The New York Herald Newspaper, February 4, 1853, Page 2

Motion for ¢ for Contempt. SUPERIOR COCRT—GENERAL TERM. Jan. 15.—Thomas E. Davis and Courtlandt Palmer, Sic Vork Mayor, and Com- seat oh Toages Duer, Campbell, Bosworth, and OF ME. JOHN VAN BUREN, ON BEHALF OF uk PLAINTIFFS, ON THE MOTION FOR ATIACH- MENT AGAINST THE ALDERMEN, FOR CONTEMI'T. Mr. ven BUREN rose and ac i ~May it please Sie ‘Court— Papers upon which we move again Sturtevant and others. for an attachment, are the orig’ complaint, and injunction, and ‘the affidavits showing the of the injunction, and the order to w cause served in the action. These penere have been handed up to the Court. Ze. Van B. then proceeded to state the substance of | papers.) ) Mr. FteLp, who appeared for Alderman Sturte- | vant, then rose and said: In opposition, sir, to the complaint, we offer the following aflidavits:— Ex-Chief Justice Bronson.—Have you any papers | to read in answer to the qu mn whether you have er baye not violated the injunction ? Mr. Fiety.—We read them in answer to Mr. Van Buren. Ex-Chief Justice Bronson. question sir? Mr. Firty.—We read these affidavits in support of our case. Ex-Chief Justice Bronson.- x29 ae i | ‘The pose to read, sir, papers, that they are rizht | upon the merits, ‘The Sheree already disposed of | question. Will you answer my | | Mr. Freip.—If you can argue upon the merits 1 we can. ‘ -Chief Justic Bronson.—There is not one word | im those papers about the breach of the injunction. Hon. Judge Dvurk.—We caunot say whether they | are pertinent or not, until they have been read. Ex-Chief Justice Buoxson.—(To Mr, Field.)— Are pertinent ? ‘ “a! Freip.—Every one is pertinent upon the ques- | tion of bsp se The counsel then proceeded to read the | affidavits of the grantees, Jacob Sharp and others. Mr. Van Buren then rose and said—If the Court | please; your honors will find handed up with the papers a series of printed propositions, to which, in main, I shall confine mee Lought pezhapsto | ay iuding @s an excuse for not at all to the allida- | upon the other side, that from the time the ‘were served xpon us, on Thursday, be Ae this period, | ‘we have been unable te see how they ave the slight- est bearing upon this particular motion; and it was for that reason that one of my associates objected to | their being read, and for the same reason highly pro- | bable that | shall hardly have occasion to allade to them in the suggestions I have to make to the Coart imrelation to this motion. 1 read to the Court, in the outset, the complaint itself, showing the va s grounds of right which were set forth by the plain- Uiffs, and the relief that they asked. It will be for the other side to show why we are notentitled to it. They claim thet we have not made out a case of ja- | Fiediction in this court, and, upon the propositions with which we set out, tit the Court has jurisdic- tion over corporations a5 weil as over uatural persons, wehave cited no authori for I presume it will hardly be controverted. We certainly made a case against ordinary parties. We certainly made a ease against natural persons. We certainly | made a case against persons standing in a representative capacity, of a gross breach of trust, aa we supposed, and which authorized us to obtain relief, and under which a judge having jurisdiction of the subject matter, and of the parties, granted us an | order, which has been disobeyed, and the disobe- dience to which the Court are now to consider. We say, the plaintiffs complained that an injury was | about to be done to their legal rights, by a wrongful act of the defendants, and prayed that the defend. | ante might be restrained from doing that act. No- thing further was necessary to give jurisdiction, and it was then for the Court to judge and decide wheth- | era proper cuse was made for granting the relic the plaintiffs asked. Aud when a court has Jmrisdiction, its judgment or order is never void, how- ever erroneous it nay be. Now, the idea that the officers of this corporation—that these Aldermen, and Assistants—these two boards, constituent parts of the corporation—were not parties to this suit, and | ‘were not operated upon by this injunction, seems to me a suggestion which would go to relieve officers of | all corporations, and, necessarily and consequently, the corporation itself, from all responsibility for the violation of an order of the Court. In a proceeding against a corporation, to guard against an act of the corporation, whatever it may be, yoa must make the corporation parties and not the in- dividual members; and if, when yon obtain an in- junction under tl cumstances, the ouly person: who set the corporation in motion—the only tive agents ofa body which is powerless of itse ¢an violate that injunction with impunity, then, of <@ourre, these corporations are began the restraint of Me Court. We suppose that is not the case with re- @ard to the corporation of New York, to a baak ¢orporation, or to any oti v e have not un- Gertaken to cite author’ ‘h there are a great many, to sustain the proposition—that whea a Court acquires jur a, their proceedings are not void. however erroneous they may be, which is true in cases even of limited jurisdiction. For ex: ample, where an officer is authorized to issue an at- tachwent, and he proceeds upon insufficient evi- dence, if he has some evidence upon which to act, he acquires jurisdiction, and his action is not There are a large class of cases of that kind. also, in regard to a P| of which have come before this the Su- meme Court; the seme ij has been Id over and over 4 are cases of limited jurisdiction, and court is one of general are subject tothe t he case now before the urisdiction, where the purties al jurisdiction of the court We say turthe: resolution which the C mon Council was about to pass was, in no pr wense of the term, an act of legislation. It was not a It was what the Commou But if it w. al to consider whet! a question upon which the if it erred in judgment, stil i it should be reve fs the Common Council that 2s ‘ih “grant,” but the grantees, in accepting it, and in tue aftidavits read in their bel i ita grant through- out. Mr. V. B. then referred to the affidavits and the evolutions of the Common Council. and _pro- ceeded :—Pre-ently it will be proper to call at- tention to the fact that the power to license 4s unqualifiedly in the Mayor this agree Tent that they entered into without the assent and against the probibition of the Mayor—who is not only an integral part of the corporation but the portion which alified authority t Tivense, is, in the 1 than agreement tha resolution then provides, in the incorporation of the assc would say there is ¥ i Fy they should proceed i think they can do it by ution, and th rporation wanting in the 3 ivi- sion, is perpetuity, and that is given by the Lith. | The 15th provision is a very curious aud’ extraordi- mary one: The associates, wi filed with the elerk of the Com nify their acceptance ti to conform thereto’and all new i admitted according to the provi sociation and by laws, shall be deemed » agreement ; In reading, in connection with thee provisions, ‘the acceptance of this agreement, and the execution | of it, as we regard it, by the partics of the other a, the Court will see _ precise! what it nature of the transaction is. it would seem to me to be a very great waste of time to undertake to show to the Court that this resolution cannot be deemed alaw. f suppose I vould hardly he anthorized to call the attention of the Court ‘Yo the form in which the Common Council do legis- late; but if the Court have any curiosity mpon that point, and there is no strictly technical ‘objection to it, they will find 1m the Corporation Manual various noes, the form of which may throw some light the mo in shor ng the manner in which pass ordinances also apprising the Court that they know the difference between an act, sich as they would deem an act of legislation, and a reso or contract. If they do not, one object these proceedings is to call their atte distinction. in the next place, this r none of the spirit of a law, because the spirit o in reference at east t other citizens thau the Alder. men, is, that it shall be obeyed, not accepted and agreed to, and a proceeding on the part of the mem hers of thisCommon Council, by which certain other | parties are to determine whether they will en- ter into an agreement with them, and become parties to certain articles of association, which they provide for the benefit of other parties, ean, it sees to me, hy no stretch of fanguage or human ingenuity, be construed as a law. But, if the Court please, we say | if it was material to consider whether it was a law, oF 4 grant, or a eontract, that was 4 question npon which the Court was to jadge, and if it erred in judg- ment still its order was valid. We say further, that | if the resolution which the Common Couneil were | about to night properly be reyardes Poel of legislation, it was tik a question tor the Court to decide whether re} cvanted it an injory attempte be done in that for yad t whether the judge was right ov w void. We shall contend at 1) there is no color for the pretenc moo Conncil that the power t ordinances for the government 0! the city stands upon the same foc tion of the State, or that o While I cannot, without enteriis the merite of t! ontroversy, call the ate She court to the djetinetion between the ate ¢ | gress; on the contrary, people are divided in opinion | over members, and they cannot make it extend to | This sort of minor authority to make regulations in corporators, is sedulonsly guarded in the charter | of this Jorporation, and in various acts of the Legis- lature passed from time to time, which have gone to ) court | There are two or three other peculiarities; and this | | kind can be passed by a State Legislature or Con- | position to the authority of the courts over them? I | of course cannot take any action. Consequently, we | court to decide whether relief might not be grant ve sn Sa tet an gress. Upon cases, but toa digest, and a series of Broposl ions in this digest, sustained by cases which ik will call the attention of the court sufficiently to what we suppose to be a distinction between jers of in Cocoon and the Legislature. And we ap posed the authority of this corporation, so far as it called a legislature, is incidental to every ; without any express authority given, its er is one of the incidents of a corporation, and one of the elements of its constitution. I refer to Comyn’s Digest, Title Bye-Law A., that a corporation may make by-laws without an express power by their charter. But those by-laws which nia’ ration, either municipal or other, has power to make, are subject to very great restrictions, and to almost unlinaited control on the partof the courts. For in- stance, the general principle in regard to a by-law is that it must be consonant with reason and law—that a by-law must be lawful. It is forthe courts to judge then whether a by-law is reasonably made by one of these corporations, with the limited power to legis- late that they all have. Nobody, I suppose, ever heard that any such restraint or control was exer- cised over an act of the Legisiature or an act of Con- almost constantly about the reasonableness or ba ety of various laws passed by the legislature, but no- body ever thought that the couft could control that legislation or declare it veid for any such rea- son. Again, a by-law cannot be made to extend to persons other than the members of the Corporation. Their authority is to legislate strangers, unless by the express authority of the Legislature. If the court will look at the original authority in this Corporation to legislate, which is given them in Montgomery’s charter, for example, which 1 willnot read, but reter the counsel to Kent's notes, at page 26° the court will see how properly guarded this authority of the Corporation to pass by-laws is made, and Bow entirely consonant it is with the general rule, Their laws and regulations, which they are authorized to pass, are to operate only upon the inhabitants of the city, and are even limited in duration to three months, unless they are subsequently passed by the government and council. regard to the corporate property and the duties of enlarge their power; and when they desired to show an authority to pass any law, they have looked to their charter or to some of the acts of the legislature which gave them such an authority. Now if the iil look in the same book, pages 93 and 112, they will beable to see how fur this authority has been enlarged trom time totime. For example, subse- quently the authority to pass these by-laws was given to them, so that the by-laws would stand for tweive mouths instead of three months, and then they were to, be confirmed by the governor in council, or to be void. suggestion that J make extends, as we supposed, to every corporation, that uo by-law can be passed in restraint of trade. They have the ye to regulate trade, an express right is given them, either by their charter, or, where it isa ape corporation in this State, by an act of the Legislature, to regu- late trade to a certain extent, but they cannot pass a law in restraint of trade. Why not? Laws of that jon has no such power. Again, if they make a by-law which is void in part, it is void in the whole. We suppose that portions of these resolutions, it they axe to be treated as a law, ly void that it extends to the whole. But authority and right to pass any law at | a either from the Legislature or from ‘Their right to grant licenses, for ex- gress, but a corpora e their charter. ample, is in the Mayor, is and is derived from their charter and from acts of the Legislature; their right to regulate streets, their right to pass | apy laws regulating the health of the city aud | | the police of the city, is almost, in every instance, given them by express authority on the part of the | Legislature. ‘They have thus, incidentally, regulation of the property and of the duties of the inhabitants of the city, which belongs to the corporation of the as the same regulation of the property and duties of | other corporators, like banks or academies, when in- corporated, belong to such a corporation. Butnot only are all their laws subject to these restraints that 1 have stated, and subject to the great limitation that I have referred to, but the existence of the corporation itself is at the mercy of the court. The court will re- collect the case of the city of London, in which pro- | ceedings were instituted to take away the charter of the city itself; and the idea that a body whose exis- tence is at the mercy of the courts should have the legistative power, and whose action cannot be super- vised by the authority of the court any more than | Congress, or the State Legivlature, seems to me a proposition so totally irreconcileable with reason that | i cannot entertain it. How can they assimilate their 0 not mean over pul acts, but over them, them es—to that of a legislature, over whom the courts say further, if the resolution which the Common Council was abont to pass may properly be regarded | as an act of legislation, it was still a question for the against an injury attempted to be done in that forn and whether the jadgment was right or wrong. i was not void. Now we suppose it appears most dis- tinctly in this case that the Common Council were not legislating at a! at the time they were passing | these resolutions, but that it was on their part an effort to grant certain rights and pri 3, ond to enter into an agreement with certain parties. i have called the attention of the Court to the phra- sevlogy of these resolutions, to show that this was, in point of fact, in no sense a law, and would not heen held so by the Court. It was not ana le jon, and was not, under the forms of leg , attempting to make a contract, because the or- ‘ mn of legislation was in no sense observed. | Now, if the Common Council had ordered a coatract | of this kind to be made by the Street Department, iich is the proper department to enter into these | conti , nobedy would have denied the authority of the Court to interfere and arrest the execution of | that contract, and arrest the performance. It is im- | po for the Court to avoid seeing that the object | of adoptin, is mode of proceeding was not only to | exercise powers which the Common Council did not possess, but was to aitempt to evade every control of the Court, which they have aud do exercise over va- | rious department-, whose duty it is to do what this Commou Council is attempting to do in this resoln- | tion. Now, a reference to the authority of the Com- mor Council in the act of i540 is a little important in thix connection, and w is commonly known as | the new charter of the city, passed April 2, 1849, | the first section, the legislative power is vext- | ed in the Common Council, and by the ninth section they are forbidden to exercise any exe- cutive power; and, after establishing varjgus de partments, the twelfth section organizes what | is called the Street Department, which shall have the | power of opening, regulating, and paving the streets; and which is undoubtedly the department which had, if any department had, 4 special authority over this subject. Now, the heads of these departments, as the Court is aware, are elected by the people of the city, and not chosen by the inembers of the Common | Council. They are subject, to a certain extent, to | the direction of the Corporation, the extent of which | will be seen by referring to section 21. Now, the | Court in looking at the provisions of charter, will see in the first place the express division of the | executive and legislative powers of this Corporation, | whatever they might have been; aud in the next place, the express prohibition upon the Common Council from exercising any executive power. And it seems to me that the Court cannot look at the resoltitions passed in this case, without seeing that it is an attempt, not even in the form of a legislative act, to asanime the power which clearly and properly | belongs to the executive department ol the Grrpons- tion, which was an executive duty, and which was confided particularly and propety to asingle de- partment, organized in this case as the Street Depart- ious other regulations under to the manner in which con- e made by calling for the work to be done, nents to be issued, and the contract to be xiven to the lowest bidder and so on: and the ruggestion I inake is, that if one contract can : by the Common Council in the has been me auy other contracts ry assume to make can be meade precisely in | way, and that all these safeguards, thrown the rights of these corporators by the division i of this corporation into executive and Jegislati parts—by the prohibition upon the Commen Council from assuming executive duty—hy the various pro- visions made to secure fair competition, when any property of the city is to be parted with, and a posi- | tive prohibition a, any member of the Common Conacil purchasin erty, when it is sold—all these are en cht, if, under ‘olor of a resolat authority may be ped by the Cor 1d the Court is to be denied the power of ide in ond terete ing them from acting. as | am con non Council ate | at the Mayor is an in & component part made without t all the parts of t 1 nt of y nb ent of the whol corporation; and ad, by ¥ ‘y treatise—"“Kyd on Cor ble a part the Mayor is. de of proceeding, t to grant away certain p certain property-—that avedeemed svi fers have been made for | of the ead ter and m avon of ' such. » Blackstone—which it is not neces be always adopted in the rope! e . We further say, 4 ere say, so long as in- j in force it must be obeyed, although i oer ere been erroneously, or even irregularly The Court will find a variety of au- thorities cited under this » but I shall not feel authorized to detain them by particu- larly to many of them, for I do not id the other side that they intend to question that proposition; and yet it seems for us to see the acta of these Aldermen can be sustained, unless they have a nig to judge whether the injunc- tion was properly or improperly issued; but that this injunction did restrain them from doing precisely what they did do, seems to us reasonable and clear 0) a reading the injunction and the affidavits of what they did. They pass precisely the resolation that they were directed by the Court not to pass. They passed it after the service of the injunction, This particular party—Alderman Sturtevant—voted for it with “the injunction in his pocket,” and they yowed a resolution that the Court had no anthorit; issue such an fs (ed 2 The order, also, whic! has been made by the Court in this case, that they will decide upon this question of attachment without hearing an argument upon the merits of the case, seems tous to preciude the other side from raising this question, or, at all eventa, from offering a objection to the proposition which is here main- tained. But the strong language used by the Court, in two or three cases, i perhaps, properly be referred to, and I refer the Court to the case of Sulli- van vs. Judah, 4th Paige, 444. Judge Duer—That proposition will not probably be contested upon the other side. At all events, we will not hear you till it is, Mr. Van Burex—Yon will find cited a variety of cases, some of which refer to another aspect of this uestion. For e: le, the case of Lansing vs. Easton, 7th Paige, 364, which refers to the effect of the advice of counsel, in authorizing a party, or in recommending a party, to violate an injunction. So does the case in 6th Vesey, 109. Mr. O'Conor—There is no evidence that Alderman Sturtevant had the advice of any counsel. Mr. Van Buren—As no such advice is presented here, the counsel says no such question arises. Pro- bably such advice was not given. The newspapers stated it had been, and pretended to give the names of some half dozen lawyers who had given such ad- vice. It is only another proof of how little faith one can put in newspapers. Caran) I refer the Court to the cases in 4 Paige, 444; 4 Howard, 225; 6 Howard,124, and two cases in chancery, Woodward vs. King. The next proposition is, that the injunction to restrain the making of this grant was properly addressed to the Corporation; and, when served, the order was cperears upon every branch and official member of the corporate body. And we also add, in addition to that, “ that it was operative upon their agents and attorneys.” Now, I do not know how far it isintended to dispute that proposition, but the court will find several cases cited under the third point to maintain it. Some of these are cases of mandamus directed to corporations. _1 think that is the case in Lord Raymond, 559 and 560, (the King vs. the Mayor of Abingdon,) where a mandamus was directed to a corporation, commanding them to do certain acts; and, upon their refusing to make a return, the question arose who should be the parties attached, or which members of the corporation should be the parties proceeded against. e court: will find in these cases the ground distinctly stated that the persons who refused to do the act—the ofli- cers of the corporation, or the of the corpora- tion who refused to comply with the order of the | court, are those against whom the attachment should issue. There are one or two cases from Comberbach, in reference to this point. (Harcourt vs. Fox,) page 212, and, under the next proposition, is the case of Smith against Butler, (Comb., 326-327. The first | case was a mandamus directed to the “ Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Council; no return was | made, and an attachment was issued against the officer whose duty it was to make the return. The caxe in Comberbach, 327, was, that the Mayor and commonalty of New Sarem failed to perform an award, which was made a rule of court, by consent— an attachment was then issued the officer who refused to perform. We say fourthly, that there was a breach of the injunction by every member of the Corporation who, after the service of the order, yoted to make the grant. Every such member acted in direct contempt of the authority of the Court, and the commandment of the law. The case of Agar-vs. the Regent’s Canal Company, (Cooper's Chancery Cases, 77) Was not a case where an attachment was granted, but the defendants came in by affidavits, and showed cause, which, as the court thought, left it doubtfal whether they had violated the injunction or not; but it is re case, because it was very elaborately Bets , and the facts were very severely litigated. It was the violation of an eres tion by the Canal Company, which restrained them from changing the course of their canal. Sir Samuel | Romilly and Bell argued for the motion, and Worth | and another against it. The injunction was not granted, but it was not suggested throughout the | whole argument that the individuals who violated the injuetion—who violated it for the cotporation—were | not responsible for their conduct. There is a case in 3 Modern Reports HI, The King v. The Mayor and | Burgesses of Tregony. A question arose there whether a peremptory mandamus to the Mayor aud | Burgesses of Tregony to elect and swear in a mayor, could be aad, A mandamus was granted in the first instance to do the act, and they made a return ; but before making a return they took an exception, that it was the duty of the burgesses to elect and the mayor to swear in,that their duties were several, and that neither could do the whole act which the man- damus directed. But the Court held that the writ | was properly directed, and called upon each to do that portion of the duty within bis province. They made up a return that the time of election had gone by, and again the objection was renewed that it be- longed to one to swear in, and the other to elect; but | the Court held that the peremptory mandainas | should go, and thet each should discharge the share of the duty that belonged to him. The Court will | find a refer given to 2 Kyd on Corporations, 350, | where the rule is laid down’ as we sup) it to be. See, also, 1 Barbour’s Chancery Practice, 636—the Bank Commissioners vs. City Bank of Buflal cided 23 January, Now, as to the criminal punishment of the members of a corporation | for any corporate offence, the Court will find two authorities of cases of indictment against indi- vViduals—directors of a coporation—for the violation of a corporate duty; but I have found no indictment against, nor had my attention drawn to any instance | ot the punishment of a corporation in its corporate capacity. On this point I wish particularly to call the attention of the Court to the case of The King vs. Holland, 5 ' case of Kane vs. The People, 8 Wendell, p. 203, 209. We suppose that the punishment and the proceedings in this depend upon the same principle as they do in proceeding criminally against a party by the remedy of indictment. The Court will also find, by reference to the statute, what is their duty and what are the duties of parties in reference to the process of the Court; and perhaps it may be well for me, in this connection, to call the attention of the Court for a single moment tothem. The Code, at section 218, provides for the issuing of an injunction order by a Judge, and for its enforcement as an order of the Court. There are various provisions of the Revised | the points as to the | mode of punishment, the extent of fine and im- | imprisoument, and | Statates which are cited upon prisonment, the length of the amount of the fine; but it is not necesaa- ty particularly that I should refer to them. 2 RLS. 534, sec. 1, sub. 3, 8, 21, 22, 25, and 26, relate to the amount of the fine and the length of imprison- ment. Jt will be sufficient for us, as we suppose, in this case, if we had nothing but the code and the provisions of the Revised Statutes and this injunc- tien in the precise language in which it is issued. We suppose, in its terms, it reaches these parties; but whether it does or not, the Corporation and its agents, attorneys, and officers, and all persons who shall act and must act for the Corporation, wei joined by this order not to do a certain thing, injunction was obtained in the mode point the code, by an order of the Ju i order of the Court, and which The statute provides the mode in which it “hall be enforced; and independent of the other au- thorities avd proy suppose upon the code and statate itself that w be entitled to the punishment of these parties. There are various other references upon the i Ths out by also in Ange! & Ames on Corp., 651. gave the Court a reference, or should have done se of Fitzherbet, under the third » page 234, as to the proper of directing a writ to a corporation, the proper mode of enforcing obedien it, That was a case which seems to bear resemblance to this in one particular. writ de amowendo leproso, directed to the M. burgesses of the vity of I and en the refusal ofthe Ma; was to do it—the writ being Corportdion—an attachment was gr aud to he supervision o} opon the other side, this w mi while Gat may bea r n under nves, it is j arly unfortanate in ff such & process cond be put in it wonld go a great way te preve: of the inconvenience @ whiclt we a gc. By these cases, thevetor 's cited in « fth i nd by the ai pport of them, we suppose that mi follows. WHen any one acts in ing an mjunctior or- lv i we propos leh of er of the a ter in divre ourt, it ia who i punished Term, R. 607 and 622, and also to the | Piet usted bat cee Sigpositon of Mr Cottechall mode | j te etrepot ee Oe os conclusion; if we have assumed, that these. and ~ andi re are suitest in the the over this inference we draw, that when the jurisdiction was once and an injunction granted it was the the injunction affidavit and without any order, and it was A and the Violation was punished by the Court. If we are right in supposing that the Court had ac- quired jurisdiction, and having ordered this injunc- tion, it was the duty of all ies who were en- joined to obey it; why, then, it seems to us that it is ‘one of the most aggravated cases of a violation of an injunction in the,most audacious manner, that was ever presented to a court of justice. There was no occasion for Sema this injunction, and there was no reason for haste—not the siete For a moment look at this case: On the 6th of Decem- ber, this grant passed the Board of Assistants,on the 18th it was vetoed by the Mayor, and on the 27th this injunction was obtained. They had then protracted their session Besos all previous example; and one reason why it is beyond all previous example is, be- cause those Aldermen are not paid beyond eight days—I mean, paid by the Corporation; and there is hardly a case in which they continue to sit after their pay sto) They are paid for eight days, and usually ‘set for five, six, seven or eight days;: but on this occasion they continued the session from the 8th to the 18th, waiting for the Mayor to act upon this subject; and after he vetoed this resolution, they waited ten days and extended their session to about the 2%th of December, when this injunction was obtained. Well, now, why not wait until the regular session of the Beard on the first Monday of January? Why not? In the first place, what were the reason and oc- oan to f° on ‘Ee vite jad injunction, even if they had the authorit lo it? I suppose, none npon earth, This order that the session was ten end has no force in it. The Corporation continued, other men were to take the places of those who went out, and they were to act in four or five days, when the court could be heard on the propriety of granting this injunction. Was this not a case which reqs prudence, and discretion, and _ time, and care? The Court cannot fail to see that it was a matter of vast consequence whether this rail road was to be operied in this street or not. Very large sums had been offered by responsible and com- petent people, and if they had chosen to put this Matter in shape, and issued advertisements, and riven time to those who desired to take this contract fo pay the city the large sums which they agreed to ay, they required a delay of five, ten, or fitteen lays. Where the consequences were to pa on of from $150,000 to a gross sum of $1,000,000, and a consequence to the parties to travel upon this road, paying five or three cents, or nearly a difference of one-half, what was the occasion for this particular haste to violate this injunction in such an insulting and contemptuous manner? If anything could aggravate the wilful disobedience itself, it was the re- solution passed by the aldermen, and to which I have called the attention of the Court, and which was in the last degree audacious and disgraceful to the members of the Cor tion. In regard to that there can be no two opinions that their proceedings in this matter were perfectly disgracetul, even sup- posing they had a right to disobey this injunction—to charge the officer of the court with personally cor- rupt motives. Why was this great speed? I can un- derstand it. If there were five or six men who were hired to pass this resolution, and whose time expired on the last day of December, and if men were to come in subsequently who were not willing todo it— I can imagine, then, that they might have some in- terested and some personal motive. But this will not be claimed on the other side. If we are correct in regard to the proposition that it is a contempt, then it seems to follow very necessarily, that it is a kind of contempt of the most aggravated and discredita- ble character. Theatrical and Musical. Bowery Tueatre—The entertainments an- nounced for this evening are such as cannot fail to draw a crowded house. The play of “ Pizarro” will commence the amusements. ir. E. Eddy will sustain the character of Rolla, Stevens as Pizarro, and Mrs. Grattan as Cora. amusements will terminate with the piece called “The Mechanic and the Queen.” ‘he orchestra will play several Rar airs, and Mr. Dunn will sing a favorite Broapway Tnearre.—Those who have not seen the wonderful Chinese artists should do so imme- diately, as their engagement closes on Saturday evening. Their feats of legerdemain, tumbling, and other performances, are truly surprising. The enter- tainments will commence with “ Love, Law and ; Physic;” the next feature will be the Chinese per- | formances; and the terminating piece will be “ Ladies, Beware,” with Davidge, a great favorite, in the principal character, Nivio’s Garpen.—The charming vocalist Mad. Henriette Sontag, wh dulcet tones and brilliant execution are every night rewarded with enthusias cheers, appears again to-night in the beautiful opera of “La Sopnambula.” Ji the character of Amiva she has great scope for the exercise of her splendid abilities. She will be assisted by Badiali and Pozzo- lini. No doubt the theatre will, as usual, present a dazzling picture of fashion. Burton's Tear! he excelient comedy of | “The Serious Famil which has always drawn very large audiences, wiii commence the entertain- ments at this establishment. It is unnecessary to say more than that Burton will represent Sleek, in order to have the house crowded. The next feature is | Bulwer’s beautiful play,‘‘The Lady of Lyons,” with Dyott as Claude Melnotte, and Miss Weston as Pauline. The theatre to-night wil! be filled to over- flowing. Nationa. Turarry.—A very excellent selection | of pieces is announced for this evening, by manager | Purdy, who is always active and energetic in pre- } senting light and amusing pieves, and in the engage- } ment of the best stock actors. The performances of this evening commence with “The Six Degrees of | Crime,” which will be followed by ‘Charles IL.,” | and all will terminate with the amusing and laugha- ble piece called “The Rough Diamond.” Wattrack’s THEATRE.—Those who love good act- ing should visit this favorite and ably conducted es- tablishment. The selections are always good, and the | house isevery night crowded with highly respecta- ble citizens. Wallack’s theatre is in a career of great success. The entertainments for this evening con- sist of Bulwer’s splendid piece called “The Lady of Lyons,” in which Mr. Lester and Miss ate All will | Keene will sustain the leading characters. close with “The Review.” “Wnite’s TueaTre or Vanreries.—Herr Kist, whose jastic performances gave the utmost de- light and satisfaction to crowded houses, every even- ing this week, takes his benefit to-night at this estab- | lishment. The bill of entertainment provided, com- prises the popular pieces of ‘ Frederick the Great,’ the “ Jealous Wife,” “ Loan of a Lover,” and gym- | | nastic exercises. | American Muskum.—The same attractive per- formances which were given here yesterday after- noon and evening, are to be repeated to-day. The | Museum is going on very successfully under the able management of Messrs. J. Greenwood and C. W. Clarke. The new piece hee the “ Old Folks at Home,” is likely to prove as lucrative as the other great favorites which have been laid aside. Cincvs.—Strong attractions are put forth at the Bowery Amphitheatre to-night. They include almost every variety of equestrian and gymnastic perform- ances. The feats upon the tight rope by McFarland are truly excellent. Cueisty’s Orera Hou The programme an: nounced for this evening by Christy's minstrels, con- sist of singing, dancing, instrumental solos and bur- lesques. Woon’s Mrxetrens, whose performances have al- | ways contributed greatly to the pleasure of the pub- ; | ic, offer another diversified and attractive bill for | this evening. | Banvarp’s Panorama ov tHE Hovy Lanp | continues to be witnessed by very large assemblages. L. M. Gorrsenank’s Concert, which was to take place this evening at Niblo’s saloon, is post- poned until riday next, in consequence of the in- The directors of the American Dramatic Fund | Association, at their meeting on ‘Tuesday last, v i | isly chose Mr. J. G. Gilbet, as their theatrical tee for the unexpired term of the late T. 8. Ham- 1, Esq. Mr. “Pit rim, the Manager of White's Vari takes a benefit on Monday ing next, when hoped his friends will give him a bumper. MabAme Alpont.—The Howard Athenwum was crowded evening, says the Boston Advertiser of the 3d in mance of Madame Alboni in the ful han Jen, it is (iate Mrs. Forrest,) had a tri Albany Museum, on Bist ‘poosperous engagement, rat appenra which wns their engagement at the ng, on the 24th vlt., with theatre e Ov a full honre benefit. Mins Fitzpetet Mr. Hacket, an Cancers, ave performing at the Walnut i silos thé froupe of French ateest” theatre Bishop is announced to give a wand concert glen {a lame Anna ‘ow Urlenns ont is Jim Crow Rie ae (bh Py ORIN a ARN fs gern: dommes $48,061 60; four thensand “ total $63,081 50. The MONEY MARKET. Tuvespay, Feb,8—6¢ P.M. | The company own thirteen hundred acres of land I shall] ‘There was an active market this morning, but | in the centre of what is known as the Cumberland prices were very mach unsettled. The bulls and the | Coal Basin, all of which contains workable seams of bears appeared to be well suited with the fluctuations. The tendency, however, was npward, and atthe close | after paying for all their lands, mining implements, | a better feeling prevailed among speculators for a | cars, railroads, loading house and sideling, connect- rise. At the first board, Canton Co. advanced 3§ per cent; Montgomery Mining, j; Florence and Keyport, | road, openings to the mines, three in number, and 14; Brunswick Land Co., 3; Brie Railroad, }; Sixth Avenue Railroad, 23; Long Island, 3; Norwich and Worcester, 1; Niagara Falls Railroad, 3. New Jer sey Zinc declined } per cent; Pennsylvania Coal, $; Cumberland Coal, 4; Phoenix, 3; Potomac Copper, 4; Hudson River Railroad, 4. The upward move ment in Canton came upon the market very suddenly: It is folly on the part of holders to make such trans- actions, The effect is injurious. They are perfectly well understood, and attract no purchasers. Only two small lots were sold at the advance to-day, and we are disposed to believe they were notreal. Poto- mac Copper stock was active to-day, but prices gave way alittle. Ithas not become sufficiently known yet to attract speculation, but it will ultimately com- mand high prices. Cumberland and Phoenix Coal stocks have not varied much since yesterday. Large quantities of each stock changed hands at the first board. In the moresubstantial securities a moderate amount of business was transacted, at prices eurrrent at the close yesterday. At the second board the market was more buoyant and more settled. Morris Canal went up } per cent.; Brunswick Land Company }; Cary Improvement Company }; DecpRiver Coal Company }; Florence and Keyport Land Co. $; Norwich and Worcester Railroad 3; Hudson River Railroad declined 3 per cent. Potomac Copper Company 4; Phoenix Mining Company j. There was a small sale of Great North- ern Lead Company stock at 8 percent. The month- ly report of this company, which we publish to-day, | must attract attention to this stock and create an outside demand for it. There has as yet been but a limited inquiry for fo- | reign exchange for remittance by the steamship Bal- tic from this port on Saturday next. Sterling bills are improving, and we now quote 93 a 10 per cent premium. In others there has been no change. There will be a quantity of bank and insurance stocks, California bonds and Pacific Mail Steamship | stock sold at the Merchants’ Exchange, by S. Draper, to-norrow, Friday, Feb. 4, at 12 o’clock. ‘The value of merchandise and specie imported into and exported from this district, during the month of January, 1853, compared with the corresponding month in 1852, was af follows :— COMMERCE OF TH Port of New York. Pnuary. Free merchandise. Dutiable merchandis: Specie, &e......... Witha'n from wareha 8 1863. - $1,047,466 $1,202,238 8,589,211 11,563,405 104,73 1,584,652 33,048 1,536,365 ,008,801 | 852. 1853. Domestic merchandise....$2,419,206 $2,004,624 Foreign merchand’e.free, "26,003 42574 Do. do. -dutiable. 358244 2651730 Specie and bullloa ...... 2,808,058 747/670 Totals......6.6.005. $5,073,191 $4,050,607 Decrease in exports in January, 1853 $ Total... According to this, it appears that oar foreign trade, during the past month, has created a balance against us of upwards of four and a half millions of dollars—greater than at the close of January, 1852. This has been produced by an increase in imports anda decrease in exports. The falling off in ex- ports has been entirely in shipments of specie and bullion. This may be considered a favorable feature; and 80 it would be if we had not an abundance of specie to spare. The exportation of specie now is no more than so much cotton or corn, aud has not more effect on financial operations. Thefollowing auction sales of stocks were made his morning atthe Exchange :— $5,000 Convertible 7’s Rochester. Lockport and N. Falls tb 1863... 21 . “4 do do | 10,000 Maysville and Lexington 187: 22,000 Evansville and Illinois 7’s, 1361 + 86% Gold imported into Boston in January, $13,8 gold exported same time, £5,800; silver, $2,77 Total, $8,527. ‘The receipts at the office of the Assistant Trea- surer of this port to-day, amounted to $2 ments, $148,642 '27—-balance $3,830,0: The importations into this port on Wednesday and Thursday, February 2d and 3d, have been as fol’ lows :—~ Butter, 200 firkins; beer, 100 casks; coal, 479 tons; cheese, 50 eases; cement, 4 bbls.; coffee, 344 bags; | drugs, 139 casks cream tartar; boxes’ manna ; 150 cases licorice brimstone; 16 tons divi divi; dyes, 14 ceroons indigo: 128 casks madder tons logwood; 23 tons, 7 wood; 3,714 pieces do.? d ages per Splendid: 399 per Patrick Her 622 per Zurich; 814 per Lady Franklin; 80 per Alexandria; 253. per ‘Trumbu 5 casks soda ash; 13 ste; 1,81 181 per Roscius; per Liverpool; ; 9 per Panama: fruit 70 boxes lemons ; 4,411 do. oranges; 54 bbls. raisins; 527 bags walnuts; 100 bags nuts; 54 bbls., 18 bbls. chi ; 285 bags almonds; 340 box: case, 10 kegs igs; 200 pumpkins: fish, 465 bbls., 65 half do., 450kogs herring; 5 quintals cod; 50 bbls pickled cod: grease, 87 pipes mare's :’ hider, ; 881 buniles goat skins ; theep skiv: 4,393 horse skins, horns, 14,085; honey, 04 bhds, 270 tes., 1 bbl.; hats, 10 Dales; hops, 6 ales; hair, ‘83 ceroons, 12 bules; iron, 9,658 bars It.R., 27,614 bars, 4,528 bdls., 2,200 bdls. sheet, 2,017 bdls. hoop, 72 tons pig, 25 tons scrap; lumber, 1200 hackmatack ‘knees, €0,000 lath; 6 bales leather, metal, es sheathing; marble, 181 blocks: oil, 2 casks almond, 216 easks linseed, 4 casks cod, 875 boxes olive; palm leaf, 200 bunches; paint, 50 casks ochre; rattan, 2,000 bdis; rags, 466 bales; salt, 1,301 sa ed, 310 bags linseed, 230 do. canazy; shell, 10 bbls.’ mother of pearl, 1 bbl. ‘turtle; sugar, 25 boxes, 77 tes.; steel, 371 bdls.,’5 casks, 74 cases; splees, 24 casks nutmegs; spirits, 166 pipes gin, 20 casks brandy, 2 pun. whiskey; tin, 950 slabs, 600 pigs, 3,754 boxes plate; tea, 10,561 packuges; tobaceo, 80 bales; wool, 163 ine, 5,851 baskets champagne, 109 cases, 14 casks, 2 qrs.; wood, 1,028 Wdls, willow, 265 pieces, 146 logs mahogany. According to the last annual report of the Old Colony Railroad Company, the receipts and expenses for the year ending Noy. 30, 1852, was as aunezed:— Ow Cotoxy RatRroap. Total receipts from payments, freight, &e Expenses, rents, and interest........... $522,315 74 ,703 80 Leaving the net earnings for the year...... $101,610 44 ‘This is equal to about $6 per share on the capital stock. Amount of bonds purchased, being a reduc- tion of funded debt, $45,500. Amount of iron rails, wood. oil, &¢., on hand and paid for, $51,207 94. Cash on hand, $15,471 67. Also, 2,334 shares of the capital stock, purchased at an average cost of about $67 per share. Also, several large and valuable tracts af land, which will go far towards paying the balance of the corporation's debts, amounting to only $283,000. The lease of the South Shore Rail- road will expire in one year from the 1st of April next. ihe savingin the expenses ou this road for the past year amounted to $7,453 02. There can be but little doubt that by the time this lease expires, the Old Colony road will be free of debt; a seven or eight per cent dividend paying stoc} 1 be worth in the market a handsome premium, instead of 20 per cent discount, as at present. The coal operators in the Wyoming Valley have entered into an arrangement in regard to the price of freight, so as to. prevent, in future, that competi- tion which has heretofore proved so disadvantageous | to those engaged in the business. The supply from that region will be largely increased the coming season. It is estimated that 100,000 tons will be consumed in Danville alone. Ve hi Professor Wodge, geologist, and W. Hf. Morrell, civil engineer, and we should think from the state- ments made, thatit would soon rank with the most | yoports throughout the year, confine prominent mining companies in the Cumberland jon. two hundred iid thares—the par value of w and dollars—are in the treasury, The jnme <o7 the company consist of cash on hand aimenty poe yithin the ygyt four months, ¢ Clearance: | Valueof ‘and Patrice Fear. 8. British. Foreign. 383 2 3,202,867 926,097 182: + 35,357,041 3,287,835 1,148,567 1824, 98,422'404 8454350 1,506,401 1825) 88,870,945 8,987,169 1,868,878 536,72 3,688,055 1,386,556 3,974,680 1,619,685 4,100,754 = 1,242,738 842, 4247.74 140,553: : 42821189 1,617,198 87,164,372 4,668,053 1,770,656 450, 4,415,249 1/291, 202 4,498,088 1,520,686 | 4:604,588 1,686,732 e037 050 2'oua1° 037, % . 8164393 2.042778 5,661,623 2,434,459 6,198,261 2,720,461 6,490,485 2,949,182 6,790,470 21628,057 | 6,669;905 214571479 TSL1T9 —2}643,383 58,584,202 7'500,285 2,846,484 €0,111,082 8,546,000 3,551,215 57,786,878 8,688,148 3,727,438 58,842,377 9,712,464 4,568,732 52,840,445 9,289,560 4,017,066 63,596,025 9,660,638 4,934,760 ; 741367,885 9,442,544 5 ,002,53 1851;. 74448,722 9,820,876 6,189,322 | _ It will be noticed that within that time the amount ; there had been no sustained improvement for ten received the repovt of the Llangollen | 1 Coal Mining Company, together with the reports of | This company have a capital of only and fifty thousanddoliars, of whieh four h i3 forty She es aE of stock $40,000— ite liabilities amount to $42,000, being an available excess of $41,061 50. coal. The sybstance of the report, or reports, is that ing their works with the Baltimore and Ohio Rail- preparing chambers for mining at least 300 tons of coal per day, the company will have a surplus, a3 a reserve fund, on hand of $41,081 50. That the com pany’s lands are traversed for nearly one mile by the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, at a distance not more than forty feet from the out-cropping of the lower coal seams; that a connection with the railroad, of sufficient capacity to afford transit for 300 tons of coal daily, is nearly completed, and that an addition- al outlay of $5,000, for extension of tracks, mining implements, &c., will put the company.in a condition to mine an almost unlimited amount of the best quality of coal. That the town of Bloomington, now Liangol- len, which has already a population of three hundred inhabitants, a post office, several stores, and is a place of considerable commercial importance, be- Jongs, with the exception of a small number of lots already sold, exclusively to the company; that on‘ ac- count of its advantageous position at the confluence of the Savage and the Potomac rivers, this town pos sesses great facilities for manufactories, mills, &., and that besides affording a considerable source of revenue from the sale of lots, it will tarnish great conveniences for the prosecution of the company's business ; that the company’s great advantage con-- sists in the smallness of its capital, the comparatively: limited number of shares, the possession of all the: coal seams, and a location upon the Baltimore and | Ohio Railroad which renders its capacity for mining | almost unlimited; in short, has all the facilities for | mining which a much larger capital could bestow, nsuring to its stocknolders a certain and Jarge divi. | dend. The Superintendent of the banking department of | this State has furnished the annexed statement of | securities held in trust, for the security, and if neces- sary, for the redemption of circulating notes, on the | first day of February, 1853 :— Secures IN BANKING Deparment, State or New Nor, For the Free Banks, | New York State Stoek. $9,064,240 55. United States do. 5,118,262 52 Canal Revenue Certificates, 1,371,500 00 Illinois State Stock... 646,687 85 Arkansas do 356,000 00 Michigan do fs 180,000 00 Bonds and Mortgage: 2 oO Incorporated Baiaks. New York State Stock. Canal Revenue Certificates, 75,400 00 | —_—-——---- jen dlotabcsal asa deters ackaustuacdar tage $21,073,844 43 | Amount of securities held as above, on the | ~ Ist day of December, 1852, as per Super. | intendent’s Annual Report........... «$20,907,512 67 | Increase... .4.eeeere $766,331 7p | The increase in securities shows that new banks j ®ve forming much more rapidly than old ones are | | closing up. The annexed statement from a recent Parliamen- | tary return, exhibits the value of export of British. produce from the United Kingdom of Great Britain, and also of the employment of British and foreign. shipping, during a period of thirty years, from 1822 to 1861, both inclusive :— Commence or GREAT Brrras—Valve or Exrorts axp- Amount or Tonnack Eapioven, Declared Total of exports has been doubled, but that this increase has taken place entirely since 1832, up to which date years. The table also shows at a glance the effects of the banking and commercial depression of 1826, 1837, and 1848, Within the same period the increase in the employment of shipping has been still more remarkable than the growth of exports, the total amount of tonnage entered inwards and cleared out- wards having becn three times as large last year as in“ 1822. The augmentation in foreign tonnages since the repeal of the navigation laws is exhibited in a still greater ratio, but this disproportionate movement wil! be reversed in the returns for 1852. In the twelve months ending June 24, 1952, the Li verpool Dock Estate received the enormous sam of £102,649 from the commerce of the port with the United States, and also received the large additional sum of £28,077 from its commerce with the British provinces in North America. These sums, amount- ing together to £130,726, form more than one-half ot the revenue which the Liverpool docks derive from | tonnage dues, goods, and lights, that whole sum. being, according to the last complete annus! ac- count, £254,470 188. $d. This vast revenue, whose continuance and increase are essential to the solyen- cy of the Liverpool Dock Estate and the prosperity of Liverpool, arises from the cotton trade, the timber trade, the tobacco trade, the trade in American and Canadian flour and provisions, and the colonial trade in oil and dried fish and skins, and from the exports to these countrics. These trades amoant in round numbers to £35,000,000 a year, if we take on one side the goods exported; namely, cottons, wool lens, linens, silk, iron, earthenware, Xc., and on the other side the raw materials and supplies brought ipto this port. No other port in the three kingdoms possesses one fourth part of the trade with the United States and British America which is pos- essed by Liverpool. 5 The Columbus (Ohio) State Journal states that he commissioners of that county have sold its fifty thousand dollars of stock in the Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati Railroad to that company, at the rate of $130 per share, The company agrees to pay six per cent interest on the purchase money, and to re- deem the bonds given in exchange for the stock, when they shall become due in January next. The third monthly report of the mining agent of the Great Northern Lead Company to the executive committee, shows how industriously the works, thus fur, have been prosecuted, and what a bright pros, pect the coming year holds out for the proprietors o | these mines. We annex the report entire, that those | interested, and the public generally, may see the 4? | ference between working a mine properly and we ck | ing one improperly. There is no doubt but that the | Great Northern Lead Mine is one of the richest in | the country; aud that it is workedin a sefentific mau. | ner no one can deny | Great Norn Linan Mixiva Company eR ae, 1 to yon in my last monthly ve- | int the present would he of interest, I propose, ox | it fs the opening of the new ye }o endeavor to make you | understand, by as much dotailas T can, the exact state of afiairs at these mines. J shall, in ew quent monthly myself principally to statements of the progress of underground works, aut! the quantity of ore weighed in and smelted. ‘The estab lishment is, for the present, very complete am and F may em my opinion of it by congratuliting you on the posses ost extonsive and yala able eoneerns Th vet long by two extremity of omimenged. By 5 is on the ¢ i works beve boy abont “sevem