407 



ing been confirmed by the Supreme Court, was conclusive 

 upon all parties. 



The Commissioners who were appointed to lay an ai jess- 

 ment for benefit derived from the- opening of the park upon 

 property specially benefited thereby, have made a preliminary 

 report thereon. This report having been submitted to public 

 examination, was freely criticised by the parties in interest, and 

 the Assessment Commissioners proceeded to hear the proofs 

 and allegations submitted to them, and are now engaged in re- 

 viewing their report. The aggregate amount proposed to be 

 raised was somewhat larger than had been anticipated, and the 

 fact that considerable sums have recently, in consequence of 

 the decision of the court above referred to, been credited to 

 the city on account of land taken from the park for widening 

 streets, involves the necessity of making some abatement from 

 the amount stated in their report. But from the conceded in- 

 telligence and integrity of the gentlemen composing that com- 

 mission, no doubt is entertained that their final report will 

 prove to be just and fair, as well to the city as to those who, 

 in consequence of special benefit received from their proximity 

 to the park, are reasonably expected to bear some additional 

 share of the public burden. 



The Commissioners regret to find that an effort is being 

 made by some property owners within the proposed district of 

 assessment, to change, if not to nullify, this just provision of 

 law, by either evading the payment of any assessment for 

 benefit, or by reducing it to such an extent as seriously to in- 

 terfere with the arrangement made for the payment of the 

 land at the time when the park was agreed to be established. 

 It can hardly be considered proper at this late day to discuss 

 the policy of the law which directed an assessment for special 

 benefit to be laid. It is, in fact, generally conceded that a 

 reasonable assessment ought to be made ; but it should not be 

 forgotten, by those who propose to change the present rule of 

 assessment, that the first suggestion in the law of 1860, for 

 raising only one twentieth of the price of the land, had refer- 

 ence merely to the very limited expenditure which was then 

 supposed to be necessary for a park, and that even this arrange- 

 ment of the matter was not approved of by our citizens, but 

 was obliged to give way to the compromise act of 1861, under 



