
    In the Matter of Opening and Improving Henry Street in the city of New York.
    UTICA,
    August, 1827.
    Under the L.a4i3,’ Jii?) supreme court may, on refusing to confirm an estimate and assessment of 3 commissioners in the city of New-York, refer the matter to the three former commissioners, three new ones, or retain part of the former commissioners, joining them with new ones.
    On exception taken to the report of an estimate and assessment by three commissioners, this court referred the matter to two new commissioners, continuing one of u old. These three reported; and now
    M. Ulshoeffer, for the city,
    moved for a rule to confirm the report.
    
      J. Platt, contra, (inter alia,)
    
    objected, that there should have been three new commissioners appointed to make the second appraisal; or all the old commissioners should have been retained; that the court were bound strictly to follow the statute, (2 R L. 413, s. 178.)
   *Curia.

That statute is, that if we do not confirm the report, we shall refer it to the same commissioners for revisal and correction, or to new commissioners to be appointed by the court. Under these words, we think the reference was regular. The greater power, to retain all the old commissioners, or to appoint an entire new board, includes the lesser power to retain part, and reject part.

Motion granted.  