New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-03-04
BOTH UNJUST AND ILLEGAL.
THE WATERFRONT BILL ATTACKED.

|
PRIVATE RIGHTS SAID TO De DIsREGARDED.
TO tho Editor OF The Tribune.
Sir: The bill introduced by Mr.. Hamilton
which has been prepared by the Counsel to the
Corporation. is characterized as unjust, utterly
opposed to the principles OF our institutions and
10 any and all the practice under Constitution,
down to the present time In this, that 1t intends
| 70 dlvest the owners and lessees and all persons
interested In dock property upon the water front
OF the City Of New-York Of all title thereto, as
soon as tho oath Of office is filed with the County
CLERK; and assuming that the bill is constitu-
tional, such will be its effect.
his property consists Of large number of
piers and many thousand feet of bulkhead owned
by large number Of persons, whose interests are
as distinct as the owners of any two houses and
lots can be.
/ In the statement relative to tho bill which was
furnished to The Herald" correspondent and ap-
pears in the issue of The Herald" of March l.
it Is conceded that it is the intention of the Com
missioners, if the bill passes, to apply to the
Supreme Court to have Commissioners of Assess
ment appointed, and that from the date Of their
appointment the title TO the property will vest in
the city
This property extends from somewhere about
Canalst. to the Battery, on the North River, and
embraces the whole water front on the East River
The Corporation Counsel admits that this bill
authorizes that the whole property should be in
GUIDED IN one proceeding but that he proposes to
take the property by sections, occasion serves.
But what control has the Corporation Counsel
over 1t, when tho determination rests wholly with
the Dock Department, and the Corporation Coun-
sci is controlled In his action by any resolution
that Department may pass? If, rs the Corporation
Couilsci would seem To admit, IL would not be
good plan to include all the property III pro-
should
Ought not the Legislature to see that dangerous
power Is committed 10 any public officer or onceIs
Inc Corporation Counsel states That the I'M
proVement Oi the water front has been retarded
Tor years for want Of any authority in the Dock
department TO acquire property for public use.
Is not he aware that Chapter 3 "a OF the laws Of
1871, organizing the Dock Department, ut page
l,237 OF the laws Of that year, contains full
authority for the Dock Department TO acquire any
piece OF property necessary for any public improve
ment determined upon by it, the only difference
between that act and this being that the title
TO the property cannot be Invested IN bulk, but
each owner has hearing with respect to his own
property, and his title cannot be Invested until
the money is paid to the owner following, in that
respect, the law of sl3 and the other laws of
similar character, under which all the property
which has been taken by the city Tor streets and
avenues aud public places for the last seventy years
has been acquired? Is ii necessary in the year OF
our Lord one thousand eight hundred and eighty
eight to throw over all the prccedcnts which were
established by this legislation, and authorize the
city authorities, at once, to deprive the owners
thercfrom while legal proceedings are pending,
whether these proceedings last for ore, or two, or
five years by the simple process of the presentation
Of petition to the General Term of the Supreme
Court, and the fling Of an affidavit OF the Com
issloncrs appointed that they Will discharge their
duties?
But the Corporation Counsel says that upon
the assessment Of the Commissioners being con
firmcd the value of the property, with interest
from the date of the Commissioners appoint
ment will be paid to the owners The pro-
of tp
that statement It. is provided TINT tn Con
missoners shall proceed. after their appointment,
the respective owners, lessees and parties and
persons interested, but they need not ascertain
but may make their award TO unknown owners
il they see fit: when their report is ready it may
be presented to the Supreme Court may be con
firred or sent back 10 new commissioners for re-
yising and correction for n new report and
after the second report Is returned 1t shall be
confirmed, and shall be final and conclusive.
Commissioners no one car tell. If they acquire
all the property i'll one proceeding, it may be
amount Of property shall be ascertaincd, and dur
ing all that time no money can be received, either
as principal or interest or income, by the owner
of any portion of that property.
Before divesting title of the land under this
act, IL would seem also that all existing leases
arc terminated. so that the Dock Department
he received during that period of time. and the
city will Of course be in receipt of a very large |
revenue, which properly should go into the peck
crs during the time this proceeding is pending. /
And then the act provides that the Mayor, !
Aldermen and Commonalty shall, within four
calendar months after the confirmation CT the |
report pay to the parties entitled thereto the
respective sums so estimated and reported re-
spectively and, in default thereof such persons
interest from and after demand thereof, with
costs Of suit There is nothing contained in the
bill about paying interest from the time that
he petition was filed, and any provision OF that
sort would be unlawful because there Is no rule
If law under which an amount not ascertalned
s to bear interest.
1t is not necessary now to consider the gross
Injustice Of giving to the City OF New-i9rk the
ntire income from this property while tho pro
,ecdings arc pending. The injustice is in taking
hat income away from the private owner. The
constitution declares that ri, ate property shall
iot be taken for public use without Just COM
,ensatiOn. 49,
In the case Of Bloodgood VS.. the Mohawk and
Hudson River Railroad Company in 8 Wendell,
he question OF whether railroad companies could
,xercise the power OF eminent domain. 1t was adj
judged by large vote of the Court Of Errors
md appropriate the plaintiffs land to their use,
or the purpose of making a railway thereon until
us damages were appraised and paid or deposited
S there any more justice In the property being
aiken by the City OF NewYorls from a private
Individual for public use until that individual has
,ecn paid therefor.
III III crfdlcS nOrc iuDOr Unc OOrpOrdtlo OouIi-
el and throws more labor upon the Dock Depart
ncnt to ascertain in advance who are the owners
4 the property, q labor assumed every year by
he Commissioners OF Taxes who tax the owners,
that excuse for the oppression which neces-
arily results from turning a man out Of his house
nd lands without paying him dollar, until a
commission of three men shall at their leisure,
scertain how much his property is WORTH
But this bill seems to intend that the first three
zen whom the General Term shall appoint Com
lissioners shall estimate the value of all this
property. of the different pieces Of land with diff
erent interests in the bulthead and with different
wnerships In the piers. No jury of twelve men
Tho have sat in an assault and battery case invoy
ng $50 would he permitted by the court to sit
D two consecutive relating to the same as
ault and battery, but the plaintiff would have q
ight to new jury for tho trial Of each case.
the law will not trust twelve men to render 6
rcond verdict upon substantially the same con-
roversy without the consent of all parties, Is 10 !
ghi or just to say that the value Of this whole a