New-York tribune., 1871-03-29
THE COURTS.
THE BROADWAY WIDENING swINDLE.

THE BROADWAY WIDENING SWINDLE.
MOTION TO yACATT THE ORDER CONFIRMING
Tfrr .WAEDS OF DAMAGES-INTERESTING
QUESTIONS OF LAwADECISION RESERVED.
The report OF the Commissioners OF Estimate
and Assessment in the matter of the Broadway widen
ing confirmed m December last by Judge Cardozo came
up yesterday before the Judge sitting in the su
prcme Court Chambers motion TO vacate the order
previously made confirming the report. Ii is now
brought before the Court pursuant to an act asseu ny
thc Legislature last month, which provides as follows
Is & an apIcS sa9a o & S1 b 70 M, e,SrSa Of four months
from tho dae Of the ore' confirming tie report IN me
Tse fourth sec.ou Of The ST. hOweyeE gives to the saHe
% So tstn9 Of & appeal and nouihsi.rdng the Penrey
bctery Justice q the Supreme Court OF ths Dc ,aer AZ
port This section iarher provides that shan be the duty Of toe Con
nsEe sulart a sc, the Poceengs for the widening
if Co1 tai e ssscssrn for bene Tor
- or Se, Of en- & T,SSY SSa SeoS S or s sSs or .uy VI %
sts.ie sSy e Do'5 1a & ''eie & & 1f ors % % sa @
Comr ot Of whom shall be other than the present
go - . 49, + 10 ne Conr,-tbe rport 10 he made within
the order referring the matter to the Comusone sla
. De Pas for R e The E0sT upon Il & i u ~ , s s Po''
under this the fourth section of the BILL that INC
motion was made yesterday notice having been gwen
by publication all interested in the matter There '
peared for the notion and in behalf OF the hayoi "
dermen and Conmonality Aaron J. .Vandcrpoel fachIu
OGormau Counsel to the Corporation ana ms asslstn
Mr. Dean In opposition to the motion anu hIafcd nv
tire interested property y-holders who are ~ cole
The awards there appeared Ira Shafel, James ~
man. Gratz Nathan, ID. d. Lord, O. r. ana .. =; onaW %
Simon Conover H. H. Anderson o. - Mloii ire 91u tooy %
others who took part in the argument. ~ -"
Ing AFFIDAVIT. in support Of the motion were first read;
AFFIDAVIT or PETER R. swEENY. ,.,.,-.
Peter Secn7 being oePos AID m tat he s me RE
ssq e M @ q S, aaas ah f eonsG 90 % Dor SD oaS
Of Coo-r kON were ever n9ael Of lhe iaei ih1t @ 30
ass P % i ti.pe ity2ISth-st AID ontlst
az ht1aye in ard BY the report the @ To @ o ca
informed sH 6eyes a 1a.rac,s ani PPc 5sPG %oks @ S r
CURED for Iu'le SaIn 10 nor e'stsilel & 10 iT ~ 1S
r o,drrs by the saPr,me Court ms depqnf1t & 9
r-ore this teQote1 believes TO be esu
AFFIDAVIT OF A. oAKET HALL. ,.. .
a. s1l N mar, n vo y2r ls & p.s' r 5a,e C Se Of
S, ~ ' O. % crs ~ so Of Fims5es ard Asse.snehs the
se O ots OF Pusc WORKS to sssa's any portion q
9 ip, spIe ers .aia any s sa SIKH Eqta
sye 'of - en- so3 sr ConnSsitr nor was any or
nation v-r MayO as Com,i1nI OF ie Sinug ana mo-
once Of Puolc WORKS as a.2r'sad to The Mayor
closed AM Which te COmsoHsrs had awarded to the City o. Ne"
'''A w. '- AFFIDAVIT OF GEORGE II. ruRsER
George H. Pane CeTk TO the CorHs o9 aieI Bls iha i
Works on e s35 September 1870 notice thereof gwen IN
required the second section O the speea act authorizing
Ssai q the awards made tie Mayor ee Cnonalty
Eo,s 10 Ie coe unfer these proceedings ps Of
which assr iAe sutng owners mgh acqqr ue TO sue. m G
9 dy September ls7) n the Office Of the Boar Of Palc & WGfss
2 Ns. 4 " Asicron Nelson j. WaterSury A X Law
rc 7sd among other counsel on behalf Of th butns o"aeis &
and Coi had no legal ard interest or properly in
te lands to be r,.esgi from Pubic 9ss s"a gee ri Swsri
therefor An rsn ezr zion on and eos9.f'o9 % n i.s s end d
taa Der fsl and crcd report he sum Of - oa should @ g5
n. pubic use instead aHadea in ss ;ia:eae
su1 y1l e s s 1nl io4Sa & q s 15' & derme was
Tsgo OF directed by SID CSna,,o1E ~, r. % 70 or
SINKING Fund Commissioners other o5a or ael ent o. e
laHe Goymea, Of he y Of & "a A @ 20 ' @ I n he
~ - s IN -s sui sniei as sio.esa,d was
siye or oe in The Pable WORKS for examination
anu aTFiDAv1rs OF wM D. AsroR AND J. j. AsToR.
John Asio! aElayt that be AMI D. D. Lod owners "a
Wm Asor were oTnf Of Other lands ami that be ovnei sin
other lands bis rght that he has been long @ S M WIN S
v6srr and wei acquainted with the value Of said property ana .hs
2S1 IN '' IN 1 1o. siSes much accrued The dsmsge which viii
i e eTreS.s o the widening is very than il sloa4 be-
% hs @ B5t 0 of rfotrtp is exempt from assessment winch
much beHe.iel a. o.-e po i,,e ,;b fsn-opdjone
sbsrg of the expense for benefit on the lots TaA As
,s '-w w. l T B. Aof and wl l Aston Of Ike import
in reference 10 property Owned BY them
ARGUMENT OF MR.. O'GORMAN.
Mr. o.Ccruau in stating the object of the motion,
claimed that the action Of the Commissioners toward the
city was illegal both in respect TO the amount OF assess
pent imposed on the Central Park Of s16OOO0 and the
$1,000 pi9G e upon s%aTl Td' coz foy "% the portion Of the
street HAT was closed, the original awards amounting
nearly si5OOOO payable 10 the Commissioners OI tne
sinking Fund but reducing to S5, OF 81 per iot 10Y 10
pieces OF ground. He continued; r., ,,s h.. h,.
civ an Commissioner Of the sinking Fund should pave bee
he be The Coa attempted ether TO diminish on sNAl
] G5 10 Ne IN those proceedings purely state Oiesf to
srsn er IP't "lf9 n ibe 'i peiags directed tile be
, m t nae Of t5e asyor Aldermen and Co9mona but wis
not an, wise under control II the city had bad notice loo
ally woal have hai ngt 70 s0p The pIocens' uar M 1 M & %
ISa which provides that anv person o fopr cl &
senne majority assessed can orier The PoMl4 ~
Continued pro ,ls eI' 49,, EoptrolT could under the act Of
pointed coune 70 represent tie city me Questions o. -
assessed ADD should be hs@ia 5eioie @
ude BY asking the Court to extend the Tehe " lar Is 'he
Ira sbafer then asked for the laws or decisions show
ing the cOnsttuuonality Of the law under which me
present application is made. Judge Cardozo lntlnate1
10 the counsel appearing for the motion that they should
give list OF cases which they intended TO rely MI.
VanderpOe then cited several cases An opportunity was
then given the counsel present and representing the
numerous individuals interested to raise objections plt
the opposition to the motion had nlteH ~ DlSi % Ten @
few remarks from Messrs Rowland Han, and Henry II
Anderson. Mr. shafer addressed the court III substance
30 MR. sHAFER's ARGUMENT.
When such an Act that Of Feb a. lsIl was passed
uonstrOus fraud had been perpetrated upon inc Guy
down 10 the statement that Peter b. sweeny, Conms
soner of Public Parks had not received notice thdt ht
assessment upon the central faik was d bsd
been increased without notice 10 the city lie wOuu ht
10 inquire who was the CITY ih suen SS %
the ety The Corporation Counsel In TINS case had MN
self moved the confirmation Of the report MI ohaeI
Nj fSst the Act February e. m under Which the motion
.s was uncon roand that imPdrs the obligation
oS sSd SEEKS TO former and esee, q the prop
eDened to pgse use & s s @ 80 =, hem rescey Under tia
Sbeh adopted the statutes in c sIo's ~ . J DJoey 1 s
- I h, th plocdng vested In the city upon me oonea
Of the report Of che Com Oos & T @ vested Gsbi to 6