New-York tribune., 1895-05-22
MAYOR STRONG AGAINST THEM.
HE DIsAprRovEs TiIF Jury Duty ANp nNni.Ey
BRIDGE BILLS

He DIsAprRovEs Tnr JURY Duty ANp HARLEM
BRIDGE BILLS.
Albany. May 2l.-Mayor Strong. of Now-York has
disapproved OF Assemslyman Niles's biz providing
that the Commissioner OF Jurors in Ncw-York cry.
In preparing his list Of trial Jurors shall take FIRST
from the names OF citizens who dll not at the
preceding general election. and until the list o. all
such persons liable TO serve trial Jurors is
hausted he shall not include In MS list he name II
any person registered as having voted AZ the occ-
ton In his letter Of d!sapproval. the Mayor says
The above ntioned bill is returned withou, ap-
provaL ! In hearty accord with any enleavOr
on the part OF the Legislature to inc-case the mum
Der and efficiency Of jury service. The great
number OF exemptions and the disnc!na,ion on
the part Of many OF our citizens TO perform public
duty by serving jurors justify legislative action
The present blll. however, does not meet the re
| qurements OF the casa 1t would, believe. in fact
reduce the number OF citizens eligible for Jury duty
and 1t imposes upon the Commlssloner of Jurors
duty that it would be impossible FOR him 10 liter
the name OF person who failed to vote and could
OF a strict interpolation which nigh. he construed
into permitting the name OF one man who d;d & -,
did vote Again. there Is substantial unanimi'y
department 10 the effect tha; the BIZ would largely
reduce the number Of available Intelligent jurors.
The Mayor has a.so disapproyei Assembly man
Reinhards bill amending the laws OF 1872 making
provision for the construction Of drawbridge over
the Harlem River in New-York city. and for the
removal Of the present bridge a. Third-ave In his
letter OF dsapproval the Mayor says:
This bill originally drawn, was unohjec'lon- or
abe its purpose and intention being 10 invest the
title In the land necessary for the approaches 10
the bridge on June |. IN order that the contractor
might be able to 30 ahead and complete this WORK.
and thus facilitate the time for ;he completion or
this important improvement. In the course of ts
passage through the Legislature the bill has been
ane nded and is objectionable IN several par
ticulars:
First il provides that The commissioners must
make separate reports OF the land 10 be included
within the single approach TO the bridge or within
one block along the l!nc Of the approach. This
bv piecemeal and will very greatly delay the pro-
ceeding and embarrass the Conn sci 70 the Cor
poration in mis- defence OF the Inter, Of the city.
MANY acts have bee: adopted in the past author
iz!ng the commissioners In heir discretion, TO
make separate reports. and such bills have been
| unobjeciionablc. and often have achieved worthy
PURPOSES but TO compel. the present bill does,
| a separate report 10 each block. and TO forbid
| the commits soncrs going ahead and taking any test-
mony az 10 any other block. IS Objectionable and
1 dangerous.
The second objection is that inercs' upon the
awards shall run at the rate or per cent from
the time o. the appointment OF the commissioners
OF appraisal These commissioners were appointed
| IN February 1891 and up 10 the present time.
so far az very large proportion OF the property
| is concerned enjoyment thereof has not been
affected by he proceedings thus far taken. Hence,
| the enjoyment Of the property not having beea
affected by the proceedings the payment OF Interest
| from the date Of the appointment OF the commits
sioners IL mere bonus or gratuty 10 the property
| owners and is entirely unjustihable
| The Mayor has returned disapproved Assembly
man Foley's HI providing for the relief OF Mart
| r Bates IN damage suit against New-York