REPORT, &c. The Attorney-General, in obedience to the resolution of the Assembly, requiring "his opinion whether the lands described in the bill, entitled 'An act granting certain lands to the trustees of FortCovington academy,' belong to the Common School fund," respectfully submits the following REPORT: By an act passed in 1818, [Laws 1818, p. 172,] the SurveyorGeneral, and two other persons, acting as Commissioners, were authorised to lay out the mile square of the St. Regis Reservation as they should deem proper for a village or villages: laying out suitable lots for public buildings for the use of such village or villages. By the second section of the act, the Governor was instructed to direct the Commissioners "to survey and lay out so much and such parts of the said Reservation, not exceeding in the whole, sixty acres, as he shall deem proper to be set apart and be reserved for public purposes, to be hereafter designated by the Legislature.”The proceedings of the Commissioners were confirmed by an act passed the next year. [Laws 1819, p. 280.] The Attorney-General has learned from the Surveyor-General, that the Commissioners, in pursuance of the first section of the act of 1818, laid out a public square, and a cemetery in the village of Fort-Covington, and other lots for public buildings for the use of the village. And that in pursuance of the second section of the act, they surveyed and laid out certain lands near the village, which were reserved for public purposes; and which lands are designated on the map made by the Commissioners as military lands, A map of a part of the village, furnished by the Surveyor-General, and accompanying this report, will show the location of the land described in the bill. It is the narrow strip lying between Salmon-street and Salmon river, and lying principally in front of the public square and the cemetery. This piece of land was not allotted, because it was of small value, and because it furnished a con venient watering place for the citizens, and a place for unlading commodities afloat upon the river. It was neither designated as a site for the public buildings of the village, nor as a part of the lands set apart or reserved for public purposes. The committee on the public lands, in their report on this application, speak of the land in question, as having been "reserved for military purposes." This is a mistake: the military lands are at another place, and beyond the bounds marked on the map herewith submitted. The lands described in the bill, had not on the first day of January, 1823, been "reserved or appropriated to public use," [Const. Art. VII. Sec. X.] and consequently belong to the Common School fund. Respectfully submitted. GREENE C. BRONSON, January 24th, 1833. Attorney-General IN ASSEMBLY, January 25, 1833. REPORT Of the Commissioners of the Land-Office, on the bill authorising them to sell the Missionary lot in Westmoreland. The Commissioners of the Land-Office, on the bill entitled "An act authorising the Commissioners of the Land-Office to sell the Missionary lot (so called) in Westmoreland, Oneida county," referred to them by the Honorable the Assembly, RESPECTFULLY REPORT: That the lot contemplated by the bill to be sold to the present lessees, was originally granted in trust for any minister of the gos pel which might thereafter be employed by the Oneida Indians tó preach the gospel among them. This was done before those Indians had separated into parties holding rights to their territory in severalty. Acts of the Legislature subsequently passed, directed the manner in which this trust should be executed, as reported by the select committee. In a conference lately had at the request of the Governor, by Eli Savage and Isaac Denniston, Indian agents, and the SurveyorGeneral, with a deputation sent by a council composed of the several parties into which the Oneida Indians are now divided, it was stated that they considered the rents of said lot to have been unjustly appropriated, by the Commissioners in whom that power was vested; that they were paid to a missionary placed among them by the bishop of New-York, and who had not, for more than three years, performed any services; that they had not employed him as their minister; that they were dissatisfied with him and would not attend to his preaching; that in the mean while they [Assem. No. 42.] 1 had been served by other ministers of the gospel; and that the object of their present mission was to obtain the passage of a law that would secure to them such an equitable appropriation of the avails of the lot, as would answer the end for which the original grant was made. The following mode was then after considerable discussion and deliberation suggested, and they expressed their approbation of it, viz: That the power of appropriating the rents of the lot should be transferred to the Governor, whose duty it should be to distribute them, according to what he should consider just and equitable in execution of the trust. If this measure were adopted, the necessary examination to ascertain the justness of the complaints, now preferred, would be made, and the condition of the Indians ascertained, so as that justice might be done to all who were entitled to the benefits of the grant, and by these means would the end contemplated be more surely effected than by paying the rents over to the chiefs, to be by them divided among the Indians. If this arrangement should meet with the approbation of the Legislature, the Commissioners of the Land-Office would respectfully recommend the substitution of a bill making provisions accordingly. Should however the Legislature consider it most congenial with the general policy of the State, to change the leasehold to a fee simple tenure, it may not be unimportant to inquire whether a sum of money the interest of which would be equal to the rent reserved in the leases, would be an adequate consideration for the rents and reversion of the premises. On this subject the Commissioners of the Land-Office can give no opinion, as no report can be found showing the conditions on which the leases have been given. It may moreover not be amiss to consider that in this case the State is the trustee of the Indians, and that, in executing the trust, their interest should be a paramount consideration. Respectfully submitted. SIMEON DE WITT, Sur. Gen. January 24th, 1833. IN ASSEMBLY, January 19, 1833. REPORT Of the select committee, on the petition of sundry citizens of the village of Brooklyn, relative to sales at auction. Mr. Downing, from the select committee, to whom was referred the petition of sundry inhabitants of the village of Brooklyn, county of Kings, for an alteration relative to the sales at auction in said. village, REPORTED: That the petitioners represent, that the auction law in relation to the village of Brooklyn, affords frequent opportunities of practising fraud upon the auction revenue; that the existing act, as originally passed for the city of New-York and extended to the city of Albany, has been found extremely beneficial from long experience. The petitioners further represent, that the contiguity of the villageof Brooklyn to the city of New-York, the business, manners and customs of both places being so similar, renders it absolutely necessary that the said act should be extended to the village of Brooklyn. Your committee having examined the subject referred to them, are of opinion, from the facts set forth by the petitioners, that the prayer of the petitioners is reasonable and ought to be granted; your committee therefore ask leave to introduce a bill prepared for that purpose. |