PROSPECT PARK. MEETING OF THOSE OPPOSED TO THE SALE OF THE EAST SIDE. SPEECHES BY MAYOR KALBFLEISCH, W. W. GOODRICH, EDMUND DRIGGS, and others, BROOKLYN: THE "UNION" STEAM PRESSES, COR. FULTON AND FRONT STREETS. 1870. SEYMOUR DURST When you leave, please leave this book Because it has been said "Ever thing comes t' him who waits Except a loaned book." Avery Architectural and Fine Arts Library Gift of Shymour B. Durst Old York Liurary Hon. Demas Barnes : — Brooklyn, March 18, 1870. Sir : At a recent meeting, called at the instance of the Park Commissioners, held at the Academy of Music, and presided over by you, the speakers made many statements touching questions of public economy calculated to mislead the people, and charged that the opposition to a sale of the easterly side of the Park arose solely from a party of speculators located in the Ninth Ward. You did not invite any known opponents to the proposed sale to meet you in discussion of the subject. We propose to hold a meeting at the Academy of Music on Friday, the 25th inst., at eight o'clock, P. M., under the chairmanship of His Honor the Mayor of Brooklyn. We now invite you to meet us at that time and place, in order that the question may then be publicly discussed. As, at your late meeting, no one being invited to answer you, we deem it fair, in extending this invitation, to limit the time which may be occupied by your side to one hour. If, therefore, you will select any gentleman for the purpose, they shall have an opportunity to present your views to the meeting. Yours very respectfully, N. B. MORSE, ALDEN J. SPOONER, SAMUEL McLEAN, THOMAS DAKIN, JOHN B. WOODWARD, H. D. WADE, A. S. BARNES, ALBERT WOODRUFF, H. M. NEEDHAM, JOHN B. STRTTON, JOHN D. LAURENCE, WILLIAM MOSES, J. C. BREVOORT. E. T. BACKHOUSE, EDMUND DRIGGS, GEORGE M. WOODWARD, H. J. CULLEN, M D., CHARLES E. HILL, J. C. HUTCHINSON, M. D.. and many others. Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2014 https://archive.org/details/prospectparkmeetOOkalb PROSPECT PARK. MEETING OF THOSE OPPOSED TO THE SALE OF THE EAST SIDE. A meeting- of tax-payers opposed to the sale of the park land east of Flatbush Avenue was held last evening at the Academy of Music. The audience was about as large as that which was assembled at the meeting in favor of its sale ; that is, the Academy was nearly half filled. Upon the platform were Messrs. Nathan B. Morse, Judge Thompson, Ex- Judge Reynolds, Gen. Thos. S. Deakin, Luther B. Wyman, J. C. Brevoort, A. Woodruff, Jno. W. Hunter, W. W. Goodrich, Edmund Driggs, Edward Rowe, Wm. A. Brush, John A. Goin, Wm. A. Coit, Jno. H. Funk, A. J. Spoon er, George M. Woodward, and about twenty others. On motion of Mr. Edmund Driggs, Mayor Kalbfleisch took the chair. The following named gentlemen were elected officers of the meeting :' Vice-Presidents. — Hon. Nathan B. Morse, Hon. Calvin E. Pratt, Hon. George Thompson, Hon. Jno. Greenwood, Hon. Geo. G. Reynolds, Major-General John B. Woodward, Gen. Thos. S. Daken, Luther B. Wyman, Samuel McLean, J. Carson Brevoort, Albert Woodruff, Henry J. Cullen, M. D., J. C. Hutchinson, M. D., Henry R. Jones, Edmund Driogs, Charles E. Hill, Edw>rd Rowe, Jno. D. Lawrence, Jno. W. Hunter, Albert S. Barnes, Gen. James Jourdan, Jeremiah P. Robinson, James R. Mauley, Jno. A. Monsell, Horace D. Wade, James Hollingshead, Col. Julian Allen, Charles W. Godard, Jho. H. Funk, Wdlliam Coit, Alden J. Spooner, Russell W. Adams, Jno. T. Barnard, Jno. M. Pratt, IJeter Melue, Dr. Wm. Swift, Geo. W. W ungate, Daniel McCabe, Amasa S. Foster, Wm. A. Brush, Abraham Allen, George M. Woodward. /Secretaries. — James Rddgway, Archibald S. Lawrence Jno. A. Goln. 6 KEMAKKS OF MAYOE KALBFLEISCH. We have met here to-night to discuss the propriety of part- ing with a portion of our domain, a part of Prospect Park, or what was originally bought for that purpose ; and the invita- tion to attend has been extended to those who are in favor of its sale, so that the question may be thoroughly understood before we part. In 1868, on the 8th or the 18th of January, a report was made by the Park Commissioners, in which they set forth that they needed some land on the western side of the Park ; but at the same time they stated that they had not came to any conclusion as to the mode and manner in which that portion of the Park lying east of Flatbush avenue should be improved, thus giving the people to understand from the commencement, that it was their intention not to part with it, but to keep it. In the first place then, I believe that good faith with those who live in the vicinity of that part of the Park should prevent its sale. The plea of economy, it is true, may be set up for the sale of the eastern part of the Park, but, gentlemen, if economy had been the rule with the Park Commission, no necessity for that plea would occur to-day. [Applause]. If through their extravagance, and through a desire to continue that extravagance, they want to part with a portion of the Park, let them say so. The Park to-day has cost the citizens of Brooklyn in bonds and obliga- tions, and in money paid nearly $9,000,000. They will tell you that they have expended about $7,000,000 ; but the bonds out-standing to-day amount to $7,238,000 ; in 1865 money was raised to pay interest on the outstanding bonds, and that has been continued annually. In December the amount was somewhere in the neighborhood of $600,000, and the interest upon the interest makes the total amount Eight millions seven hundred and odd thousand dollars. Aside from that the Park Commissioners have received rents, have sold materials, and have received interest on the money de- 7 posited in the bank to their credit. I think that if the matter was thoroughly sifted, the amount would quite come up to $9,000,000. Another thing. From the money appropriated for the improvement of Prospect Park they have been com- pelled to take an amount that was raised for maintenance during the past two months, actually compelled to take from a fund raised for other purposes to pay for improvement ex- penses. The act before the legislature for the sale of this por- tion of the Park provides for its improvement. If it is necessary to raise money, and we can't afford to improve the portion lying west of Flatbush avenue, let them sell the land, if necessary, but don't empower the present Commission, at least to improve it first and then sell it afterwards. [Applause]. The statements that they may make are unreliable, and when, gentlemen, I want it understood — when I speak about the Park Commission, I mean Mr. James S. T. Stranahan, for he is the Commission. [Applause.] Mr. Stranahan in a re- port signed by him sets forth that with $500,000, at one time the whole of the Park could have been improved. He spent $3,000,000 on part of it, and then asked for $2,000,000 more for only a part of the Park, be it remembered, and with an uncertainty of that being sufficient, when the whole was originally to have been improved for $500,000. What reli- ance then is to be placed upon what they tell you about the sale of fthe land east of Flatbush avenue. To show you that they are unreliable in the statements they make, I may tell you that there is another bill before the Legislature for the improvement of Tompkins Park. I will read it that you may understand what these gentlemen are at. " And the said Commissioners or their successors are here by authorized and directed to improve the Tomkins Park in a style corresponding with the other city Parks, at an expense not exceeding $25,000." Now, then, Tompkins Park is below the level, and illy • adapted for Park purposes. It is within a fraction of eight acres in extent. The report of the Commissioners from the last report shows an expenditure of over $19,000 on Carrol 8 Park. Now, you are all aware that before the Commissioners got hold of that Park it had a good and substantial iron fence round it. And it was laid out— it is less than two acres in extent — and yet these gentlemen, after telling you in their report (Page 30). that they expended $19,000 upon that Park, tell you that they can improve Tompkins Park, which is eight acres in extent, for §25,000. They have expended upon about 300 acres of Prospect Park — not more than that — $3, 000,000. How does that agree with the idea that they can improve Tompkins Park for $3,000 an acre, they having ex- pended on Prospect Park, which is better adapted for Park purposes, $10,000 or $15,000 an acre. The only reason that I can assign is that it is — in the language of the gentlemen here the other night — that it is in the land of pigs and poverty. Or take Washington Park. Fifteen years ago it was in a better condition than it is at the present day. Could Wash- ington Park have not been improved for $3,000 an acre? Well, they have spent $3,000 an acre over it already, and have not begun to beautify or improve it yet. Another rea- son why the present Commission should not be continued in power is because they do not obey the laws that are enacted for their government. And here I may say that every law relating to Park matters is concocted between Mr. Jas. S. T. Stranahan and his legal adviser, Mr. John N. Taylor ; and the Commissioners, though they are only the creatures of these laws, don't obey them. Look at this fact. In 1867 one provision was made for the improvement of Washington Park- The law provided that they shoud put round it, from moneys to be raised for that purpose, a substantial iron fence, and the work was to be finished on or before the first day of January, 1868. Has any gentleman here seen any thing of an iron fence round Washington Park ? I have not. And that was more than two years ago. The act was mandatory, but they have not obeyed it. But aside from these considerations, there is a stil] greater danger. I don't know whether it was an oversight on the part of my predecessor or not ; but' it strikes me if I 9 had been Mayor when the Legislature had only gramed au- thority for the issue of $500,000 worth of bonds, that I would never have put my name down for 100,000. [Loud ap- plause.] It was some time after I had been in office again when 1 looked over these laws. The original law provided that bonds should be issued and the money raised and paid out of the City Treasury upon drafts for work done and ex- penses incurred by the Park Commission. This law was no^ obeyed at all. I can't tell who is to blame for it, but I sup- pose the parties who did not attend to the duties imposed upon them. The mode and manner by which these bonds were sold, and the money was raised was the simple requisi- tion by the Park Commissioners upon the Comptroller for $200,000 or $300,000, as the case might be The bonds were then issued and sold, and the proceeds were deposited in bank to the credit of the Park Commission, and they drew upon it as they pleased. If it is necessary to spend $2,000,000 more to finish Prospect Park, let us at least put some sort of check upon these parties who now spend our money so extrav- agantly. [Applause.] The Common Council, a body elected by the people themselves, cannot spend $100 without letting the people know through the papers what it is for ; and they Can't give the work to some brother, or some wife's brother, some wife's uncle, or some other favorite friend, but they must advertise for proposals, and give the contract to the low- est bidder. [Applause and laughter.] Work upon the Park is gi^en to favorites. They go to Boston and Maine, and all over the earth almost, to give the work to some friend here or some friend there. It mav be said: You are one of the Commissioners yourself, ex- qfficio. I am ; but I am a good deal like the figure-head upon an old-fashioned brig — I may be some ornament ; but I am of very little use. During last fall, the Park money was expended, and 1 wanted the Commission — or Mr. Stranahan — to discharge everybody upon the Park, except such force as was absolutely necessary for the protection of the property. Mr. Low, a very kindly sort of gentleman when he has a 10 mind to be, drew up a resolution for the discharge of the Park force, and I offered an amendment to this effect: "Except such force as is necessary for the protection of the property." There were engineers drawing $S,000 a year, and some others drawing §2,500 or §3,000 a year; and we thought, if the laborers were discharged, that we might as well discharge some of those who were drawing the most money. But the engineers were kept on, and the excuse was made that they were completing the report to be handed in in January. And these individuals are still on the Park, with not a dollar in the treasury to pay their salaries. But they are there ; and when I complained ot this at the meeting of the Commis- sioners, I was met with the resolution — that only such force as was necessary should be kept at work on the Park. Now I can't see, for the life of me, how engineers, who are half the time in Chicago, or somewhere else out of the city, are per- sons necessary for the protection of the Park property. [Ap- plause.] One of them went to Europe some time ago, and they paid him his salary while he was on a three months' leave of absence, and a thousand dollars besides, to get his little nick-nacks with; and one of the Commissioners, who was in ill health, went too — I suppose, to keep him company. Don't you think, if they had exercised ordinary economy, that with the money already raised they might have improved that portion of the Park which lies east as well as of that portion they have got through with west. An objection is made to having an avenue run through the Park. There is no objection to having railroads through the park in Phila- delphia. If they had taken the money they have spent for bridges, where they were not necessary, they could have used it for erecting bridges over this street ; they would have looked just as beautiful, and more attractive, than those they have put in the western part of the Park. There is another thing which I might as well allude to now : The western portion of the Park is intended, judging from the manner in which it has been laid out, for gentlemen who have styltsh horses and beautiful turnouts. There is 11 another class of people who have to pay their share of the expense of this Park, who, perhaps, would like to enjoy themselves in their own way, where they could sit down after their walk and look over the surrounding country and enjoy the beautiful scenery. If the western part of the Park is to be chiefly for carriages, let the working men from the region of "poverty and pigs" have that portion of it east of Flatbush Avenue. I feel with some warmth upon this subject, and perhaps I have said more than I ought as the presiding officer of this meetiug. There are some gentlemen here who will take up the subject and discuss it, whether it is right or not to sell that part of the park east of Flatbush Avenue, and then I suppose they will be willing to hear those who are on the other side of the question. In order to arrive at a full understanding of the question both sides should be heard, and I think it was wrong on the part of the meeting held here the other night that only one side was heard. [Applause.] Mr. Nathan B. Morse read the following resolutions : Whereas, It is proposed by the Park Commissioners that a portion of the lands acquired by the city and set apart for a Park easterly of Flatbush avenue, should be sold, and they have prepared an act for that purpose, to present to the Legis- lature of the State : Resolved, 1. That we earnestly protest and remonstrate against the sale of any part of the land acquired by this city for a public Park, and especially to a sale of the portion east of Flatbush avenue, which forms one of the most distinguish- ing features of the Park, and from which its very name is derived. 2. That good faith and the interests of the city alike demand that the land thus proposed to be sold, be immediately laid out and used for Park purposes, and if the present Commissioners and the architects employed by them are incapable of devising 12 a plan for the improvement of this land, we would recommend that they give place to others who not only have the capacity to design a proper plan for that purpose, but the will to exe- cute it. 3. That the land in question is in the line of the present and prospective growth of the city, and is already the centre of a large population, which will rapidly increase when that part of the Park is laid out and improved. That from its highest point a view is obtained of the cities of New York and Brooklyn and their harbors, a large portion of New Jersey, Staten Island and Long Island, and of the Atlantic Ocean in the distance, and it was this peculiar and desirable feature w T hich commended the selection of that particular section of land to the originators of the Park and the citizens of Brooklyn in general, as appears by the first annual report of the Commissioners of the Park. 4. That we are unalterably opposed to all trading and speculating by the city in real estate as impolitic and unfair to the owners of land acquired for public use; and that nei- ther public necessity nor public sentiment calls for the sale of land taken and set apart for a Park, and to the use of which for that purpose, and for that purpose only, the good faith of the city stands pledged. 5. That no more City Bonds should be issued for Park purposes. 6. That a copy of the foregoing resolutions, signed by the officers of this meeting be transmitted to every Representative and Senator at Albany, and that they be requested to use all honorable efforts to carry them into effect. They were adopted with only one dissentient voice. On hearing the announcement of the vote, Mr. N. B. Morse remarked — " And he sympathizes with poverty and pigs." REMARKS OF HON. W. W. GOODRICH. Hon. W. W. Goodrich was then introduced. He said that he considered it an evidence of the healthy condition of the body politic that so large and respectable an audience could be collected to discuss a subject so dull as the taxes of the city, without any appeal to what one of the speakers at the Park Commissioners' meeting, a few evenings since, denomi- nated the " pigs and poverty " of the Ninth Ward, a meeting gathered without the unauthorized use of names, without the circulation of deceptive petitions concealing its real ob- jects, such as were circulated by the Park Commissioners within the last thirty days. What 1 say to you to-night I shall place under three heads : Whether the sale of this Park land would be honorable. ; Whether it is lawful ; and Whether, in any view, it is expedient. In 1859 a number of gentlemen were appointed by the Legislature to select and locate a park ; they were taken from all parts of the city, and represented all classes of citizens and their various opinions upon park questions. The park was to be selected with reference to thtfprospective growth of the city of Brooklyn. No better citizens are in the Park Commission to-day than were in that Commission. They carefully ex- amined the various places which were recommended to them for selection, and finally made their report to the Legislature of 1860, in which they recommended and selected a plot of ground on the east and west sides of Flatbush Avenue in almost equal proportions — 137 acres on the east, and about 190 acres on the west. The Legislature of that year passed an act appointing Com- 14 inissioners who, it will be observed, were not recommended by any representative body, or selected by the people. The act also provided for the taking and laying out of the lands. The law, of which they were the creatures, directed the im- provement of the whole Park — whether then, or a year, or two years afterwards, I don't undertake to say. The Park Commissioners expressed their satisfaction with the plot selected. In 1861 they issued a pamphlet, and we have been favored with one annually ever since that time ; a pamphlet which, in later years, has been adorned with photographs and engravings, which are well enough in their way, but have little to do with the Park. In 1862 and 1863 the Commis- sioners again approved, endorsed, and expressed their satisfac- tion with this easterly side of the Park, and its adaptability to Park purposes; and so again in 1864 and 1865. In 1865, however, after they had issued their report, a change seemed to have come over the spirit of their dream. Perhaps a slight review of the history of the Commission may give us some light on the subject, and the causes of this sudden change of views. After the present head of the Park Commission came into place, there became manifest a gradual elimination and weeding out from the Park Commission of every gentleman who did not reside in a certain section of the city. Then it was discovered by the Commissioners that the land on the easterly side was not adapted to park purposes. But there's a higher power than the Park Commission, even the people, who have, over and over again, expressed their satisfaction with this beautiful side of the Park. It has beautiful glens and sequestered nooks, and one of the finest outlooks, while, from its highest elevation, your vision stretches to the north far up to the Palisades on the Hudson, and to Staten Island westward, with a view of the ocean to the south and east. This is my argument, I insist that the Legislature and the people having fixed and defined the boundaries of that Park to be what they are now, public faith, public decency, and the hon. or of the cit} r , demand that they should be unchanged. [Ap- 15 plause.] In 1868, in 128 blocks in the Eighth Ward, towards Greenwood, there were built 285 houses. In an equal num- ber of blocks in the Ninth Ward, gentlemen, (and that is only a portion of the city, which lies adjacent to the east- erly side,) there were built upwards of TOO houses. The valuation of the buildings thus erected in the Eighth Ward was $364,000, and those in the Ninth Ward over a million. Thus, it is manifest, that many people se- lected these localities as their homes. Why ? Because the attractiveness of the Park drew towards it a good class of citizens. Many invested, without actually erecting houses, in lots, or in loans to others upon lots. If you sell this land, you reduce the security by reducing the value of these mort- gaged lots. I have here on the table an affidavit from a gentleman in the city of New York, that he, believing the boundary of the Park to be fixed, recently purchased two lots in the Ninth Ward, facing Washington Avenue, and paid $7,800 for them. Remove the Park, gentlemen, and these lots are worth §1,000. He is not a speculator. He is not connected with that " gang of Ninth Ward speculators " who are said to be "kicking up a row" in the city of Brooklyn about the Park. There are many of my own friends, who have purchased land in the immediate vicinity of the Park, who, if it was removed, would sustain a similar loss. Would gentlemen who own lots facing the Park on Ninth Avenue think it fair to remove the line from Ninth to Tenth Avenue? Would they think it good faith ? Would purchasers of prop" erty on Fifth Avenue, New York, facing Central Park, deem it good faith to have the park line removed back to Sixth Avenue. Let it once be understood that such fluctuations of property are likely to occur in Brooklyn, and what capitalists will invest their money here ? Have any one of you had occa- sion, recently, to secure a loan upon your house ? You used to pay one per cent, brokerage. How much have you had to pay within the last year? Every lawyer knows that capitalists avoid the city. The public faith should be like Caesar's wife, above suspicion. Now, I say, that although a thousand dollars 16 to this or that man makes little difference to the general pub- lic, it is a wrong to take it without compensating him. The city had better pay millions of dollars than to violate its honor and public pledge. Mr. Yan Cott said the other night that he would dismiss the Park with this simple epigram : " If the land could not be sold, it would not be." The Eagle well said, that this was either the ruse of a lawyer, or that he could not answer the statements that have been made on our side of the question. Let me, for example sake, illustrate this point by a somewhat analogous case having reference to the rights and responsibili- ties of a private citizen : I own, for instance, one hundred acres of land, which are comparatively valueless; but seeking to improve its value, I map out thirty or forty acres in the center of it for a park, and sell the adjacent lots. After ten years I conclude that it is not a good speculation — close the park, and attempt to sell it. Do you suppose the law would allow me to do so, when I had induced persons to purchase lots on the theory that the park was to remain, and when I had pledged myself, in issuing my map, that it should be a park for all time? I am aware that there is a difference between the cases, but the principle is the same. The public should not be allowed to do that which is forbidden to the citizen. More than this, by the act which created the Park, the Commissioners received authority to issue the city bonds to pay for and improve the Park. Those bonds were issued. In the act the whole area of the Park was pledged for their re- demption. The bonds have gone broadcast. Some are out of the country and others are here and there all over the country. Is it right to attempt to withdraw, even seemingly, from the operation of that "pledge, a portion of this land, and thus depreciate the apparent value of the bonds. That was what the Commission attempted to do last winter. And this year they have very wisely sought to obviate the objection by providing for a sinking fund in the sale of this land ; but they cannot do it, even in that way. 17 Every bond is a lien upon every lot in the plot. Who will buy it under such circumstances? I don't care if John Jacob Astor or A. T. Stewart, or any one else guaranteed the col- lection of these bonds, capitalists will not come in and build on land where there's a lien ? The legal point upon which I place the utmost stress is this : My friend Kinsella satirically said, day before yester- day, when the subject was up for consideration before the Senate Committee, of municipal affairs, that the bar of this city was divided — Mr. Goodrich was on one side, and all the rest of the bar on the other. I believe he said he had found no lawyer who agreed with me. I think he talks only on one side, though he sometimes talks on two sides in the Eagle. The Eagle of six months ago and the Eagle of to-day being very different affairs. "When the Commissioners took this land in I860, they took an easement, as it is called — that is, the right to use the land forever for a public park and for that only. That was all there was any necessity of taking. It is all the railroads take ; it is all the State takes when it takes land for a canal, and can we imagine anything more permanent than that. They paid the owners, but the owners never deeding the property willingly, you will perceive that the Commission took it by the right of eminent domain. My friend Britton stated very clearly the other night what the right of eminent domain was. It is the power (and a dangerous power it is) which authorizes the State to take private property for public use only, and then only upon compensation to the owner. So dangerous is this power that the law not only limits it, trammels it, and binds it by the closest guards, but the common law, natural right, back of and behind all constitutions, provides that private property shall not be taken under any circumstances for private pur- poses. Almost the first words in the Declaration of Independence relate to protection and security of private property as well as of persons and life. T J8 \ 1 jThus\^y the, Mrslv poorer and f lic purposes, rTherethey stood for foiir years. In their report fqr /7 the present year, they say that the bonds which had been issued for , the payment of this land were avoided- by capitalists. Capitalists said if we come to foreclose these bonds we shall have to sell this property. But the instant we, under our mortgage, sell this property,. it is diverted from a public use to a private use, and will revert to the former owners. They said to the Legislature in 1865, f You must give us an act that will give the city the fee simple absolute of the property and ultimate right ! " ; They, therefore, acquired again by this right of eminent domain the fee sim- ple in 1865.. possibly they did .and, possibly ^ — if they had taken that property and used it I don't know that they would not have acquired a title which would have enabled them to give a good title to the fee of the property when the public necessity which required the taking for a public use had passed away— I do not say that I believe this to be a sound or cor- rect doctrine, but as the Court of Appeals of this State have so decided I must respectfully bow to it, until time and op- portunity are given to review that opinion in .the Supreme C -urt of, the United States. But in this case the facts are very different, and the case of Hey ward in the Xth of New York Eeports upon which our opponents rely, has no application whatever , to the present case. That was a case where land was taken by eminent domain, was used for the public purpose for which it was taken, the act itself authorizing the sale when such use should have ceased, and in course of time the necessity for the use ceasing, the land was sold. That .is far different from this case. Here the land has never been used at all for a park. . . I grant that the Legislature of the State is the Supreme judge upon the existence of this necessity, and that when it said in I860 that a necessity existed which required the taking of an casement for the 'public benefit, it was the, sole and final judge *of that necessity and that that judgment is not open to review in the courts. 96 • "When the Legislature of 1S65 said it was necessary to take the fee although I am un'able to discover any necessity for the taking of a fee for the purpose of a public park, yet I acqui- esce in even that — but you will observe that the power which makes the law can unmake it provided private rights have not intervened ; and therefore I say that, although former Legislatures may have declared the existence of this public necessity, yet if the present or any future Legislature pass an act authorizing the sale of the land without its ever having: been' used as a park, they in effect and by implication repeal the declaration of -1865', that a public necessity KVEROxfeted, and tlrat upon a sale the land will revert to the' former cfifrhei&. 'r} ' J i ' ornottwitf a I rtoqu won n* ttou ->For the first time in all this controversy we heard a clay or two since at Albany the real reason why the Commissioners desired to acquire the fee in 1865, and their reason is a proof that the right of eminent domain under which they are act- ing,- is a harsh and dangerous one, and that there is need of so confining its exercise that it shall not be used to enable private property to be taken from one person and transferred to another. . c, - '-Mr. Taylor, Counsel of the Park Commissioners, stated that in 1865 the -Commissioners desired to obtain other lands, ' and in-order to save expense consulted counsel upon the question of the sale of the easterly section ; they were ad- vised that they could not sell the land as it had been taken for a -park only, and that if the_y should sell it would revert to the original owners. As a means therefore Of obtaining'a title which would enable them to sell they were advised to obtain tlie passage of the Act of 1865, and they did this for- the express purpose of obtaining the fee and then selling the laiictel ■ ^ - •-' - oi b§ Jr .,_ a vJr Let us see what other members of -the -Bar have- thought of tWe 'question. -■• - r • - - Oh the westerly side of the- Central Park in New York is a^ort of excrescence, called-Manhattan square. It was taken nfifby '-yeafe : -ago for a p'ubKc-'park — t aken by the- ■ right- of - i 20 eminent domain — taken just as these 137 acres of Prospect Park were taken, and like them, lav unused for many years. It was then determined to sell the land and put the money in the public treasury ; but there was another stupid lawyer who said it could not be done, and that was Ex-Corporation Counsel and Judge Bronson. to whom the question was referred. He decided that unless used for park purposes the land must revert to the original owners ; and Manhattan square stands to-da}- a monument to the correctness of the opinion. There is a certain eminent Judge, formerly of the Supreme Court of this district, who formerly owned land which was taken by the Park Commissioners under these acts. A gen- tleman now upon this platform recently offered to give him 25 per cent, of the amount he had received for his land for a transfer of this same shadowy right of reversion, and the judge refused the offer. Should the land be sold it will be found that every man who buys a foot of the land, buys a lawsuit, and who will buy at any fair price under these circumstances I Mr. Goodiich here referred to the cases in 2nd and 20th Barbour's Reports as sustaining his views : And now. who will buy a law suit \ Call together your capitalists. Bring the whole city together and let the Com- missioners stand up and describe the beauty of the lots and surroundings, and offer them for sale undei an act like this, and some private individual stands up and says, " I want to let whoever buys this land know that he will have to buy a lawsuit." How much will be bid for a law suit, if you are fond of litigation \ Some time ago I had occasion, in the course ot my business, to take the title of some property for an English client. I took it in my own name, and seeking ibr a loan upon it applied to some Insurance Companies for a loan and their counsel examined and pronounced the title good. Having perfected the title, I put up the property for sale and sold it in parcels to four different individ- uals. Subsequently one of these sold to a fifth, so that there came to be live lawyers engaged in searching the 21 title. One of these gentlemen suggested a little flaw in the title. I didn't think there was anything in it, of course. I told him he must take the title. But these four others came in and., said there was a flaw in the title. They had not made the examination, but they trusted the first lawyer. "But why don't .you examine it for yourselves?" I said. They replied, " W» want a marketable title, and if any law- yer rejects or condemns or questions the title we cannot take it." They refused it because they did not want to buy a law- suit. [Applause]. There is not a lawyer in this audience but will do the same thing when this question comes up. It is an illustration of the necessity of having a clear, marketable, un- disputed title when you want to sell real estate. I come back to my old question, Who wants to buy a lawsuit ? We have got none too much land in our Park to-day. It is not the question whether we shall purchase land, but whether, having the land in our possession we had not better keep it ? Now, how much will it bring ? There are 137 acres. The Commissioners want to keep the reservoir. I pass over the very evident question of its beauty and its usefulness. The Commis- sioners want to save 40 acres. That leaves 7 acres. They have laid out IT acres in unusually broad boulevards. We asked the Commissioners for their maps for the purpose of explaining the matter here to-night, but they did not see fit to let us have them. These 97 acres contains 1067 lots. 'Competent engineers in this city have estimated that it will cost on the average 81,000 a lot to put that land in condition to sell. That is $1,000,000. The Commissioners have asked the Legislature for power to raise at any one time $100,000 to do it. If it costs them $10,000 an acre to improve land which they declare was naturally a park — which is enough money to put a Brussels carpet over the whole surface of the park — what will it cost, under their supervision, to build up from a depth of fifty feet, as it is in some places in Washington Avenue ? There is another problem. The Commissioners could have contracted for the excavation of the skating lake at 30 cent . a cubic yard. It cost them 70 cents by days' work. What will lots sell for ? Well, they will, when prepared fty the Commissioners for sale, have cost us a thousand dollars already, besides what we have paid for the land originally; Who will even bid a thousand dollars for a lot and a lawsuit ? [Applause]. The city lives by its revenues--~its ever-increasing val- uation. The Commissioners say that the^ lands lying near the Park have increased thirty-three millions of dollars' in value. The taxes on that' valuation are enough to pay for the Park. I am in favor of the- park. I am in favor of the whole Park. [Applause], All along Washington' Avenue is a great frontage to-day, and in -time- those lots will be worth $10,000 ; yes, $20,000 each. The people of • the city should be ever , ready for and favorable to public improvements of all kinds, provided they are carried out economically. Destroy this frontage and the lots will fall - from $10,000 to $1,500. But the Commissioners say, u If you 1 draw in your frontage, we don't see but you will have just as much trontage as before." ....... They propose to keep a strip all along Fiatbush avenue- 262 feet wide, on which to erect schools, public buildings, etc. 1 ' Then those lots would have no frontage on the park, but would be only back lots to public buildings. What would they be worth, according to the Commissioners' plan, as shown by their map. They propose to destroy all present frontage of lofts on the Park except on the Plaza. Now, let us see what they estimate. We sometimes com- plain of these Commissioners, not; because they take our money but because they do not take care of our money. They^ allow one gentleman to run the whole Commission. They don't take our money and use it with the same precaution that they would their own. There are gentlemen' in this' Commission to whom we could afford to pay $50,000 a year if they would take it in their own hands and give their time an r 3 personal attention to it. Last year the Commission wanted two millions of dollars for the further improvement of the easterly section • of the A> Park, and yet the completion of it had 'been proposed by other parties for $625,000. They now want one million. We have had a bill in Albany to reorganize this Commission, and I am glad to say that it has been reported favorably by the Assem- bly Committee to-day, after a careful hearing. ["Great ap- plause]/ I am going to close with just one illustration of the economical ideas of the Commissioners. The Commissioners wanted 'water. They went to the Water Commission and said : " Gentlemen, we want you to supply us -with water." The Water Commission wanted $2,500 a year, and the Park Commission would not pay it. The city taxes, you will observe, would not have been in- creased thereby. It was like taking money out of your left hand pocket and putting it into your right. They would not pay it, &nd they have commenced to dr^in Long Island. [Laughter and applause.] They went out under a. hill and got a quicksand. They built an iron rim, and on that rim a brick wall fifty feet in diameter. Then they dug out the sand from the centre and let the wall down —after getting pretty well down it broke and then they built another inside. Then some one said : " Why didn't you build a ten foot well, it would have given you just as much water ? " I don't care about that. It cost them — I don't know what. They don't tell us. They give in their annual report minute details of other expenses, but not what that well cost. Engineers tell me that the well has cost over a hundred thousand dollars. Some of the Commissioners are here and they can tell us if they will, I should like to hear. [A voice, " speak up."] My guess is that it has cost nearer two, hundred thousand, including everything necessary to put it in running order. What will be the expense to us year by year of this well ? How many thousand dollars will it cost per year to run it, including interest, wear and tear, and salaries and supplies ? And when they have done with it they might have taken $2,500 out of one pocket and put it in the other, and had just as much benefit from it. s It was stated last winter and never denied, that there was a 24 majority of only one in this Commission in favor of the sale of the Park. For four years they have asked the Legislature for permission to sell, and for four years it has been refused. For two consecutive years the Common Council has voted unan- imously against the sale of the easterly section of the Park, and every year the legislative delegation from Brooklyn has worked against this sale. We are stigmatized as a gang of speculators located in the Tsinth Ward. Read the call for this meeting. Read the names of the Vice-Presidents here to-night. Decide for yourselves whether they are speculators. If itwere not for the respectability of the several gentlemen composing the Board of Commissioners, they would have been changed years ago. A gentleman said to me the other day : " There's one reason why I don't think this Park should be sold. Providence has put upon real' estate one character- istic — it cannot be run away with, and if it is put into money it may be.' 1 The speaker [who received frequent applause] closed his address with congratulations upon the liberal attendance, its respectability, and the fact that it had not been drummed together. The Chairman — Gentlemen, the other side of the question will now be heard. Mr. A. A. Low — [from the audience] — I would ask the gen- tleman who has just spoken, on one particular point, a ques- tion. He is so well informed on all others, I will not mention them. Tn respect to the well, without going into figures, let me ask the gentleman what it costs the city of Brooklyn for its twenty millions of gallons a clay. I will not say what the well is capable of supplying, but if it supplies one million gal- lons a day, I think it is very cheap at $100,000. I under- stood the Board of Water Commissioners to say that the present supply was nearly exhausted. I hold that it is a mat- ter of economy, then, that the well supplying 1,000,000 gallons per day, should cost only $100,000. Again, there is a differ, ence between the Park Commission and the Water Commis- sion. The Park, it is well understood, is used and maintained not by the eastern section of the city alone, but by the first twelve Wards of the city. [Loud applause]. And when the first twelve Wards take $25,000 out of their pockets they give it to the whole city. Mr. Low's remarks were subject to disagreeable inter- ruptions from various parts of the house, and an occasional ejaculation from the stage, but the applause which followed them gave evidence that there was a large infusion in the audience of those in favor of the sale. When Mr. Low finished he withdrew from the room, much to the regret of the presiding officer and others who desired him to occupy the platform. Others hissed. Others said let him go. The Chairman arose and said : Gentleman, Mr. Low has made one mistake, and it is this. The Eastern District pays the same towards its maintenance as the Western. The well was incapable of pumping a mil- lion gallons*'a day. Question from a Citizen — How much does the Eighteenth W ard pay towards the Park ? The Chairman — The Eighteenth Ward, in which I am a tax-payer, pays its proportion of the Park. The original cost ot the Park was intended to be laid on the twelve wards, but that assessment was never made Another law was pas- sed providing for another assessment upon the whole city, which was never attended to. Then one was passed under which the Commissioners are now acting upon any lands benefited. A voice — Who owned the Clarkson farm \ Will the gen- tleman please state what was the valuation and what was given for the property sold ? The Chairman — That is what I cannot tell. They call me an old rat, but I cannot follow up all the holes and crevices. Gentlemen, it is getting late. Another citizen — If they have the power to sell this pro m perty of £he Park is there any security for property anywhere in the citt*t>f Brooklyn I There are men here whose property w T as tak^ijT from them, and they are not satisfied. Some thought it was a godsend. No one was ever satisfied — (ex- cept Litchfield, a voice responded.") and the speaker subsided. The Chairman — The Commissioners for appraising the land for those little Parks on the hill, awarded to the different owners a certain amount of the money. They were dissatis- * tied and the award was increased. A Dr. Squib who owned some property, would not take any more than the original award, and thought it fully up to the value of the land. This is the only instance where property has ever been taken from any one that I ever knew to be satisfied. The Chairman then introduced Mr. Edmund Driggs. Who said it was too late to enter into any long disuession of this subject. In fact, it '^was entirely unnecessary. His Honor the Mayor and Mr. Goodrich had gone over the ground so. fully that it seemed unnecessary, but he wished to recite a few facts on the subject of buying law suits in the event of the com - missioners having power to sell this property. Last week, said the speaker, I met Mr. Wm. D. Murphy, a large property holder in the cities of New York and Brooklyn. He was in company with one of the editors of the World newspaper. Said he, "Mr. Driggs, I understand you are about going to aid in the defeat of the passage of a law to sell a part of your Park grounds in Brooklyn. I told him it was so, and said "I wish you would go with me. You own much property in the vicinity of the Park, and have had property taken from you by the commissioners." "I will not go," said he ; "If I should, I would urge the passage of a law for sale of the ground. I have been opposed to it, but I have become converted." "What has changed your opinion ?" said I. "Why." said he. "if they attempt to sell that property I will take good care that I get possession of the property they got from me without my consent, or I will get my money back." Mr Driggs continued his remarks upon some of the points already given at length by preceeding speakers for twenty minutes, after which the meeting adjourned.