New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-02-24
xEW-YORK AND BROOKLYN


=, YORK OPINION AT THE TIME or THE IN
n" CORPORATION OF BROOKLYN On THE lNEN-
DSnTtyCY OF MAKING SEPARATE CITIES
yorr OF TIE HON. WIN. II. SEWARD AGAINST
THE MEASURE ,..
,ovornent for the consolidation of the Cities OF
York and Brooklyn the following extracts from
s5,tive records viii be found of Importance.
- sboyy st once that the question of consohda-
-. was not only favorahly considered by
- citv but that separation was regarded
crave mistake that the Committee that repre-
.+od 3rooklvn IN q conference between the cities,
s-a.ted New-York suggestions of consolidation with
,,4erpt and refused to submit them to the people
.Kincs County on the ground that they would
,.e irritltion and that the bin for incorporation
,r,s spurred through the Legislature rather upon
aha representaiOn of the right of Brooklyn people to
have what they asked for in respect to municipal
government. than upon any considerations of expe-
S;ancy OF welfare of the State at large.
VIEWS OF REMoNsFRANTs.
Amemorial and r6raons..- anoe were presented to
Cha Assembly February IS, 1884. from the Mayor,
Aldermen. and Commonalty of the City of New
York against the application of the inhabitants Of
Brooklyn to be Incorporated as a city. The ground
taken was: ThS it is impoltio, well in respect
70 the interests and welfare of the applicants them
selves as Of the inhabitants of the City
of New-Y0rk. that Brooklyn should be incOr-
porated as city, except in connection
with the City of New-York. upon just
and equal principles" That the Incorporation of
Brooklyn as a separate city would materially in
fringe upon the vested rights and necessary immuni-
ties of the City of NewYork was the belief of the
remonstrants. Entertainments and invasions of
tbe territory of the City of New-York, it
Is asserted, were contemplated by the pro-
4 Il
community. interfering with and embarrassing the
business pursuits and the regulations of New-York
IN respect 20 navigation of the surrounding waters,
is regarded with dread. The two communities are
spoken of as parties whose contiguity and pecu-
liar local situations indicate that they should be
united as one body to participate and enjoy. with
mutual security and benefit, the advantages with
which nature has surrounded them" The danger
Of conflicting interests interfering with the COM
merce of the harbor was further set forth
iu the accompanying documents. which include
message from the Mayor of New-YOrk in the Fall of
The previous year. and the reports of a committee of
conference appointed by the authorities of the City
OF New-York 70 meet one from the village of Brook
Ism and discuss the questions at issue. The New
York Committee proposed as a solution of the
problem 20 take into consideration the prOpriety
Of uniting New-York and Brooklyn, OF even ali
Kings County, into one city. To this in
vitatlon, the New-YOrk Committee say that the
BroOklynites promptly replied that they had no au-
thority 10 hear entertain such proposition that
the communication Of It to their constituents
would occasion great irritation, and deep
and lasting disquietude - and they distinctly
refused TO submit it to the people of Kings
County. Tho New-YOrk Committee grew
eloquent over the advantages of union
and the dangers of separation. Speaking of uniting
Kings New-YOrk. and Richmond Counties under one
municipal government, they say: If this measure
should be adopted if Heaven breathes It's blessing
on the procedure you will, in the opinion of the
Committoo, lay the foundation Of the most magnif-
cent city In the universe, IN trade wealth. and in
tegual resources"
WATER RIGHTS AND INTERFERENCEs.
The Mayor of New-York, Gideon Lee, entered
heartily into the views Of the Committee and opened
correspondence with the Mayors OF other large cities
from whom he received encouragement in his belief
that the interests of both cities would be best
escured under one government. He says he deems
me whole subject 4" Of more dangerous Importance
70 the future prosperity of the commerce, the
health. and the peace of this city, and
50 all other settlements OF towns which
may De formed upon or connected with this port
and har5OI than can now be readily perceived OF
clearly known The matter Of jurisdiction over
The Committee dwell most intently. They are
clearly of opinion that NewYork City holds title TO
al Brooklyns water front and consequent jurisdic-
ton over al vessels lying at Brooklyn wharves They
point ONT how such Jurisdiction must shackle Brook
Iyn: The Committee deeply feel this circumstance,
but It Is impossible for them to advise admit the
proprety of extending TO her the jurisdiction OF the
river upon any other terms than that she should be
united 70 NewYork as one city. This in the opinion
Of the Committee ought TO be immutable as
VOL a. 10 relates TO the future prosperity
Of New-York as of Brooklyn also, and, they
think they may add, the commercial prosperity
of tho state likewise for whatever affects the
general mart must in the same degree affect the
general thrift" L" The spectacle Of two Boards nav
ing jurisdiction over the waters Of the same city'
with power TO enforce their orders whether conllct-
Ing or not with heavy and ruinous penalties Is a
great injustice TO the citizens, and Jeopar-
dies the commerce of the State, and in
Tia ouiuion of the Committee, ought
20 be remedied. These things, if not timely cor
rected. may kndle fire by and by Many great
cities have been ruined by commercial rivals with
whom thew were unable TO compete" This com
nittee consisted of James Palm er, j. Aug smith,
Stephen Allen. J. Hammond, D. Banks, and E. II.
Werner
HOW BROOKLYN BECAME CITY.
There was also a memorial and remonsrance
against the Brooklyn incorporation BILL presented
% the Assembly ut the same date, from the adJoih-
ing towns in Kings County-Bushwick, Flatbush,
Esw-IJtrecht. Gravesend, and Flatlands. Their
grievances seem to have been principally
In reference 70 the disprOportionate repre-
ssntation proposed by the bill for Brooklyn
Gu the matter of county officers, and unsatisfactory
specifications about jurors, taxes and the powers Oh
courts The bill itself, which evoked so much OPP
position was very simple in its provisions, setting
forth principally the prosperity and growth