The New York herald., 1874-07-09
OUR PUBLIC PARADE GROUND.

OUR PUBLIC PARADE GROUND.
Motion for Continuance Of the Work
by tho Comm isyiOners-The Argument
OF Opposing Counsel.
The Legislature OF 1871 passed an act providing
for the laying out OF pubic parade ground for
our citizen ldiers to perfect themselves 10 mill
tary mannuvres Under this act Messrs. william
Q. Traphagen, John McClaye aud William A. Seaver
were appointed Commissioners OF Estimate and
Assessment. The ground selected by the Depart
mont OF Public Parks and General Shaler as most
suitable ior the purpose was plot OF
elghty-tw0 acres on the Harlem River, about
mile below Kingsbridge. When the Commits.
soners were about ready to make their report the
Department OF Public Parks ordered discontin.
uanoe Oh any iurther proceedings in the case. The
matter has been lying in this shape for some time.
Meantime some of the National Guard regiments
have interposed objections to the locality as too
remote from their armories, and altogether have
sought to throw cold water on the entire proceed
tnga But the property owners have felt dissatis-
fed at this standsti and are anxious to get pay
Tor their property, and with view to put the ball
again In motion, motion on their behalf was
made yesterday in Supreme Court Chambers, be-
fore Judge Lawrence, to compel the Commission
erS to make their report
FOR The CONTINUANCE or The WORK.
Mr. William r. Martin. who appeared in support
Of the motion. SAID that he did not rely any dis
tant authorities nor claim that the owners had
vested interests In the sense that the courts had
decided them to be vested, after the confirmation
OF the reports in cases similar to this, but argued
upon the direct and precise Interpretation OF the
statute OF 1871, under which this proceeding was
taken This statute nowhere, IN its express lam
any other statute, gave the Department of Public
Parks any power to discontinue. On the contrary,
j. made the ro1yslons OF the general law applicable
tltle," that excluded the idea OF defeating the
object aud end Oh the statute. Discreuon and
Parks IN tw0 Observation-Disclosures, the selection
OF the location. rnis they did and detel mined by
certifying and fling the map. Second, to deter.
nine the day wltnln two years when the public in
forests required the proceeding TO acquire title to
fiiing their petlt,on IN this case they had deter.
mined that fact that the public in terests required
the title OF this land to be taken; that was the
basis and limitation OF their power. They could
not change this determination. They had not pre-
tended 70 cnange 1t. Taeir resolution OF dlscon-
grounds Or reasons and purely arbitrary act.
The effect OF commencing this proceeding was the
sas DAY the Whole Of the act ws
mandatory In all its provislOns. This improve
ment the Legislature mad determined to
be necessary, and they meant that 1t should
be carried out. Here was the strong dis
tincti0n between this proceeding and the general
PROVISIONS OF the act of 1907. At that time when
the rectangular system OF streets and avenues was
established, the wants OF the city lor o century
were provided for and 1t was proper to give q
power to discont tinue and renew. In this act the
parade ground was needed forthwith, and a differ
ent discretion was given to the department-the
Simple dlscreti0n to determine within two years
when to commence the proceedings. having done
that their power was at an end. II any effect
should he given to the attempted discontinuance
1t would suovert and defeat the whole thing, be-
cause there was no power given to the department.
expi. ed beyond any question their powers were at
an end. Within the two years they had no power
as e 70 BE- ss so n
1878 Il they should attempt to renew the
de Be- ys nus the new
would be- valid. and no title would be &C.
-Quired. This DrOugnt the Case to tue general
be imported INTO another. Even in Da,t MaterA
where Its effect In Its whole operation is to sub
disoontlnuance implies o suspension with right
to renew. 1t Will not be permitted where Its real
and necessary enect is utterly to defeat the object
property owners, whose property was condemned
and taken or the public use, and everything done
nation and payment OF their compensation. and
argued that they mad constitutional, legal and
SSs sSs @ IN asssstns HS ing
under The Orders OF city department. and
had no power to make their report, ana the prop
erty owners had standing In court to ask that
they be ordered to MAKE their report. which, ex-
cept ior this contemplated discontnuance. they
were In all respects ready. able ana wiling to do.
II this order were made the rights o, one party
and every right and question guarded and passed
on at the Special and General Terms But II the
order was refused the owners were lett In state
OF peculiar har ship; tnelr property was con.
demned 10 the public use. The Department OF
Public Parks had exhausted their powers; there
was no way for them to get their money, and they
were wholly without remedy.
POINTS IN OPPOSITION.
Mr.. Andrews, Assistant Corporation Counsel,
SAID, In reply, that ne would Indicate the main
points raised In opposition to the motion, and
promised to supplement- these by an extended
brlet which he would submit In few days. He
Insisted, the first place. That the matter did not
come properly before the Court, inasmuch az the
motion had not been properly advertised. He
was aware of the interest naturally ielt In the
matter BY the owners OF the eighty-two acres OF
swamp land that had been selected for public
assessed Tor the work, which would cost not only
million Tor the ground, but nearly naf million
additional tor iaying out the same, he thought
hao an interest also In the matter, and
should have been notified OF the present
motion. He appeared for the Corporation
Counsel and could hardly tell for whom the opIos-
ing counsel appeared but understood 1t to be Ior
the property owners. As to these property owners,
that is the owners OF the selected ground, all ne
had TO say was that they had mistaken 'heir
remedy. The statu'e provided that II IN cases ike
she present the Commissioners failed to do their
work they should be removed and others appointed
10 their places. He insisted further that the De-
partment OF Public Parks had tull right to dis.
continue the proceeding, that the relat0rs had no
standing In Court, and that the court had already
substantially passed upon the question.
Judge Lawrence took the papers, saying ne
would reserve his decision until after receiving the
brief OF the Assistant Counsel TO the Corporation