A court-house, to meet the wants of 85,000 people for many years, and upon a basis of $26,500,000 of value is erected by the efforts of the very men now seeking the division of the county, and yet they seek to throw the whole burden of its maintenance upon the western towns, besides the other buildings to correspond, yet to be erected, after taking from the old county $11,000,000 of value and 35,000 of population. Jamaica, before the new court-house was built, offered the county its new town hall, a large brick building and suitable for a court-house, for $50,000, but the eastern men refused the offer. The people of the town of Huntington, in Suffolk county, voted against the new county, and they ought not to be compelled to go in. The only reason offered by those from the towns of Huntington and Babylon, favoring division, is the inconvenient location of the county seat. That may be a good reason for changing such location, but not for dividing a county. It is conceded that a large majority of the inhabitants of both Queens and Suffolk counties are opposed to the passage of this bill. No doubt, in many of the counties of this State, as much or more cause for dissatisfaction exists, than in Queens, and yet no effort at division is made; but let this bill pass and you may expect all these communities to be disturbed by attempted disruption. The truth in regard to this matter seems to be that the eastern towns of Queens county, having failed to secure the location of the new court-house where they desired, now seek to punish the western towns by dividing the county. If this bill becomes a law it leaves Queens with but four towns. The improvements at Hell Gate, and the consequent bringing of the large water front of Long Island City into occupation, and the building of the bridge over the East river at Blackwell's Island, will cause New York city to annex this territory, just as it has taken in the lower towns of Westchester. That would leave Queens with but three towns and a small population to support the whole machinery of the county. No principle can be invoked in support of this bill. No good or sufficient reason has been shown to exist for the division of Queens and Suffolk counties, and public policy and justice alike demand the defeat of the measure. Therefore, the undersigned recommend the adoption of the following resolution: Resolved, That this Assembly does hereby disagree with the report of the majority of said committee recommending the passage of the said bill. A. H. PURDY. Mr. Graham, from the Sub-Committee of the Whole, to which was referred the Assembly bill No. 345, introductory No. 731, G. O. 354, entitled "An act in relation to the indictment and punishment of criminal offenses committed on railroads within the State," reported in favor of the passage of the same without amendment. The bill was ordered to be reported by the following vote: Mr. Graham, from the Sub-Committee of the Whole, to which was referred the Assembly bill No. 249, intoductory No. 460, G. O. 251, entitled "An act to further amend chapter 160 of the laws of 1875, entitled An act to incorporate the New York Infant Asylum,' reported in favor of the passage of the same without amendment. The bill was ordered to be reported by the following vote: Mr. Graham, from the Sub-Committee of the Whole, to which was referred the Assembly bill No. 278, introductory No. 586, G. O. 286, entitled "An act to repeal chapter 583 of the Laws of 1869, entitled 'An act relative to the improvement of Mamaroneck harbor, and for the promotion of the public health,' passed May 5, 1869," reported in favor of the passage of the same without amendment. The bill was ordered to be reported by the following vote: Mr. Graham, from the Sub-Committee of the Whole, to which was referred the Assembly bill No. 149, introductory No. 377, G. O. 127, entitled "An act to amend chapter 737 of the Laws of 1873, entitled 'An act in relation to the creation and formation of water-works companies in towns and villages of the State of New York,' passed June 12, 1873," reported in favor of the passage of the same without amendment. The bill was ordered to be reported by the following vote: Mr. Graham, from the Sub-Committee of the Whole, to which was referred the Assembly bill No. 140, introductory No. 117, G. O. 116, entitled "An act to enable the city of Brooklyn to raise further means for the improvement and sale of certain portions of Prospect park in said city," reported in favor of the passage of the same without amendment. The bill was ordered to be reported by the following vote: JAYES, 91 Mr. Graham, from the Sub-Committee of the Whole, to which was referred the Assembly bill No. 355, introductory No. 612, G. O. 368, entitled, "An act relating to the repaving and improvement of Fourth street from Division avenue to Grand street, in the city of Brooklyn," reported in favor of the passage of the same without amendment. The bill was ordered to be reported by the following vote: Mr. Graham, from the Sub-Committee of the Whole, to which was referred the Assembly bill No. 338, introductory No. 456, G. O. 348, entitled "An act to organize a fire department in the village of Andes, Delaware county," reported in favor of the passage of the same, without amendment. The bill was ordered to be reported by the following vote: Mr. Graham, from the Sub-Committee of the Whole, to which was referred the Assembly bill No. 365, introductory No. 366, G. O. 381, entitled "An act to exempt the counties of Suffolk, Tioga, Monroe, Livingston and Otsego from the provisions and operation of chapter 180 of the Laws of 1875, entitled "An act creating a board of town auditors in the several towns of this State, and to prescribe their powers and duties," passed April 29, 1875, reported in favor of the passage of the same without amendment. The bill was ordered to be reported by the following vote: AYES, 12 |