Udall v. Trustees

fing^ village of part, includes docks6 wha"nd erections!^on oppSfte* to'The of ,Nem; York, though nest of the netturctl low-water mark on the Long-island jurisdiction ^ ¡ends^'af6 the f¿ív“va(er,6 °f ydie{,yernaf°„™¡ °nr(;ans ariificial f*'* the next

IN ERROR, on certiorari, to a Justice’s Court. The trustees of the village of Brooklyn, in the county of Kings, brought an action of debt against Udall, the plaintiff in error, to recover the penalty of twenty-five dollars, for the breach of an ordinance of the village of B. in exercising the office of a measurer of grain, for hire, &c. without being licensed by the trustees of the village. By the act of J ° J April 12, 1816, (sess. 39. ch. 95.) the freeholders and _ ' . , n .... 1 . , _ habitants or />. within certain limits, were declared to be a corporation, by the name of the trustees of the village of B. with various powers, to make by-laws, ordinances, &c. The west boundary of the village, being the section of the town of B. called the “ Fire District,” was the East River. The plaintiffs passed an ordinance, declaring that if any person, not holding the appointment of weighmasler, or measurer, under the trustees, &c. should exercise the office, &c. he should forfeit and pay twenty-five dollars; &c. It was proved that the defendant acted as a public measurer on the 14th of April, 1819, in a store, standing on a large dock or wharf, erected twenty-five or thirty years ago, the west end of which extended between ten and twenty feet west 0f jow water marie, being made land. It did not appear that the city of New-York had ever exercised jurisdiction *n *he P*ace where the defendant acted as a measurer. The property had been always assessed and paid taxes to Brooklyn. There were many other houses and stores erected on made ground, west of the ancient low watermark, which had paid taxes to B. The defendant was admitted to be a licensed measurer in the city of New-York ; and to show that the place where he acted as measurer was within the boundary of the city of New-York, he gave in evidence the charter of that city, by which is granted to New-York all the vacant and unappropriated ground lying on Nassau (or Long) Island, from high-water to low-water mark, contiguous and fronting to the city, from The Wallabout to the west side of the Red-hook and the Old Ferry, on both sides of the East River ; and the eastern boundary of the city is described as extending across the East River or Sound to Nassau Island, to low-water mark there, (including certain islands,) and from -thence all along Nassau Island shore, at low-water mark, unto the south side of the Redhook. The defendant also produced and read the “ act to divide this state into counties,” (sess. 36. ch. 39.) by which the limits of the county of New-York are described as beginning at Spy ten Duyvel Creek, where the same empties itself into the Hudson River on the Westchester side thereof, at low water, wherever the same now is; or hereafter may be, and so running along the said creek, at low water mark, as aforesaid, on the Westchester side thereof, unto the East River or Sound, and from thence to cross over to Nassau Island, to low water mark there, as aforesaid, (including certain islands,) and from thence along Nassau Island shore, at low water mark as aforesaid, unto the south side of Redhook," &c. And the county of Kings is bounded northerly by the county of New-York, &c. The justice gave judgment for the plaintiffs below.