fused; all this not through representatives, but by direct act of the people at large there assembled. The town meeting is the legislature of the town. It is, of course, not intended, by this bill, to do away entirely with the town meeting; this will still be assembled, for certain purposes other than the election of town officers. The division of the people into separate polling districts for the election of town officers will tend to distract them from the general meeting, at which a large popular attendance is desirable, in view of the important local questions which are often there determined. There will be danger of matters of grave consequence being decided by a very small proportion of the people interested.

If it be deemed wise to change the system of town meetings, now established as a part of our machinery of self-government, I submit that it should be done by a general law affecting all the towns alike. A proposition to do this would excite general attention, and the Legislature and the Executive would be aided in coming to a decision of the question by the discussion of it among the people. A special law, like this one, fails to excite such general attention.

It must be remembered, also, that if any town embraces within its limits so much territory as to make its government by a general meeting inconvenient, power now resides in the board of supervisors to divide towns, to alter their boundaries, and to erect new towns.

I respectfully call attention also to the fact that this bill provides for other matters which are not referred to in the title thereof, and that, therefore, being a local bill, it violates section 16 of article 3 of the Constitution.

JOHN T. HOFFMAN.

ALBANY, April 14, 1869.

TO THE SENATE:

I return, without my signature, Senate bill No. 138, entitled " An act to authorize the construction of a railroad in One Hundred and Twenty-fifth street, and in certain other streets and avenues in the city of New York."

This bill grants to ninety-six persons named in it, residents of various parts of the State, the privilege and franchise of constructing, operating, and maintaining the railroad mentioned in its title, without any limitation as to time, and without any consideration for the grant, except that the grantees shall pay into the city treasury the

same license fees as are now paid by other city railroad companies in the city of New York.

Only a portion of the city railway companies pay or are required to pay a license fee. Some have been declared by the Court of Appeals exempt from any such liability under the provisions of their charters. Some pay fifty dollars a year for each car, and others less. The requirement, therefore, of this bill to pay the same fees as are paid by other companies may not impose any condition, or mean any thing as an obligation. But, however this may be, the license fee is only a nominal charge, or nearly so, upon each car, as a matter of police regulation, and it cannot be regarded as a compensation in any sense for the value of the privileges granted. The bill, therefore, as it comes before me, is a legislative grant to certain preferred individuals of a special license, privilege, and property, to be enjoyed and used by them in the public streets of the city of New York, without any compensation to the people of the State or city for its value. I cannot concur in or give my sanction to any such act of legislation.

The argument has been presented to me that the streets in and through which it is proposed to lay and operate this railroad are not very important that the travel thereon, other than that upon the railroad, will not be great, and, therefore, that an exception should or might be made to the rule which I have always advocated as reasonable and just, that compensation for the privileges granted should be required. I have also been referred to the example of my immediate predecessor, Governor Fenton, who, while he refused to ap prove certain railroad grants, signed one last year (similar in character to that now proposed), known as the " Avenue C Railroad Bill," which provided for the payment of the nominal sum of one thousand dollars per annum, by the company, into the treasury of the city of New York.

I have also been referred to the example of Governor Morgan, who, in the year 1861, approved of what is known as the "Ninth Avenue Railroad Bill," while vetoing other bills of a like character. I cannot, however, allow this argument or these precedents to control my action in regard to the bill now under consideration.

One Hundred and Twenty-fifth street is the chief thorough-fare of the large and growing district, known as Harlem, in the northern portion of New York island. If this railroad is required for the convenience of the people of that section, the privileges granted by the bill will constitute property of great and annually-increasing value. If it is not required, the grant should not be made. The questions which relate to the merits of all city railroad grants, and

the terms and conditions upon which they should be made, are as distinctly raised by this bill, therefore, as if its provisions applied to the more densely populated sections of the city, and embraced a larger number of more important and greatly travelled streets and

avenues.

I shall, therefore, as briefly as possible, present my views upon the whole subject.

The precedents cited, established by my predecessors, can have no weight with me, because the principles which I hold as controlling, in regard to all these railroad grants, are not in their nature changeable, to be applied, relaxed, or compromised on personal or any other grounds. They are necessarily fixed and immutable.

I hold that these grants belong to the people; that their value should be paid into the treasury of the State or of the city of New York; and that the Legislature has not the right, in morals or justice, to give them away to any individuals who may be selected for such benefaction.

If the grant made by this bill, or by any one like it, is worth ten thousand dollars per annum, the effect of the bill is to give that sum annually to the grantees, for all future time, without consideration. It seems to me that the simple statement of the proposition is sufficient to show the unjustifiable character of the act.

All legislation should be founded on public reasons and be for public benefit. Legislation is a "public trust," and not a mere right to be exercised for private benefit or emolument. It should be as impartially administered and executed as any judicial or other power of government.

Our Constitution and our form of government recognize no distinction between classes of the community, and give no right to the representatives of the people to distinguish any individuals, by grants or gifts of public property which are withheld from others. Legislation is in the name of the people, by the people, and should be for the people.

Where is the authority from the people for the enactment of a law making to individuals the gift here proposed to be made?

In my judgment, equity demands that the value of these railroad grants should be paid into the treasury of the city of New York rather than into that of the State, and should be applied either to the reduction of the debt of that city or of the annual taxes levied on its citizens. These railroads are to be operated wholly within the city, and by a special use of its streets. The streets have either been dedicated to public use by the owners of adjacent lands or paid

for by assessment on such property. They are paved and repaved, lighted and cleaned, at the expense of the tax-payers, who also pay far maintaining police and sanitary regulations, and the general expenses of the municipal government. If any revenue can be derived from the use of such streets, it seems to me equitable and just that it should be applied to the payment of these expenses.

Ten or more railroads have already been established in the city of New York by virtue of special grants made by the Legislature. None of these railroads have been required to make any payment for the value of the privileges granted, except a mere nominal license fee, or (as in the case to which I have above referred) a nominal annual payment. All of these grants were valuable when made, and some of them were and are of great and increasing pecuniary value. The capital stock of the roads and their profits have been greatly disproportioned to their actual outlay and expenditures. Two of them (and only two), viz., the Sixth avenue and Eighth avenue railroads, are required to make monthly returns of their rereceipts. The receipts of these two companies, during the last year, were as follows:

From this statement of receipts (which in each case are about double what they were ten years ago), some idea may be formed of the great and increasing value of railroad grants in the city. If all the companies had been required to pay to the city an adequate sum for the value of the privileges granted to them, the debt of the city would have been largely decreased; or if they had been required to pay a yearly compensation in proportion to the yearly increasing value of their grants, the annual taxes levied would have been materially reduced each year, and the people would have been so far relieved from the heavy burdens of taxation.

In my judgment, the Legislature had no more right, in morals, to give away these privileges, and deprive the tax-payers of that city of their just rights in respect to them, than they had to impose a direct tax, of the same pecuniary extent, for the benefit of the persons named in the bill.

I am not opposed to the construction of railroads in the streets of the city of New York. I am aware that additional facilities for

travel are required. The improvements being made in the upper portion of the city, occupied for residences, at points remote from the business sections, and the distance to be travelled from the ferries and railway depots to the commercial centre create a great and growing demand and necessity for more city railroads. I will gladly give my sanction to any just plan calculated to meet this requirement. But, however urgent and pressing may be the inconvenience from the present deficiency in the means of public travel, I cannot consent to give my approval to any measure which, while it may add to the public convenience, violates important public rights or principles, or the true policy of government.

I respectfully submit to the Senate that the just mode of providing additional railroad facilities for the city of New York would be to authorize the construction of such roads on suitable routes, with careful regulations for the protection of public and private interests; the grant or grants for such roads to be disposed of by the proper authorities of such city, at publie auction, to the parties who will agree, with sufficient security, to pay to the city the largest sum in gross, or the largest sum annually, for the privileges granted; or if not at public auction, then in such other way as may be best calculated to make certain a fair and honest disposition of the grants, upon terms which will secure to the city treasury their just and reasonable value.

An act containing such provisions, or framed upon such principles, at the same time providing safeguards for the general public convenience, and for the protection of private rights, would be free from any imputation of favoritism and improvidence, and would secure to the tax-payers a just return for the use of the public property granted.

I respectfully ask, therefore, a re-consideration of the bill herewith returned.

JOHN T. HOFFMAN.

ALBANY, April 16, 1869.

TO THE SENATE:

I return, without my signature, Senate bill No. 121, entitled "An act to aid in the completion of the Whitehall and Plattsburgh rail