New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-01-04
BROOKLYN PAVEMENT CONTESTS.

THE APPLICATION TO SIT ASIDE THE ASSESS
mENT FOR REPAvING ATLANTIC-sT.
The matter Of the petition of William Colt
and other property In Atlantic-st Brooklyn 10
vacate the for the repavDg of that thorough
fare with the Nicolson wooden pavement came up for
hearing before Judge Pratt yesterday, at special term
of the Supreme Court OF Kings County. Tho petition
sets forth that the petitioner the of lots having
frontage in Atlancst Of IS feet inches. upon winch
there ia assessment for repaving Atantic-st OF
toSl "A, which has been confirmed by the City Oh
Brooklyn. IL charges that the advertising for pro-
posas by the Water Board for the requirement. ofAanc
At with the Nicolson pavement was mere form ana
pretense the part Of the Water Board and resored TO
for the purpose OF obtaining proposals or OF subject
ing the 20 public competition or of ascertaining
tho lowest responsible bidder, but as means OF giving
color TO arrangement which the Board had previously
made with the NcosOn Pavement Co. 10 have tho work
paving was awarded TO the NicOson Pavement Com
pany notwithstanding there were bids by John Leech
Flanders and j. Mullen. from to Oper cent lower
than the price previously ARRANGED by the boarG WIN
which the work should be done The release e.'
the BroO o The spG is charged to be in
derogation OF the rights Of the petitioner, ana con
charged have been not in good faith nor In the bona
Gde exercise OF the discretion vested in the Water Board
and their adoption of that kind Of pavement and their
causing AtantiCst be repsved with that said to
be corrupt and fraudulent acts on the part OF the Board
frauds and legal irregularities alleged to have been COM
mitted: A.. ,v...- ,oo.s ,.,o.o ,....,,,
the that the act OF April 1862 was uncOnsti
tuOna and void III. Assuming that tho act Of April 2.
1862 ia valid the proceedings OF the Commissioners we're
invalid. a. In undertaking the repavng without any
petition by majority Of tho owners Of the land along
that street. a. In undertaking the repaving
OF the street without some official declaration on their
part that the public wants or convenience required It,
81 In selecting the NcosOn pavement the pavement
with which TO repave the street. that being patented
pavement open TO public competition 81 In enter
I'M inf NicOlsOn "A x
ocssve price and at price creator than Was reason
son pavement after they received proposals accord
ing TO the advertisements for the same from responsible
The contract price Of the Ncoson pavement (6l In
ering into contract for the work and materials for
grading Atantic-s. &c. without having advertised for
proposals. % In falling to comply with the
limit or district Of for the repavng dis
crmnate between the local benefits resulting hereom
same o. falling to fix the district OF assessment 40
that the property OF tae 6 ahu e of be
expense OF the ropayng OJ Id exenPtng tne BrooH
such expense and undertaking to relieve 4 from It's
agreements and obligations Ql) In liking the district
paving etc, should be thrown upon tue petitioner ana
the other of the land to the depth OF 100 feet
2 In including In the expense OF such repavng the
following items: n,o,..o
y. Of grading =. SOC 9s5 50
21s quare bridge stone laid at 81 It 25S5 50
square second class stone LAID At 81 ee1ts sa 70
900 square old bridge read, 81 ll... 80 "
Inspection engineering assessment maps, resettlng man-
hole heads ~ %
And u3) in not credtng against the expense OF such
repavng the value of the cobbestones taken from the
street i'll The expense OF tho repavnR has been I'M
lawfully assessed upon the petitioner and the other
Atantic-s between Henry-st and Flatbush-ave. w.
such expense has not been assessed as required
Sed hs s Of in A 'Gs
% much 90 @ hs Act d nhs Be Seep
city charge. " The Items set out specifically above as
grading, old and new curb etc. were improperly In
collection OF assessment the Collector OF taxes and
easements was unawuly required In case OF the neglect
or refusal of persons referred to- 10 pay the
ment 10 levy the by distress OF their goods and
chattes together with the costs and charges or such eA
pense and sale. ,,,,., ,-,
That this Court has jurisdiction to grant the relief
for in the pettton that has 40 No e ssg 1r
tons contained in the first subdivision OF the petition
and ii therefore denies each and all OF said allegations
that assessment similar TO that described IN the
sacOnd subdivision of the petition laid at
about the time alleged; that there were no frauds
orrregulartes In the assessment or ia PROCEEDINGS 10
collect the same that Atantics had been at time
paved the expense OF tho adjacent owners tDat tho
CITY OF Brooklyn through fts regularly Instituted officers
else of their functions and duties, has caused the
Improvement referred TO In the petition TO be made ana
that such City thereafter as by statute was pOaha 70
and thereby upon It's credit and promise TO pay In
three years the date OF such bonds the cost OF such
and has paid out all scA moneys 10 uelry
the coat OF said Improvement, which Is now complete
that such improvement was made without iauu OF COZ
sion the part OF either or any OF the Onces ana
upon the petition OF large number Of the property hold
ers That the improvement was strictly lOcaln lts ch
racter and such as has always been pau TOT
by assessment levied ON the particular ocates aOuVng
the same
Tweed and for the city by Corporation Counsel Dewitt
the Court took the papers and reserved decision