New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-04-04
THE BROADWAY WIDENING.

week for the appointment of new Commissioners of
Estimate and Assessment in the matter Of the Broad
WAY widening, granted yesterday. Judge Cardozo
holds that the act assaulted is clearly constitutional ana
that the action regard to the assessment and award 10
the city is clearly illegal He consequently decides that
the only proper course TO order an entirely assess
ment and this purpose he appoints as Commissioners
James :. Hennessy, VIM. b. Aston and A. T. stewart
The following full synopsis Of Judge Cardo1os ue
ciSiOn:
The cou.uOnay Of the tChaper 81 o. Laws ofs' under
,bch the motion this natter made to me plain
both uPOn principle an pcsen, that shosh not ~ m Ss%
exceeds the constitutional power OF the Legsa'
heepe vth which The Law was the leading counsel
s nq.s 6s% sG sTs &c the Tc
Of The authorities end 70 . q me psg S T SS m ses
,hsi ho1h art consider AMI understand IN ws 9s ,oe mater
M the wiiene aud strghDag Of BroAdws and had
bv this Cont Special confirming the POr; Of the Commissioners
Of Estimate and Am who had teGSrs sen aPSn,si the only
low end the objections raised 70 The Legality Of The Com
any That spec proceeding within tie meaning Of The Code
Of PIOfssr In an act T sn PsS P Sn3e c tSa from any
SH, order or fa determination male any Pt hp9 ee st
S To ,Ss applies ss an appeal f.. from The order Of sDec
That sTPss could sIen any within 80 days after written
q s aigm O hd beer to the party sRgs'R s
There nothing before me TO ao. and mus P sp he act Of
1871 passed. Indeed not alleged upon the srsamen. S
s5S ii bv i Sm Ss, s Of $ sr or By
& nSS q VI cS he tS p cOuii sppe running
Was 9egPent on m to serve noe e Corpr on acted in the
proceeding. H. behalf l under ae & h. pessSsrr
though TIE order vas entered he notion II VII 6e per
pssc 1t might be By the acton Of The General Tern or
The espso. Of time 70 aPP. B9, 5en sp 81 can be called
this presents itself thu: Can The legislature Sons iuoGs
cd7 and nle applicable existing nt:es For 4 too PLAIN TO
waste either time words in discuss on te ' ~ VIZ Hesitation as
ann thu Io.t Of cases and lostriiions supporting the IA
rrIa dOcfrne that
Of contract OF disturbing vested nights viii cit, few
i M % t Retrospective laws in civil cases are
w because the counsel ugree very well settled that that pro
The yssture provided does not 1olse the constitutional pro
d en- X I Y AN EXISTING remedy OF remove an mpmnt
recovering redress by legal proceedings" need hardly
a. nat ihgit ar r q, ,s r own State have been
amended the ameamn, made applicable to existing WIN
d a. cocuyey ee that the Legislature may constitution pass
law, sfEs remedies sed msA them 10 p penn; b ysSy
ofcuc or dre,o bis under examination is
80 obviously purely Of that character that 70 re1s o b Dc 5 he
SPECIAL Term being sin existence the LEGISLATURE h1s by the section
Necessary @ consider simply provided new remedy We have hen s
the GT Of The Special Tern I'm confirming s af 1919 e We. fePG
statute set Of s7D providing simply Pew or further Iensdy
constitutional IL would be Singular Hdea The bS9IG 5 b con-,
that the done provide easy and ,PeeSy msihod Py
wrong OF wrong shah be vacated
The Oua for right becs%e vested until the final order
opinion upon that point
s'Sugh nay a. Nothing sgs saeh view for there the de-
only exercised Of ownership over The land bat
bad been fixed the night 70 them bad become final and pe
ed h Bor tt It sTper that here has
o5 no no error no ilegsiJ then the are
,ab Surely will not be asserted That # S r1ad or iHegsty one
SLOWED That would be to claim that By do
R1 Bsa l Is Ssss s sss: The truth such
not eIFsS Authorized BY the limits itself correcting
s.aSo, snd e to TiG0 S Tosaon to dD exceeding
aahOu Judge Caroo e case. ~ s1pPpL' % @ .~ i S
this STATE and he arrives conclusion that the question must he
s ssSs Sdss into ne c 5S3 Sy es5
de5y q . By 1 s R'i' Of Ie ma how
party brought into Court the Only msea p an opportSHty
Of being beard That ts statute expressly gives re
obT 10 Of hcb proceedings this character not one IN winch
& Sse 81 he matter Of the cousuonh,y Of the law snd
brings the next important subject ~ was
any or have tie assessments for benefit the awards for tamsgs
them been unfair unjust inequts9e or
The ehsrges arrayi gDsi the pIceaDs are nTpJ bS
ssyi for dsge far exceeding the real damage resulting
whose property taken that ie - IN IL nd been de-
pod ior inspection and without notice TO the city who Ns
e's &c, ,tey 9s we .ps The Central Pari
e. end BY dim, s 1as sTs6e T and acted on state
yea by s1 eon to To. me m as9's even IN .uh Sn
I'm n and bst he damage clearly excessive
The e, Of The respect to the assessment ssiPss
the civ and The PLAINLY illegal ,r The So RIoG .so S
S h, .pT os or DEPARTMENT Municipal Government Of
city and that such notice Wa given ~ any ~ T an
yit proving IL argued that the CororsiSn COUNSEL n
1o sa poic was ever given Corporation Counsel
that such claim 70 be or aa s hb him 10 he
outstanding this % presume notice 20 s1 II pursuance Of
the du upon by the act Of 1909 and mover 'he
~ Je c.cS holds that he Is not authorized infer that the Cope
ration Counsel had any notice o. me seo9 sb that they
might IN violation Of and therefore be was not bound 70 as.
changes affecting extent Of $2O 20 have been MADE IN
suls remedy and inexpensive s e,
relief agan sach acton oasht mo- Oe oest the ty Il
erroneous sreeny in h. deposition ssesTs isal
can reception Of sseent, be defended y was plainly an
Iceed which tie claimants stated TO be s o.mIge ne
never hitherto been SUPPOSED hke to ondeIvalae their
property Another Circumstance not TO- Be forgotten 5 h.
, S Sr5nsS enaS for piece front BY 2 depth
"a ~ e s Se i n ne month Of October month. preyiOu
hal the claimant which 1. some evidence ee'! d street Of
tg slaz 500 50 tat, . d s the vboe plot viii have cost
ing Il sw9ri ;Ies P9taOa 81 % ~ error missie irregular
IT Tor something wors or Illegal act or that II nG' ~
qHa. .S cTo sS Bu every one Mo ~
adues and sysr Bat & matter oGss sc. .ot sGes
rs Of , ss sTsT Ba S s "a. sod that cas
Soy sSy event 70 set which we're 'R
6caily allotted That mght ne 80
g md that that wrong Influenced The % ue proceed
- o n ere are Why cannot ADOPT maj new r rae
Thai The statuie making duty n s' W.
tsnted ilgsby uparHess uset inqnty OF
sber ss RESPECTS Mayor &c any other person. TO
S5se The order leaves TO my oscreoh t
entirely sSsesSint nj OF only OF Oh
Ba tpL Ia sufest justice demands that he So snCu
- ns There aSayts tending 10 slo" hA we A~s geo
ssV ar excessive Indeed Of the counsel rno
100 clients admitted hss ~ ~ sbs,yacts and ind this
soa.p 10 be vel founded ind thai lots contiguous 70 esn
for any db'
ss,eoy sssd DO not overlook the arguments OF ,n Gov %
~ ch matters have never reviewed by the county 9u' ma &
sedon The had always beeo uesiea % The re-