By a special act (chapter 43 of the Laws of 1867) the Jordan Academy was "constituted an academical department in free school district No. 4 in the town of Elbridge," "in the manner provided by section 24, title 9 of chapter 555 of the Laws of 1864;" which latter is the general law passed that year to revise and consolidate the acts relating to public instruction.

The Jordan Academy ceased to be an independent institution and passed into the charge of the board of education of the district. It was, among other things, provided by this special act of 1867, that the board of education of the district might fix the terms of tuition in said academical department, within certain limits.

But by the subsequent passage of an act (chap. 406, Laws of 1867) to amend the acts relating to public instruction, and commonly known as the free school law, the privilege of requiring payment from the pupils was taken from all departments (academical included) of the public schools. Section 26 of the lastnamed act reads: "Hereafter all moneys now authorized by any special acts to be collected by rate bill for the payment of teachers' wages, shall be collected by tax and not by rate bill."

From the operation of this general provision the Jordan Academy, so called, but in fact the school district to which it belongs, seeks now to be exempted. It would remain in full connection with the general public school system, get its share of the public school moneys annually distributed, retain the power of local taxation for the support of its academical department, and yet be at liberty to require payment for tuition from some of its pupils. The teachers employed in and the pupils attending this academical department of free school No. 4 of Elbridge, are reported by the board of education of the district to the department of public instruction as common school teachers and pupils,

and are consequently counted towards the pro rata share of public money to that district.

The bill is without precedent, and would establish a bad one.

JOHN T. HOFFMAN.

ALBANY, May 4, 1869.

To the Assembly:

I return, without approval, the bill entitled "An act to amend an act in relation to a certain highway and highway taxes in the county of Hamilton," passed April 22, 1867, as amended by chapter 722 of the Laws of 1868.

I find that the act which this bill proposes to amend directed the Comptroller to pay over certain moneys to the special commissioners named in the act. Out of these moneys the commis sioners were authorized to retain certain sums as compensation for their services, their accounts "to be first audited, allowed, and certified by said Comptroller, upon a detailed statement of such services, duly verified by the commissioner, claiming such compensation, and upon such other evidence as the Comptroller may require."

It appears that in 1867 the commissioners then in office filed with the Comptroller their report of moneys received and of their charges and alleged disbursements. The Comptroller refused, and still refuses, to allow the accounts so rendered. This bill, without making any provision for investigation or reëxamination, directs the Comptroller to pay these claims in the form and to the amount presented, and at the same time strikes out the provision in the original act for the future auditing of similar ac

counts.

I trust the Legislature will agree with me that it is not wise policy to take from the Comptroller the power to audit and adjust these accounts. In cases of this kind it is right that the money should be expended under a sense of reponsibility on the part of the commissioners to some supervising authority, and the Comptroller seems to be the proper officer to exert control in such

matters.

The bill, in one of the new sections proposed, viz., section 8, confers extraordinary powers on the special commissioners. It provides for a tax upon certain towns, for a road which runs wholly through other towns. It requires the commissioners of highways in several towns (through some of which the road does not pass) to assess all the highway tax upon lands owned by nonresidents in their respective towns for the benefit of this road. It requires them to deliver the warrants for the collection of these taxes to the special commissioners, who are, by the bill, made overseers of highways for the purpose. The section further provides that, if the ordinary commissioners of highways in the several towns do not, within a certain period, deliver such warrant, then the special commissioners of highways may assess the non-resident tax in the several towns, and, as overseers of highways, collect it. If the commissioners of highways do deliver an assessment-roll and warrant, and these special commissionersdeem it defective, they are authorized, as said commissioners, to revise and correct it at discretion.

By another new section, proposed as section 9, the special commissioners are authorized to borrow three thousand dollars on the credit of these highway taxes, and provision is made for the payment by the Comptroller of bonds issued by them. It is intended, no doubt, that the money so borrowed shall be used for the purposes of this road, but the bill contains no explicit directions on that point.

The special commissioners seem, by the bill, to be invested with power to claim all the non-resident taxes in the several towns so named for a period of years to come; to act as commissioners of highways in all these towns, with unlimited power to levy a tax on non-resident lands; to act, also, as overseers of highways in the several towns, and to collect the tax they themselves have laid; "as overseers of highways," to overlook and correct the assessment-rolls of the regular commissioners of highways of the several towns, which is for a subordinate to revise and correct the acts of his superior; and at the same time the commissioners themselves are made responsible to no one.

In view of these extraordinary, and, it seems to me, unnecessary provisions, I return the bill, and respectfully ask it reconsideration.

JOHN T. HOFFMAN.

To the Senate :

ALBANY, May 5, 1869.

I return, without my approval, Senate bill No. 207, entitled "An act to incorporate the Oswego Pier and Dock Company." The bill incorporates twelve persons, named therein, and such others as may join them, as the Oswego Dock and Pier Company: the twelve corporators named in the bill to be directors of the company until January, 1871.

It gives to this corporation power to "take any and all lands upon the shore, within fifty feet of high-water mark, not now improved or occupied, and all under water adjoining the said shore that may be included within the breakwater built in the lake, or along the shore,” at an approved value, in the same way

that the land might be taken for railroad purposes. This land so taken may be improved by "filling in, making slips, wharves, piers, warehouses, railroad tracks, or such other improvements for commercial or manufacturing purposes as may be desired by the said company."

The territory within which the company is to operate is defined as "lands on the shore and under the waters of Lake Ontario, within the limits of said city of Oswego, outside the Government piers, which now protect and form the harbor of said city."

The entire water front of the city (except the limited portion between the present piers) is thus given up to the exclusive ownership of a private corporation, and apparently for its exclusive use. The extent of shore thus transferred from the present owners to this corporation is said to be at least two miles.

The purpose and object for which the company is created are nowhere expressly defined, nor in exchange for the great privileges conferred on it are any duties to the public enjoined upon it. The bill speaks of a "harbor hereby authorized," but it nowhere imposes upon the company the duty of constructing an artificial harbor, nor, in fact, any other duty.

The company, under the bill, may do almost any thing; but it is not required to do any thing. It may take lands on shore and under water, fill up, build piers, docks, wharves, warehouses, lay railroad tracks, or make "such other improvements for commercial or manufacturing purposes as may be desired by the said company;" but it is not required to give the use or benefit of these piers, wharves, docks, slips, or other improvements to the public on any terms. Upon this point the bill is silent.

The authorities of the city of Oswego are given no power nor control over the changes proposed in its water front; except that,