one
single nan lie tie Departments OF tie ey Itself vita
% tnoSs W & % II i I ~ & to to NOV SSsg abSIi those hing
Nj shafer-Diin you kHos aboli it, NJ 0Gormsli =. r..
rorstion Coae bel Ing THAT position quasi Corpora
o9r on single meeting Of the Commission. anil never
spJ assr s,y ts 5ease question not because
my statement way or Tie cher oi a] mlqi4i' l" ae
o re W m .sessireats an awards am cargeabe that
kn0wlre ana ss matter OF o9lte ana IrolHi H. ra's
is Mt part OF he dpt OF tLe OoI oa' = Oli' 70 e " Of E 49, %
DE Comcers Sinking PInd the Maoror DesTea' Of
w. rot my ddty to known and DIDN'T know.
Nj ShaeDO ou 70 say you dn kno" What was IN the re-
Goasn-l the report appearing before The
himself ronged in anything contained ~ mat report
& ,s m al vonr Hoor 20 cep, a. q thai the city
eaargeatle with any kroTe ga ma n1 az & 10
hsd been reduced different from what aPpe.Fed ia The 5raii Of ne r.
h I Pou % ni Il hat se have & to ak
All yoar Honor aske DO to ysets the orle and aIos con
Missions to adjust .e S to T. he assumed st there vii be any
the Legislature power 10 yscae en- orer OF te toui ha nov
sS to n.ni the pce proceeding When ever h
saffl flp ieFsl y
My learned friends claim that he nS"I I'm in oe 3 %ts va y t
hehi rgbt equivalent os Judgment nat par o. .n
moment aot one Of Of these learned gentlemen is entitled to
one cent Of award he until the expiration Of four months
from tie date h confirmation Of tie report It is no, right in ag
into ment: and vet learned friends entitled 10 the
dgut; OF Judgment To make juTent they must PEI i n sl,
this toe lNth Of Barbour to winch ne Ieiel' ca ca e
ton " il is case Of The People agL me SuIetos 0
Nesclese The property had been taken for highway
S S' 0cioIasie Lesiatur repealed which pro.
ceeng had been coumnced analogous to ti3 one before
your which simply arrgns the practice Now what nl e
against The County Commo OF Berias te OOur' al
cited in two particulars In that possession vas tAhn Here
tic REALTORS removed their fences and gave up ne lana.
vested Of course day Of payment had not arrived when
the Highway Discontinued The day Of payment has not maud IS
In the end the Judge saJs The legislature say 70 lne
entons the land tken" The Legislature may chang her
he upreqeslsble as 10 those whose affected ,
his clients lands We mus, pay Tor IT. 9u un me sna IS
con has ryht I'VE will stop viii not tif these ns
| and DO man shall have snY award"
| He concluded as follows:
| Now has the Court no control Of judgment, OF a
statute under the Judgment refer y0ur Honor TO he
case OF Wayland agt. Chds Al NewI YORK Reports, l6l,
10 show that even without any statute the Court would
have right to regard the suit pending after Judgment
and until the amount has been recovered an ine teg
pending, taking it even in the most favorable neh
toward my learned friend and where Is the VOCATION ol
take the position that under the Constitution OF the
United States there objection to dyest vested rights
law. The of Satterly agt Matthews, ia PeteTs
ll3 takes that ground which believe 10 be admitted hy
my friend say 1t Is not vested Egh anu not recog
nized by the which my learned friend depends
| i'm the WITH of Barbour.
Judge CardOzo took the papers and reserved his
| decision
ERIE LITIGATION.