The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1878-05-11
INDICTING THE ALDERMEN.

OFFICIAL VIEWS CONCERNING THE POSITION
TAKEN By RECORDER HACKRTT ToUARD THE
CITY FATHERS CORPORATION COUNSEL WHIT
NEY ON THE POWERS CONFERRED BIZ THE
CHARTER OF 1873
The Aldermen do not express any particular anx-
iety the result Of the pending investigation by
the Grand Jury concerning their passaseo ordinances
obstructing the streets In alleged violation OF law
Tho subject, however, was considerably canvassed
around the City Hall yesterday. is claimed on be-
half OF the City Fathers that they possessed perfect
legal right pass such resolutions and that as leg
isative body proper indictment could be found
against Thorn by the Grand Jury.
THE CORPORATION coUSsKL's OPINION.
In July Of last year Corporation Counsel Whitney
sent In an opinion TO Mayor ELY on the subject The
opinion was soon after transmitted TO the Common
Council. The document says:-"I am not aware that
prior the year 1873 there any express legisa-
ton on this subject, and the Common Council has Tor
many years in the habit Of granting such per-
mi.s, assuming, presume, that they mad tho right
do by virtue u the general legislative power
vested in them by tho old and acts OF the
Legislature to pass ordinances relating to the admin
istration public affairs in this CITY, Subdivision
section II Of the 1873 however expressly
declared that the Common Counci! shall have no
power to authorize tho placing continuing Of any
encroachment or obstruction upon any street
or sidewalk except the temporary occupation
thereof during the erection or repair OF q
building lot opposite the same.' As this
provision was o new one, and had not bcen
the subject OF judicial Interpretation. and
as the Common Council bad tor many years
the habit Of granting permits for stands an
other ob.tructions upon the sidewalks, desired 10
obtain decision by the courts the true con-
structon ana meaning OF this provision. There has
M nawa val ham n deci
IN relation TO this provision Of tho charter OF lS7a
A suit time since brought against the Com
venting the erection vi stand IN Church street,
which being put on tho sidewalk within what Is
called she stoop line under permit granted by the
Common Council The plaintiff obtained an injunc-
tion, and the motion TO CONTINUE the same pending
the litigation some time since heard but has not
been decided Without waiting longer Tor = decision
by the courts write this communication TO say That
without attempting 10 decide VIA. may have been
tue powers OF the Common Council before the char
Of 1873, they have not had the right since the
passage that charter TO grant permits tor stands
othor distractions on the sidewalks"
COMMISSIONERS CAMrBxLI's POSITION
II will be recolected that Com OF Public
Works Campbeil sent communication TO Mayor Ely
weeks relation TO the conduct of the Al
dermen In this communication be cited several ~
stances where resolutions OF this character had been
passed, and concluded by saying:-'rhe streets and
avenues OF New York would be greatly improved IN
appearance and usefulness II many OF the posts,
stands, awnings ana merchandise which now sncum-
Der them removed. believe that NJ no distant
day This will be done, and that when done The beneh
cal effect Will be apparent that II Will meet with
general approval Al necessary step 10 such con-
summation respectfully submit thut the prevention
OF further entertainments or encumUrances - an i'm
peratIve duty. IL easier 10 prevent than to re-
move. Structures fixtures once erec.ed by per.
mssion Lacit come 10 DO regarded vested
rights and their removal resisted Applicants now
Lor OF pubic streets or Sidewalks
plain II they refused, even II they point
similar grants In earlier years, because now ~ least,
the law requires the prevention OF extensions and en-
croachmentS"
THE MAYORS VIEWS.
Mayor Ely Yesterday nado the ioiiowing Statement
touching Tho controversy :--.Sinco ! hrst became
Mayor this question OF street and sidewalk encun-
bIances has been constant source oil annoyance TO
IN consequences oil tho alleged ambiguity oi the law
The subject 1t Is old question, which was dis
III days oil the king when the subject was
aitatea oil compelling the removal oil the court yards
the wiue streets, all OF when al
lcx cd 10 be hments the sidewalks. Alter
became Mayor endeavored 10 get legal solution Of
the question: and TWO three involving
phasos Of the matter have been before the
Supreme Court l believe that one OF them has
been recently decided, showing that the pow
OF the Corporation the matter are
very limited. Since the subject been abeya
have, general rule vetoed all ordinances Of inc
Common Council authorizing sidewalk obstructons
Ia winch have peculiar merits and which
are petiioned Tor by property owners Affected ny
them. Some OF these exceptional caSes 1 have per-
mtted 10 become law by heather vetong nor APPROX
Ing them. am very glad that Recorder Hacke.t has
VIII result Ia permanent solution o. the difficulty.
| do not believe that Recorder Huckett will innict
any greater punishment upon the recsicranL Alaer.
u small Ane / cannot believe that he viii
upon tho suggestion of oil the morning papers,
by placing them IN conhnement during Tho hot