New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-07-25
CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY.

Letter, and opinion referred to Mayors Card OF yesterday morn
's' CITY OF NRw-YonK, LAW DEPARTMENT, J
OFFICE OF COUNSEL TO THE CQh ~ isea
Hon. RICHARD D. CosSoLLY, Controller.
DEAR SIR: have the honor 10 aGkm0Wdsage
receipt OF your communication of the 1ith august instant
relative to the manamus lately granted by the supreme
pRgD T 19e comm2nSng you to adjust and settle
their claim, and inguiring H. IN my OPINION there ~
mandamus win be held to be erroneous by the higher
tribunals appeal.
ton as careful as was able to bostow upon the case
previous argument in my letter Of July "a expressed
to opinion that the application for the mandanS
could not be successfully resisted however submit
ted to the Court at The hearing all such points in answer
TO the argument Of the learned counsel for the REALTORS
as seemed TO me proper in your defense 80, ,
The decision Of the Court was in accordance with the
mains unchanged. The Legislature have given you
authority to perform certain duty OF public chaIac
decisions OF this State have settled the law to he that
such an enactment creates an IMPERATIVE dny 70 90 the
ferred to in the opinion Of the learned Judge who or
dered the mandamus
In my Judgment You had no power to agree with Gov.
Fenton or any other public officer, TO waive abs0lve
yourself OF the duty thus imposed on you by law You
both officers OF the law, and cannot by any agree
nent between you yourselves above the law or i'm
pair the right Of any citizen to require ts due execution
The intention OF the law OF 1868 it seems to me-
rodecaTc and make cecta the provisions OF section
~ Oh t III E fe TO ~ nnd aSi"t All claims in yor
of or against the corporation and all accounts in which
The corporation is concerned either as debtor or
creditor"
As TO the probability OF reversing upon appeal the
Judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in tnis matter
it is difficult to form any confident opinion can only
say that do not now zee any reasonable ground sum
cen to warrant any expectation Of success IN such an
effort. Yours truly, RICHAED O'GoRMAN
Counsel TO the Corporation.
CoxTRoLIER's OFFICE, Oct. 10. 1863
Hon. RICHARD O'GOKMAE, Counsel 10 the Corporation:
DEAR SIR: haye presented to me sundiy bills, IN
CURED during several years for settlement pursuant TO
the provisions of the Tax Levy OF 1865 Ihese bills are
the Board OF Supervisors aud come To me IN the form oil
These claims are for work done for the County. but
which have failed OF payment, because there was no
rpdon to pay the same as teg r were incurred or
adjusted claims shall be recovered or exist against Inc
county the Controller is authorized to borrow upon the
credit of the County such sums rs may he necessary Tor
the payment Of such Judgment Judgments or adilrled
claims understand that the Courts have held the
language OF This section to be lmpeIatlye anu tna
have discretion in Of an adjusted claim coming
within the provisions Of the tax levy but to raise the
money and pay the same when duly presented 10 me.
But before acting | desire you opinion upon theae
VIII You please inform me
FirSi: Whether the Board of Supervisors is tie an
second II a claim Is adjusted under the authority
the Board of Supervisor have the legal right 20 re-
to raise the money TO pay tho same under the pro-
visions of law above cited!
have the honor TO remain yours, respectfully,
.-- RICHARD B. CONNOLLY, Controller.
CITY OF NEw-YoRK LAW DEPARTMENT
OFFICE Or THE COUNSEL 10 me ConiORAiIoN {
Hon. RICHARD b. 'CoSNoLLY, Controller.
DEAr SIR have received your letter OF October II,
In which you state that sundry bills incurred durlls
several been presented 10 you Tor sentencing
uursiiant the provisions of the Tax Levy OF lCe, AID
That these bills are duly certified to You correct under
tl,e authority OF the Board Of Supervisors and cone 70
Won i'm the form of adjusted claims.
on this state OF facts y0u ask my opinion
First: Whether the Board OF Supervisors Is the au-
thorty under whose direction claims against the County
are to he adjusted; aud,
second III aclaU Is adjusted under the authority VI
Board OF supervisors have you the legal right TO re-
raise money to the same under the PROVISIONS
of the law above cited. -, .
the first question, it is my opinion that
the Board Supervisors j. the proper authority 10
adjust claims against the County for work done for the
County. In the adjustment OF the same the Board acs
jldciay Chase st. County ~ Saratoga. % Barb r.,
duty oyce agt. Board of supervisors etc, 20 Barb r.
2s4.
As to your second question 1t my opinion that when
claim against the County thus usted by the super
visOIs and being within The legal power of the super
Visors to incur, in compliance with the section of the
County Tax Levy OF 1863 above referred 10. the duty de-
wolves you OF raising the money To pay the same as
provided for lh said section, and YOU have no legal right
10 refuse 10 perform that duty.
| A question similar Ia this arose in the of The
People rel. Times Newspaper ag the Controller, III
which, You aware, IL was held by the Court Gar
doZO J.i that similar provision In section T. OF chap
s53 Laws OF 1858 (the City Tax Leyy) mandatory
ana mandamus issued Ia compel you 10 adjust and
settle the claim. This decision III accordance with
ylriOhs adjudged eases, which presented to the
Court the argument Yours truly,
RICHARD O'GoRdAN, Counsel 10 the Corporation.