The New York Herald Newspaper, February 25, 1855, Page 3

in ctiiitathe Nogh ofthe Daag ta Yen apee ants in error.—This wasa motion for a new trial, ground- ed on the following points :— POINTS ON THE PART OF PLAINTIFY IN ERROR. 1. The objection to evidence the acts or con- duet of Theotore 1. Peverelly was under the cireumstances, and for the reasons stated at folios 24, 26 of the Error Book. The combination or between the parties indicted should have been fi shown. This was the foundation for the proposed proof, and should bave been laid before it was received, (the People vs. Pariah, 4 Denio’s B., 153.) “2. The éotton a produced by the witness Thomas wad exhibited fo the Jury, and 2 the burning of t Wa the presence pth tf was iupecperly ul- lowed by the court 3, The tortimony of David Lewis and others was im- properly allowes by the Court. This was not» seve in which it was necesvary for the prosecution to show ag: extrinsic motive or for the commission of the al leged otience. It w iTect, allowing the prosecution Iready coumicted crime (which could be easily upon him, as he had no previous intimation that such an atiempt would de made) for the purpose of warranting the conclusion that be had committed the offence charged. As & gene- ral rule this would be most dangerous, and if improper in any cane, it was #o ia the p.esent e motioa to strike out or expunge from the case the testimony of David Lewis and others was improperly overruled by the Court. bis ovidsnce had born allowed to show # motive onthe purt of the defeudant for the commission of the cffence charged; i.e , the appropria- tion of property placed wih h m on storage, to his own use, Itdid not meet the fact, put left it to be inferred, ‘The conversion of the property was the principal poiat, and that was not proved. 5, The motion to the Court to direct the acquittal of the defendaat, as at fol. 1.5 of the Error Book, waa im- proper ruled. The building in which the (alloge ‘) reparations to fire were made was not proved to be, ur do We known to be, No. 147 Front street. There was this a variance betwren the ind ctuent and tue proof, (10 People vs. Slater, 5 Hill, 401.) 6. The definition of the word ‘adjotning,”? ax eyo ta the Orsi request of the Court to charge the jus, ras correct, and tbe refusalof the Court as to tite. sega, and its charge as given upon th! poivt, were «rvavous. ‘The statute uses lsnguage that has a perfect!y wel! ua- ders mean he huilting attempted to be fired must adjoin, or Ff not adjoin, must be within. the zutsl lege of an vuhabited dwelling. In other words, the for- mer building must touch tue latter—or if tt dovs not, and is removed any distance fro within the common fence. To take this as the #tautard Z is to assume a se’e ong. Any other would be productive of the greatest lax\- ty. But for the exertions which are made to arrest (i any buildieg on fire, or attempted to beset on fire, could be said to adjoin another, for the purposes of danger, no matter how far off the two buildings might be. The e:ror ol the Court was, in allowing the jury to define for themselves the word “adjoining,” with reterence to dis- tance, No two juries would tink alike on such a au ject. Some migut take a greater and some n less dis tance. statute, aad as such, to be strictly, literally construed. (4 BI. Coma, 225; 1 Mood. & Mals., 341; 8. C., 22; B.C. LR, 880; 2 Chitty Cr. Law, (5th Am. Kd.,) 1120.) 7. The point made in the second request, (to the Court to change ) of the defendant’s counsel, (Error Book, fol. 168,) that the most proven against the defendant was a conspiracy between him ‘Theodore L. Peverelly to commit the crime charged, with a series of overt acts constituting preparations for ite commission, was well taken, (See also the third, fourth, fifth, seventh and eighth requests, fol. 158-163, and remark of Coart at (ol 164.) They all depend upoa the correctness of this prin- ciple. ‘The refusal of the Coart to charge these various requests, and its charges givon upon these po'nta, were erroneous. If the principle advanced by the de‘eadunt’s counsel was not correct, the very firet net—that of going to Williamebarg and parchasing the camphone, (x Jeged by the proxscution) would have mace the felon. complete. allthe acts of the azcased, or his allogod a complice, short of a direct atvempt to fire or burn, were Dut the’ arraogement of preliminaries to tae commis- sion, or to the attempt to commit, the principal act. If this ia not taken as the correct conclusion, how ia it to be determined whet acta are merely overt in puriiasce ef acon’ y, and what constitute the felonious at. purchasing the camplone, tore of the a: 4, was an juance of & conspiracy to commit arzou, opening of the darrela, and saturating the cotton with their conteats, mace the felonious at tempt? (2M S., (2d Ed ) pp. 576 677, 9) 8, 10; 3I4., $16 Revisers’ Notes ) It is true the statue does not re- quire overt acts to make a conspiracy to commit arson indietable; but if overt acts are committed, they do not ravate the offence. The meaning of the statate is that come crimes are #0 he'noxs that for two or more persons to agree to commit them isa miatem:anor, fhe atatute defining ‘‘ attempts’ spd ther put oes not militate with the views of the defend counsel, Tho true eonstraction of that statu that the attempt or act must go to the perpetri tion of the very subject matter of tho crime. Ia —— corpus delictt in the firing or buraiag. The fire or burn. It would be agrose misuse of lauguage to aay that Sieg Aaa! the train was aa attempt to fireorbura (2K. © :2do, do. p. 832, Revisers’ Not In [ndictments it is not nece sary toret out the mode or manner which the at. pts are made. Where it ix done, Lowever, the alle tions deine what an attempt is (Chitty Cr. La $th Am, ed., 1,131.) The cefendast, moreover, was | does the word the averment wi Bot essential doscription, order to bring this act within the statute, tho words‘ adjoizing to” 1. By del 2. By context of the same section of ata tog fo tenor of decision in People va. Gates, (18 Woo 60. Fighth Except! 'tioa of the word: the commit arson,” and its views of the acts coastituting a attempt “attempt,” and tuching themeelves to an attempt for the jury under the ruling of the Coart. 1 mon law and the statute, regarding attem offences, carry out the civil law maxi, quic ‘ast. 5, amt People ¥ Bush, 4 Hill, 1! tle tne Inw as the Judge ruled it definition of attempt was arson, where, the prisoier merely ness, and told him to set Gre to a building. ‘Tue whole ques issue Me. Hal! so" mean in the st ear to ael To the latter case th as to arson ii the latter, it must be | | MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL IN THE CASE OF WILLIAMS, It must be observed, too, that this ix» penal | | rations of the deceased, = | way to the | until a few hours before her death, indulged the hope of | Tecovery, When her husband left her on Wednesday | evening, she stated (fol. 45) that ‘on Friltay she would Rose im. Ev. tempt to commit arson must be the attempt to | | eleewhere, where many entitled to bis locus penié-ntiae aa betwren felony’ and | misdemeanor, and the entire charge of the court tothe jury was calculated to deprive him ; 8. Tho Court erred in refusing to charze the jury that there was no testimony that the attempt to tire tho Dduilding was actually mate in the night time, as desired in the sixth reques: of the defendant's coun 20 far from this, if the Court was right in its views as to what constitute! an attempt to commit arson, the attempt ‘was actually complete In the Jay time. of oan —by the purche: phan: bringing i! into the store of the accused, tler va, The People, 4 Denio’s RB , 68.) POINTS ON BEMALY OF TIE PFOPLE, , District Attorney, appeared for the er. that the prironer was convicted at sions, November, 1854, upon indictment under theee statates. viz -—‘Every person who shall wilfully set fire io, or burn in the night time, any slop, war house, or cther bui’ding, not being the sa ject of arson im the first degree, but adjoining to, or withia the curti- lege of, avy inhabited dwellisg-howse, ro thet auch house shall be eadangered by such firing, ‘stall, upon coavic. tion, by stjudged guilly of arson in the second degree 2B 8. orig. od. 666; 2K &. ith ed, £53; 2 KR ch. 1, title &, art. 1, $2.) ‘Every person who tempt to commit an olence prohibited by law, such attempt shall do any act towars tl. comm! sach offence, but shali fallin the perpe ration thereof, or shall be prevented or intercepted in exovuting the samo, upen conviction thereof shall, in ca pro is made by law for the panishment of tempt, be punished aa felons,’ 608; 2 R. S, 4th ed, $81, part 4, c viction was for an attemp* indictment wont to the jury upon coun 11, 12, fi ters ari ke. ny, ftom t! im which they were take: Exception ‘Firrt—(Fo. court, allowing the acts ani conduct of Theodore L. Pa- following exceptions, in the order .)—To the decision of the vere'ly, co cefendant, apart from, or in the abseace of The, defendant, to be given in evidence against the de- until the prosecution had first a between ther. int First.—The court exercised a correct in allowing the prosecution to give evidence 0 vacter objected to, although perhaps & little out of time, 1, The Disirict Attorney at the tims of the oblection, siated how he would enbsequent'y connect ‘uese acts and this conduct with the prironer 2, These acts and thie conduct were coon seted—by skowing Theodore to be the clerk of the pritoaer, and residing with him; by showing the two arrested wile in ompan, coeths arts objected 1 connested t corpus delictt. ‘The snd turpent ne and time of arr goods to wh acts, conduct and deni fated. The acts objected to were material acta ‘towards the ultimate commission of the offence,’ (a* in lan guage of the aforesaid sta tate touching attemp's ) Exception Second.—To the ada {teatimony (Fo. 112, 113) regarding » bot le containing cotton saturated with eamphene; and to the proprety of burning the + in presence of the jury Point Secoud.—This was ¢ fury, serving to show (in the same manni ame effect asif the jurors hal viewed the prev uality of the alleged tows commission of the offence, It was competent evidence, because the bottle ani the cotton came directly from the preaises of pri somer, at tLe time of his arrest, and waa vedisturbed from from that period to the proluction before the jury (Testimony of Wm. Tho: ) Exception Third—To testimony show!ng ‘a motive on the part of the prisoner, for the commission of ths srinie eberged vpon him, growin the mis appropri: or conversion of property place) wita him ou (Offer of District Attorney, Point Thirl.—The question for te tempt whe ominit arson, and t being Of various decrees of ury belag fe neoowsary to ® en the caw bad the x men is charged with 8 occupstion. the inten the act itself, bat othe refanal of Court to direct %% Attormey to elect unter wuich the case to the jury scretion of € decaure the counts pore of meeting the ev p' apd the charges were sub: for the sams offence (Whar. Cr. Law, pp. 152 ami 153; People y. Kane, 8 Wen. 203) 3, Besides, the D strict Attorney did elect, and abandoned, Gth, 6th, 7th and &th counts Fifth Exeeption—To overraliog by Court of a motion to strike out the testimony of Mavid Lewis, (Fo 120,) A. FE. Dubois, (Fo, 124,) and Emil Ruyer, ground that it 4i¢ not ha made upon the defen: to be missing, and that there was consequently nothing to establish a conversion of the property by ths fendant depwat bifth.—1. Ths evidence was for the jury, as to Point motive— was some evidence—and the Judge cor- rectly aense the te it. 2. The prosecation contend, ({ the Court tt ercised i tly, under the law embraced by the mo- ton ot sewer. Prisoner was tmilee of tee properly | he was going to t the second cegree, Ajoinia bukiing,’’ or Gre ® building “so adjoining as to en i danger,” &c Next 'w: “attemp! ve an act toward fring, as taking a mato, &c’ the collection of combustible materials ai Should the verdict be reversed the prisoner may yet be tried for attempted arson im the third degree, or coasp racy, or on an indictment for larceny of ‘the goods ve boused with him, Decision reserved. Supreme Court.Goneral Term. Hon Judges Mitchell, Morris and Clerke. CONVICTED OF POISONING HIS WIFE. 2 Fen. the prisocer, and argued that he way entitled toa ne trigh— 1, The Court erred in admittio, in evides by Mary tol, 25, ceath y house with clothin (who was a watchman river) for ber husban mn some ship in the Nort! o'clock the next moroing; when she came in she ap ck on board the peared very ill; she said she got vessel on which her husband was; she said she had not been drinking; she suid that her whole frame seemed ag ‘This an- if it were on fire, and her heart felt awfal.’? sewer wan elicited by the District Attoroey asking tl witness to state “where the deceased said she was goin: on the Saturday evening previous to her death,” an token under defendant’ ction and exception. Court also erred in ¢ ‘The cay ight preceding her deata.”’ Tha inference reste solely on these de:larations of the deceased made in the absence of the prisonor. The testimony was mre hear say, and was clearly iondmissible, [a the cass o Kirby vs. The State, 9 Serg., 583, that evidence that the deceased, it was heid while on hi place where he was found murdero4, and 9 was supposed to bs killed, had stated tha: place, and that the defendaat wa ing with him, was incompetent. tate (2 Halst..'220) it was held that conv-rsaticn of the deceased with « third person, or axts of the decease which uever came to the knowledge of the prisoner, can pot be received im evidence. The priuciple of these case: ony before in too clear and well established to require a citation of of furtber authorities, There was no that the: statements of the deseased were dying declarations, na if they had been offered as clearly inadmissible—beca the time these declarations were made, aod afterward: be able to go after her money. £ p. 27, 38. 1 Phill, Evid,, 286—0th Bul.) ‘the test'mony of Dr. Uh!, as to the condition an contents of the bowl taken urder exceptions. and th 3 of the contents of the bow McCready taken under exceptions, were impro} mitted; because they were not sufictently identitie: And the Court erzed in refusing to char ow thme it wi chemical analysis by Profeseor McCrrady, the evidence an to the a. _ of the contents of the bow! should be rejected.’” ‘The witnoas, Mrs. Campbell, states that th. bow! was set om the trank by the prisoner op We:lues: Aay, and abe could not aay how long it remaiced thera. There were a half a dozen people in the room from break. fast time until she diet, and at fol. 47 and 48 she admits end the court intimates ita opinion that she could not | eseentially identify it. ecution. the people :— Point 1. The Court were corre mony excepted to, and which tes!imony is ‘ound, an also n charging the jury regarding thia tsstimoay. The it fact t falvity, wa was expr being thus, t, indicating tention’ —on exception to the ru n,) 109 and 123 ) Thi 1 by husband's ad declaration was made, question It accor le confirm Point 2. ‘ihe Court were correct in admitting the tes- ions. timony concerning the bowl ond itscontents. The teat inony was competent and admissible to the jury, wh could give to it what effect they chose. Lave bac contact with the building 147 Froat ateest, in Point Seventh.—The evidence anawered the meaning of ute, 3 Accord. —(Thia willembrace the objections suggested by cequeste for charge after number ons.) To | law Inid down by the Court regarding “‘atvempt to | Point Fightb.—The Court were correct in their view of | the la repantiay i t hi | | ‘ue com- commit | quid crimi. | nis consummalionis deert conatun consti‘wir, sed ergitati- | ums poenam nemo patitur. The eases of King v. Higgins, given in a case of attempt at | gave «match to wit: oatended iswhat or in order to make an attemp: must there ~The People vs. Andrew Williams.—Mesara, Spencer and Clinton submitted the following poiats for the decla mpbell, at Saturday before her as she said; #be did not retira until five ging “that the jury might infer that the deceased was with her huarband on the astur: Ta Zeller va. the ro they were not male in articulo morfis, or under the con iciousness of impend- | ing dissolution, On the contrary, the deceased, during by Professor rly ate » Toast if the exposed on a table or on a chest or room, or reons hal access between the taken from the room of the deceased, and the | ‘The Cour: erred in receiving in evidence the recog- | nizance without due proof of it: Mr. A. Oakey Hall, District Attorney, opposed the mo- tion, and submitted the following points on the part of | ja admitting the testi P character, motive or object— present purpose as to hearsay. eclaration was afterward ‘The bow! was NEW YORK HERALD, SU be rejected as bye mortar 5 Whar. Or. Law, 289.) 4. [t wd B question « ly for the jury, there being at least nome evidence nor are they strictly Courts of Record although thoy Seventh Exception —To refusal of court Foe Gubstamee) | powsens many of the attrinutes of such courts, yet the: to charge in substance that the adjoining dwellings muss | are courts, of interior jurisdictiyn, it ia trve, but witl full powers over all aubjects within their jurisdict on— among these is the power to punish for contampt com- mitted in their presence while the Court is in session, ‘They may be termed inferior cous ta, bot of resord. I speaaing of such courta the late Judge Cowen, ia bi 64, able treatise, vol 4. p. 64, 8ed., says:—" Irrospecti of the statutory provisions there refarred to (betore al- lnded to) which we sball presently notice at larze, this Court, (Juatice’« Court,) and indeed all courts, nave power while ia the exercise of their lawfal functions, to pr serve order, decorum, and ailenoe: for without thia ower po tribunal ean exist,’ and refer to 1 Str, 429, L ‘hit. Crim, Law, 88 and 80, ' At common law, this power a woa hek! to ‘be incidertal to every Court (ace the rewarka of Jneties of the Su preme Court of the United States reported ia | Nila.’ Register, vol 20, p , 229), ant not confined to Courta of Record goer vs. Martin (Ventris 1), the Court of King's Bich resolve) (oa the question directly arising in rethtion to courts aot of record) in there words:—‘Phay may punish one that reaieta the process of their court, and may fine and im prison for a contempt to their court acted in the face of it, though they are no court of ri ."' Not y ia {crior courts not courts of record have that power, but a single magiatrate sitting ay a court enjeys, »t common law, the right to commit for contemot and tie effect hereof was fully discussed in Lining va, Banthram, (2 1,) in the conatitational Court of Appeals of South Carolina, on a return of a warrant for a breach of | the peace, against one Dunean, the Justice retused take the bale oflered, upoa which Lining got into a lent passion, and accused the Justice of gross partiality and abuse of power in his office of magistrate, accom: anied with very stusive and disrespect/al Inaguage to is face, and in the presence of a number of bystanders, The Juatice drew up a commitment, and committal Linirg tothe common jail for thit coatemptuoas be havior, Lining brought a suit against the Justice, and Duncan itted ay a witness, and swore that the facts stated in the commitment were untrue, and a ver dict was taken for the plaintiff ; but the Court set aside the verdict and determined that the commitment drawn by the Justice was conclusive evidence in his favor and that the Justice was not amenable in an astion for & judicial act of this nature. In delivering their opinion A case, the Court retmark—" And one general prin ixcidental to all courts, #8 well superior as inferior, won @ power to commit for contempt, either by word or deed, offered in the presence of the Judge, and in the face of the Court."’ One would suppose that tho de: sions | have cited, and the opinions therein expro-sed, would satisfy any one that ao inferior court (not of re- 0 ih cord) have the power to commit for contempt. I have therefore come to the coactusion (indeed, naver had any coubt as to my power) that [ w thes» de sions, notwithstanding the summary manner the le Jadge Cispored of the committal of Mr. & exercise the power Of committal wherer oscagion vires it, 1 €o not intend any disreapect to Judge Daly by the remarka I have just made, but merely in tend to show the Jaw under which Justices of these courts exercise the power to commit for contempt. 1 ith, and shall it 4 of OF e The Late Conviction of Capt. Smidth for Slave Traffic—New Trial Granted. UNITED BTATHA CIRCUIT COURT. Hon. Judge Petts presiding 24.—The Court announced that in the cage of 4 F { Smiath a new trial was granted on the ground set forth {cn the written opinion of Judge Nelson. United States District Court. Before Hon, Ju’ge Betts. Fen. Joseph A, Crane et al ve. The Steanhoa’ Sanpson.—This was a case of collision brought by the owners of the br’'g Iola, and tried before Judge Hall, who guve a decree in favor of the libellants, and orderad areference toa Commissioner to compute their dama ges, The Commirsioner reported the damages at the som of $2,150, to which report both partion excep‘ed, An amended report was afterwards wade, spesitying the particulars of the amount, aad the cass comes up now on the exceptions to the report. The claimants of the ntemboat contend that no damages sbould be al lowed, on the ground of a frawlulent attempt on the part of the livellants to charge the steamboat w. amounts no way connected with the collision; any damages are al owed the amount should te grestly lessenesi jwhile the libel! os sould have been allowed to the amount of $4,085 75. Held by the court that, apon the proofs, there was strong evivence that wioever condustel the repairs ot the brig attempted most unfairly to charge the steambcat witn expenses, well kaown to them not to have ariaea from tle injuries, Tue pretence under which the attempt was covered ~that the underwrite «were to pay the expenses, and that the cbarges were put in veyond thoir jast to vereon the owpers ‘rom their »! of contribution lessons the dishonesty of the tranaantion, Thal | teution or even attempt of the libellants to pr fraud upon the claimants, do , di them from recovering the real valie ‘of the labor and materials bestowed upon the brig in giving her the re aire slie required, ‘That the sur of $00 be allowed for ¢ repaire as reported by the Commissioner, ome witanas | having offered to make the repaiis for that sum. But that it sbems befitting im a court, proceeding in a gool degree upon the principles of equity, to d.scountenaace the attempt of the libellants to oniorce a wrongfal » t against the steamboat, by denying interest on fom, until that sum become fixed by the secoal t 4d 1 hh they would have been , A, cs = 8 3 8 S = $ : a 3 s 2 = = o = Libellamte ave left the point upom conflicting state when they could easily have rectified the mates by testimony at their command. Decroe therefors, that the report of the Ortmlesioner bo corrected (a these particulera, and that the livellé for the sum of $1,121 22 For livellauts, Mes ants, Mr. Donoliue, Owen and Morton. Common Pleas, Before Hon Judge Woodrutl SUIT FOR ALLEGED ASSAULT AND BATTERY i 0 av THE BROADWAY THEATRE—IMCORBTANT TO MAYVAGERS traced from the prisoner Evi‘enceof Mrs. Campbell, who sh saree ave it to officer Lanagan; of officer Lan who AND GFEOCLAZORD TH TIGERES. to L Bingham ; of Lieatenant | Feu. 21 —Joseph Seagris! os Woolley, Police Ofturr.— vec ewe Boe {he coroner: of the This was an action for alloged assault and battery. Lt Whether the bew! from wh the medical gentieme: made the tests for poison, wax the bow! oxt of whicl the prisoner fed the deceased, was competent ant pro per testimony for the jury, in connectioa with the teat Knowing the anci of its contents corresponcing with teat of t ison o withers the performage found on post murtem, ‘The jury, by their verdict, set- great favorite tragedian, certain pertona commenced ted the matter, Point 3. ‘The Court properly allowed the bond to be read in evidence the privoner, but as a private writing, if you please, or as if it were private bond of the party, whose reci’al bound him. 1 was signed by the prisoner, aud had been acted upon b: him before the witm ed bm. Its recitels were nothing more than the @ dence of Mr. Kellogg showed to be the fact. Kelloge w Almshoure tuperintendemt; le had control of the Londs by statute: tke bom) recited that the privone: It was called for by an objection c bad been convicted of aboudon ng bis wife, Kellogg tes- tified to this, and the prisoner's acta showed it; priso ber was, th 1efera, wot prejudi bond. Hs 6 bond been recs d oy the reading of th without the evilen of Kellogg, the prisover might rot bave been bown’ b: its recitals, ‘The fact that there ba! been eny kine between prisoner and deceaved, Judge Green Pow Yo the Commilial of bridge Smith for @ Contempt of Covrt—Mr Taompson constable, returned in writing that in parsusace of th commitment to him delivered, he arrested Mr Smith; bat while on the way to the jail hi | was served with a writ of habeas corpus, commandia him to bring the body of anid Smith before one of the Judges of the Court of Common Pleas, to d anil receive what should be thes and the and that in accordance therewitu he took the # smith before bis Honor writing that Le held « mittel, whereupon Judge Daly discharged said Xmit tody. From the reposts it seems the di de on the ground that the justice of thie ( bad no power empt, auch court n Leipg a court Judge remv-kel th Judge Dely rrect, there was no way in which th Court could puowh witnesses for noglect or refasal ttend, or if they do attend and refase to be aworn, by | no power to comgel them to do #0; or, waen they may with impunity refuse to question that might be propounded to them defeat the cada of justice altoget ver; and, inti doctrine he correct, persons might come into room while the Court weein session, and, by lowt disorderly condect, not only interrupt ba tualiy pae- vert the transection of busines utterly unable ‘o prevent it. I mie eificulties that doo. From exam nation, [ have no doubt of the powe: of there Courts punish for contempt, and that thy | lewroed Jatge went ely m stake t suggest many othe: It come before the jury not ax a record, « (George Kellogg,) who coafront Bain by virtue thereof, ora wer any pertinent ani the md the Court would be might arise, but it ie not necessary to in Forrest was performing one of hia engege at the Broadwa: nN he speculating in tickets, purchased a number of ‘reserved reats,” and then gold tham at night at the doors charg ing an exorbitent premium fact having deen ae certained by the lessee, the assistant ireasurer, Mr. W Nagle, refused to secure seats in atvance whom be suspected to be peculatos canion outwitted by nf a t y by large p chasing ticketa from soll pests for one aga'nst pur- they fceynent!y were engaged pune mi seeing the plein if’ (Mr ~exgriat) a that for another, and this led to great confawon ia the ‘The defendant, who was one of the de‘ailed police cere of the theatre. accosting ladies and gentlemen who were entering the e iC house, and selling them tickets—which prohibited by order of the managem esorcingly polled the plsi ‘bule of the theatre if wan taken to the tent treasurer, was expressly y The plaintiff subsequently commenced a Mr. Nagle and Mr. Woolley for arsault aad ne i, { the officer for $2 000 * * ™ bly expelled from. the vestibule of th night in March, 1864 when Mr. Forrest was perfor one of his wnceessfulengagements, The witness knew nothing of the origin of the muss, nor the cause for tue interference of the officer, nor did he know who the off This was the whole of the plaintiff” so , (of the firm of Whitiog, Clark & B e is +4 , which the Court immedia Before Hon Jule Woods Ven, 2¢.—Otie Allen © action brought to recover for bill of goods sold on credit of the defendant, but delivered to one Weasels and «jury 4 Francis Jordan —Thie wae an h tyne. The parties who soll were C.C. Dole & Oo, The firm diavolved, end the business remained on a settle ment with the plaintif, Dol. The question was t» whom “ Weaselstyne or Jord The jury pl fi * med 0 © — MeMahon for plaintif, Mr. Angus for ¢ nt Before Hon Judge Ingraham. Fon, 22—0. ©. Ole d Co, vt, Philip C. Marlin. —This yromis ory note for $190, mate hy yanle to one McCartney, The 4 note mate in parea it was to be of no 4 was an action op valid, and that (he defendants were no* © pote was not bona fide bol + for value, To this point the evidence was conficting, and various legal authorities were re- sorted to a commented om by both parties, bat the Court rendered a verdict for plainwi for amoant claimed 4 ir e | ble to the mi D. MeMabon for plaintif’, Jones | rene for ew yiante. Statute ne Be Ho than 8 jnation of the may punish for | « oe eri min! pt, by and impriooment, persons Present, Hon. Jadges William |, Robert H. Morris | gvilty of “disoréer'y, contemptuous or insolent behe ro | vier towards such justice while engaged on the trial of caureor in the rendering of any judgment, or in ao judicial proceeding.’ tice of this Court ia rot strictiy a justion within the meaning of thet statute Tam aware of the fact that a Jas. of the | The jury found a verdict for platatul for $18. | Fen.28.—Wn. A, Schaffer ayl, Lindley M. Hoffman 5 wots of issue sna oe fied oo tb oar ot or We "3 be placet in relation BE asia rei ron by sine rout corrected by the Court. Marine Court. Before Hoa Judye McCarthy Fen M.—In (he Matter of the Alleged Con! «sept of Court bythe Proprictore of the Timer.—This case wae comumed again today, and further postponed, without amy sction | as to any of the parties concerned. Before Hon. Judge MeCarthy anda Jucy. ACTION FOR BAGGAGE LOST ON BOARD SHC. Pre, 22,.—Charles Bnd ws. Mortimer Livingston and Others.—This aotion was brought by the plaintiff, ae the assignee of one Miss Maria Geiseuboeffer, who came as ¥ pastenger fron) Havre to this city, last October, in the packet ship Havre, of which de‘endants are tbe owners She alleges that when tuo vessel arrived at Quarantin the passengers and dacgage were placed on board a | barge and towed up to tae dock, at the foot of Chambe street, in this city ; that when she arrived at the docks | #be was told by some person on board the barge that abo must leave ber bsggage until tmoroiog ; that next memning sbe accordingly dil call, and demanded her trunks, but did not receive them, nor has abe ever seen them ince She claims that she had twe tranks, | which, with their contents, were worth $365 Hur | | terest she assigned to plaintiff. The defenisnts ofered evidence to show that th signee had but one teuok, | | avd the mate of the vessel amore chit amined the contents of it while on the passage, ani that its con- tents were comparatively valueless. An oficer attached | to the Mayor's office alao testified that aio conplal of the loss of ber box (one only) the day after her val. Other witaesses testified to the same sta —This action was brought to recover some $400 for the monthly hiring of a o since 1852, ani for damages for cetaining the seme, The piano it was aliezed waa the property of one J. B. De Camara, who aasigned the claim over to the plaintil, who beings this «uit Mr. De Camara testified to the above state cf facts and further that in his dealings with the defeniant he acted as the agectofon» Mary Wheeler, Un tho part of the defence tentinony was introcuced to show that the piano in question belonged to one Wm, Vander had parted with the same to De Camara al soouri ty for the payment of a note, which Seon paid and that subsequently be, V no [rom the cofendaat's p retainest possession. being contradictory, the C popsuit. 4 seasion, aud has ever the rome |The testimony | act rondered judgmeat of The Market Bank Case. CONTINUATION OF THE INVERTIGATION ADJOURNMENT. Justice Connolly sat in the Lower Pol past three o’clock on F ANOTHER ¢ Court at halt YY evening, for the purpose of | hearing further testimony in the matter of the tate loas | of funds of this institution, Ex-Judge Boose and Mr. Clinton appeared as counsel for the baok, ani Mr. Post Sackett, the accused, respectively, Hiv Honor recorded the following TESTIMONY: Mr. Williams recalled and crossexamined by Me Cliuton—Mr. Sackett requested mew by let ter, to exami cash account; letter is dated om ‘28d of November, 1h04, [did not exam'ne bis casi ac count a requested: Mr. Sackett’s cash was never examined by me during the time he was in the bank, Thave no knowledge that it was ever examined by the directors; the bank directors do appoint a committer to examine the casb affairs of the bank once in six months, ste of three persons; the cashier tine I appoiuted the committes; the minutes of chs bank proceedings will show who were on the committee I genersily acted with that committee; I was always prescat with the committee at thelr examination, and examined the discouated notes; Ido not know if they Cxanuped the first tellers accounts; the $4,000 paid oa account of the alleged defaication of Sackett was paid to me in presence of Mra. Sackett, I do notknow f whose pocket it care; Mr. Delapinine was present | banaed me the certificate; the $4,00) nust have come | trom Mira. Sackett, because she enJorwer + a receipt for the money. 1 do not recollect first receipt given for it was torn up; now if Lever wrote a receipt for Mra Sackett | aubstantialy to this effect «‘ Keceived trom Mrs. Sackett so much money, on account of the embezslo ment of W Post Sackett at the Market Bank,"’ I may the certific vinted onthat committee during the | | Common Council the nam have written such a reovipt; that receipt was torn up; | Sackett’s fiends may have objected to expressioas | such a receipt, if I wrote one; 1 do not now recoll that Ldid write a recent, nor de I recollect the ob- jectichs made to it nor the terms of it; sometices | forget things past, ax men ordinarily do; what | meant y wenting to Mr. Sackett that it would be to his advantage to arrange with the bank, or to come to me to explain, may have been that perhaps he dil not do it, the request to him to come to me was made on a Monday, when an examination of the books was made, [ oxn m ned the deposit book; the mor:gage given by Sackett's father-in-law was on account of his being a surety for Sackets io the bank, the mortgage lal no e the smount of the alleged farm on Long Tslnn!: Sackett’s Joint security with his mother of five thousand dollars ; Daniel Willeta in a director in the bank, I believe the note now shown me is in bis handwriting, the reason Hackett was not prosecuted immediately I do not know, for the subject waa referred to 2 committe, which, after | many copsultations, reported to the bauk d recting the ofticers to procecute; the committee was called after the benk hed got the surety money, the bank directors’ views [do not know; I advised the bank people not to provecute until we found if we could recover from 4ack- ets friends any of the large sume of money he ha from us; the letter of Mr. Daniel T. Willetts is on th 0: 12th mouth (December); there ina bo kept in the bank called the first and second tel pias book. the use of this book is tor keeping a daily account between the two, of checks from the first to the second teller and vice versa, it is nettled up every night (Mr. Willett’s letter to Fackett, commencing with wi 4 here) in order to khow bi “ry steemed frend. the examining be bank, it is pot the practice of many to mn after columa of the accounts; they tings of the tellera: there is no mecessity ware of, to examine any book but the dealer's hook, in order to ascertain a detaleation; by g that book a defaleation weuld be fourl out the $5,000 mortgage was given om account of the em Leralement To Mr. Clhuton—Sackett's father in-law was himself only bound for § father indaw and Sackett's mother were jointh rally bound for aim of 000. the moth J wotulog to the bank, we hold the bond a collateral secusity; Mrs. Sackett paid nothing ov her bond, the sum of $4,100 paid to the tank war not entered to the credit of any ome the de aticn of Sackett is entitled to be credited with the fury it stands deposit in the bank now nut credited total up take the thatla to an, {A drensed to Me ounte privately, In this letter he diselaimed ny comnection with Candee. Witness continued, to Juige Bewbe—If I hat ex tiined the accounts a4 requested, I should have found it then correct woparently; he bad bis fovtiag then msde with hie cash To Mr. € —If a check for $20,040 had been re cved an) uuslaid St would aecount fore deScieacy, but not ‘cr false footing I atated that the defat hang 0 ed, the account containa money and checks I called Sackett's attention to the deficiency onthe “aturday previous, Iwas present with others when the deposit beok weak aided up: some of it wan adie’ up on the Sunday we were at the bank shout aa hour and « half that cay; areceiving teller may be shor nesty or design; it often occurs at th the amount may ne three cents or a if the receiving tel! u, inckett’s leavin ving teller haw had over river the paylog teller was tha’ short; de not recollect if Backett.4 account iladelphia st one time; | geo lly fooved up the cash receipta of Sackett from Febra fod, until @ week after toe disc Iwas bis assistant 1 oftes | he wan often $6 cr so nerally skort ja an short: [ looved for ths dow during this time the entries appoare) al) addition (s all that is required to have the count cor Jobn Wykolf took tacke’ he was absent in Vhiladelpbia, | to Wykof woe short ip his sccounts deen «plese when ae er) that ave © tae about |i om powed of out of do not know if apyth ng else should go on I of the “efice’’ i to embrace the out of t and other things that cempet go to the «lear Ido not reeclleet what other things go ou the « not make out the wlip called the ‘olll To kx-Ja Beebe—I footed up frures y ip the deport book months J found the deficiency ia the drpor ma altered in its footing | iq after I ned discovered the def $20,006 in the accounts; after aiding up the entr the dey I transferred the amounts of ov@ deposit book | another Coporit book, there are deporit books No 4 and Do, 5, and 1 transferred from her, | took the footings from one book them in the other im ink, the entries bao w frequently both In the footings and ent To the Court—! wrote down the — jog is ink | found the eolame from 1 to short, and the owe from A to K $10,000 short. the dr firleney wer only in the addition the Pguree (i aot ap pear to bare been altered. To Mr Cliaton—I dif not mean to way thet the foot ings or Sgures were altered, bat thet suse were recel ret and entered down J Ciatos—i beve the natare 2 sherke. at me day that the dofaloation was discovered; | | Fire Department to present to said com i | their action to the Chief Bngineer, who ‘shall ther NDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1855 be tweeo amt of necks when on the bank, an be of j we ae for aie 2 generally kept Purpose of paring checks; he parsed them t> m on the slip called "office," there wasan item of money charged to me, of small billxfunassorted by the second teller on the previous . which I charge him on the Rese bool; the rules of ail banas are not alike; when Sackett was absent, in l’hiladelphia, there wa an error of $600 in the second tele ccount; Ido not exactly know how it occurred, bat I thimk it was ap ‘over,’ this would make a seeming deficiency of $6 in the second teller’s account, the matter of thia draft is aot Yet nettled on the books ‘To Judge Beoie—Thin certifioste of depowlt (of Clark | & Go ) Wan given when Sackett was wit! ment; I could hot say the aggregate amoun’ of all the checks drawa by Sackett and paid by me, Ihave no kvowledge whether the checks were ever male good tothe bank after f pass ed them to bim; the aecon | teller bas a book called a note book, which is connected with the deposit book; in orier to make up his cash, he has to get the footings of both there books ‘Toe further hearing of the can was ad atage to next Wedne-day afternoon "at hattpast three lock. It it understood that the whole matter will be in the hands of his honor the Justice, on that day, umed at thie The Fire Departme: MEETING OF THE BOARD OF BECKESKNTATIVAS —AN IMPORTANT LAW FORK THR HETTER KXGULATION OF THE FIREMEN OF NEW YORK ENDORSED. A large meeting of the Board of Keprosentatives was held on Wednesday evening, in Stuyvesant Institute— Mr, Jobo J, Tindale acting as chairman, and Mr. Joha ©. Belcher a# secretary. After the transaction of some un important business, the law proposes by Mr. M llikea for the better regulation of the firemen of New York was taken up and discussed. A number of amendments were offered, and it was at length passed iu the following shape — 1, There shall be elected by the representatives of the New York Fire Department live commissioners, at the time and in the manner hereinafter provided, to be dene piivated “The Comm ssione:s of the New York fire De. partment ‘The rad commissioners shall be elscted ou the second Tuesday in May, at such place and hour as the 1 cerignate, wu titute a choite under this Tuesday in May yaufter such election, the per Hin the pr of the President of the New York Fire Department, draw for the teria of tuoi respective ofivos—say ous for the term of dive years, oue for the term of four years, ons (or the terin of threo years, our for the term of two years, ant one for the term of one year—and annually, theresfier, there sball be elected one comralsioner, to hol! bis office for the term of five years 4 In cane of a vacancy in the office of either or all of the commissioners, either by death, removal, orn jon, the suid representatives shall provesd, wivhim ten days thereafter, to fil said vacancy or va cancies; and the person or perronn ao elected abail hold their office only for the balauce of the unexpired term, 6. In the aa se of the refusal or neglect of either or all of commissioners to perform any of the duti upon them by et, the Common Council power to remove said com » such removal to t ooly upon the petition of the sald representatives therelor ¢. No person whail be eligible as auch commiss onor unlevs he shall be, at the time of such election, an ex empt fireman, and shall have ceased to be a member of the Sew rork Fire Department for at least three years prior to said election 7. It shell be the duty of the l'resident aod Hecrata: of the k Fire Department to certify to t of the persous £0 elsc'ed lary not exceeding five hundred dollare a year; and the comma sioners and clerk shall take wm oath to well and faita- fully pertorm their office. ¥. Itshall be the duty of the said commissioners to inquire into all applications for the organization of volunteer bre companies, and the result of suet inquiry, whetuer favor of ‘or against anid companies PPro’ 4 i commisaioner provided fur hereafter, in section 1. 10, It shall be the duty of the Chief Engineer of the janioners the awe Of al! persons applying to be volunteer firemen, and of all persons expelled or resigned from the depart ment, and op the same being duly investigated anid determined by them, they shall certify the reeult of poo r returm the same to the Commen Counsel for all have cognizance of teer firemen for rictoue or disorderly conduet at fires, or alarms of fire, of for via lation of any of the Staie or city laws respecting the ficemen of the city of New York, they sball diligeatly inquire inte the same, and if the paities so charged shall be proved guilty, the said commissions are by empowered to suspend or remove euch firemen, ject to the appro 6 Comune 12. Should any disagreement arise betw mon Council the missioners; in rey ny decision of the Under the niath, tenth and eleventh ‘oes of thie act, the aame shall be re ferred back to the commesionera for reconsiders tom, and should the said commissioners refuse to recede thersfrom, or r ec Yoard, sball, with thirty days after the said ation I] be certitied, ov os witaesses tor oathas J them, and may re aire such respect to any pending batore the tionere; end should such wituers or w ng duly notifie!, refused to aitend, the nay Court, and upon proper p vice of wotice, the rxid Jusiice #h ment compelling the altendance wiinereer. 16. Falve sweariog befor deemed perjury, ano punlshal 16. The Common Council sual! lesign a belge ia at ap how in one of which sball be comm'selonere #hall ve as tach dition to the fre ty 0! fires 1), Any person who rhe the members of the Fire New York, or who shall msticio ae Or imitate ony of the signs or devices adopted or use bal! be ed guilty of ct to a fine of not slecly repre ent aey of Depariment of the city of with latent to fire-caps, bad by the Fire Depart ator aed dei'ere three months shall be paid over to ‘bef f the Vire Departen 1*, The term “ Volonterr Firewen'’ hail be stood ne applying \o 8ll pertose who now are, or may hereatter become, members of the Fire Depart t Oe at preyent orgnnized ander t adopted by the B Mr Misines offered the f ation be Resolved, That shoold app male the Legislature for the of & low previsiog ‘ov veroment of the New Yors Vire Depart ae that Aller deters Legislature for @ act some pe ta late bo Doring the « #, (0 inepert & besatifal serv (OO, which in lo be presentet to Mr. Jobe Coyer, « former Present of the Beart of Tranter The trot five pleces, vin, —A large esiver pot, a colle pot, pitcher The following is the inscription ow eee a. the Board tom 0 re p berin, eugar bere ant corm a ealver 3 son” New Your Derserener Ata When of their nod esteem / lowg acd faithfal servires COMMNTTTER OF RErEErErtaT ee Wm. D Wate Deel Stesbury, Dovid Wilben, Coes Mactovgsl, Joun J. Tiniale COMMITTES OF TRCOTERE Tay mer MMe, James Kelly, Vewecamt, 1866. sooeroneenenerirrerresererrerey itr yn| /rtreeers: somes Prior 435 ‘Thirteenth arti-Blavery Lecture. ‘The Rey, Tumopons Panc®® delivered the thirtesntis Ant! slavery lecture Tuesday o¥Pning, at the Broadway Tabernacles Subject— “The relate of Slavery to the De ‘mocratic Lustitutions of America, and Sts lafluence thare on" The was crowded, and « large portion of the audience was composed of ladies. At halt past feven o'clock tue lecturer waa introduced by Mr. Oliver Johnson, and was received with the usual demoastes tons of applausr, He spoke substantially as follows: ~ At Gret elavery was not in contradiction with the lews of the time, for it was generally acknowledged and prac. tined, Through several centuries white slaves wore hel in Eagiand upto 176%, when several hundred men were Kidnapped in Aberdeen, in Scotland, aad afterwards sold int very. The opporition to it, by which Massecla- sotts wan distinguished, was owing to the coligions Principles which bad been ectablished there by the Pu Hitapa, As thy idea of freedom, continued the lecturse, tends to a democracy, #o the idea of slavery tents to the dHshment of a despotiam. These are the two icean, and you aee they are perfectly irreconcilabie— they are exactly opposite, and the nation that has these two ideas, Io ite coasclousnes* base coatradiction The two capnot walk together, they can never agree oither fs to the place they go to, or the roads they will travel, because one Isads to democracy and the other to dee potinm. Now, there ts not anywhere i the United a biates complete denoersey. Neither is there rrying out of the idea of alavery— our fallen humanity cannot the ute perfectiun, “Liowever, the f this Union may be covnidered pretty gc od approximation towards demecracy, New ka, and New York are more advanced in this directive, The dthern States may be considered as a fair approxima. to despotiom, Which is confined to one particular the ela workingmen and poor meu. After tae eof Hritieh power wae withorawn, these twe ideas of Geedom and slavery remwalned in the . an people, It wan nore. thas they themselves into # State, and there wore motives impeling thereto. There was got that wrong desire for union that there is now, bat there wag the recollection of common perils unitedly borne in the American war. ‘Ibe South wanted union for defeace— they were afraid of enemies (rom abroad, ad still more of epemien at home; the North wanted union for com. Mercial purporer, not at all for defence, In the Revulu tion the North had defended itreli and the Bouth b and it didn’t ak the aid of the Southsraers fo purposes. The con spoken of aa of divine revelation, but it ix of atlorney, whereby the people lamtract whom they periodically elect, to do certain things per: taining to the goverminent of the nation. In preparing the constitution the ideas of freedom and slavery appear J, and were both incorporated in that institution. Slavery bas corrupted the churches, There are 24.00@ Troteatant clergymen in the cou aad of these there iy cot oné openly oppomd to slavery, The Mothodint Fpiscopal bas got ten thousand Sunday schools, balf @ million Gunday scholars, and ball a thousand teachers. Tt has aot got a ain i soheol or teacher. It prints four thousand volumes @ day, foe three hundred days im the year, and it bas never yet printed « ringlo line against slavery, The orthodox Sa dey School Union in 1863, spent over @ quarter of a million of dollars—net m cent aga nat | got dut one book which bas ou and those are from Cowper's Christianity cannot walk together Slavery ‘ihe des whieh, lotting agains says we wi'l, we must bave it firat, th jas ti and ma we will restore slavery all over the North A great change as been eflected within the last your or two, ‘The free soil party has passed « nd tie Know No thing party has sprung up in ite place, 1am no Know Nothing, at least ina political wenee. I think they are wrong—I think they bave faults. Murely the Catholics # eame right to the exercise of their religion that to mine, and the lrote: are wroug in oj ative Americana’ Peo red Weare all foreigners, Ihave nota drop of in my veins that did not come from Rurope, and Ince no difference bv tween the oldest American family and the newest thaicame here If they have not Sexom they are sUll the ehilérea of the hoogh | am opposed to the Kaew , they have done four admirable things. ve chee! coutral the Catbow country tholic bishops and arch! Who are the y ps, who are the tools of tha ts abroad, that t net wee their Catholic pe polation in the futere they have In the past. Ne ‘hey lave shown American politicians that they betier not, forthe futare get on the . tarp with their ud feathers, ' ant call out for that rieb [rial brogue.”’ ‘Third. they have check mated the present administration, which last summer waa very certain 16 would carry the whole country, In secret the Kaew y reanized themeelves, ant brought out the the North in many of thelr movementa; they clinched the ingie fet, and smote the face of Peres ministration with a terrible foree Wourth, they are knocking to pieces the old whiy ant democratic parties; and 1 sey God biews them in that work. Hat while a = this, they undertake to cast out devile with ID the er of eelrebub. ‘The leeturcr concluded with # grand oni , and predicted that the day t would witness its complete ouerthrow. The Committee on Roads of the Board of Councilmen, conrirting of Counc Imea Webber, Ridder, Jenkins, Wow dell and Haswell, met in the chamber of the Board of Councilmen om Wednesday evening, for the parpose of bearing objections to the opening of the Kleventh eve. nue from Fifty ninth to 101th street. first addressed the committee; be with but fow exceptions, was op of land, that the expense of the appeared from the commissioner's 5.600, out of this sum, gentlemen whe < apd aeteseed to about the eum of $79,000, signed » paper ovjec'ing to the opening of the eve. nos al (his period that these persoms were apd di tinguished eft t Srna wot that the measur by the ownes amet bh Bet te t thi fs are 4 that the openieg ¢ at thie a8 pre. mature aod une as not feyuired by them ore wt the ae sither for convenience of travel or for unyroving tue Lealth of the elty, and not petitioned for by the property own the Bloom mgtale road, which rom line ger th Fievecto avenue, v ch the pr avenue + hes *Kiveratore tor 4 purposes of ot health wae Bet the land over which this avenue 90.14 wabject the owners lable ai . not be cty worpeee, tow up aad projerted tpectel Wo make smuggled it through the » dee of the rea © first intelligence received by last, when they were notified to onere ant (hey immediately the Hoard of men for are tof on the (th of Jame last the the ow or any thet th the owners wan ln May appear before the Cow ae the laot and sabject the fora \oetances it would 0 of the property That the eveoting the confirmation of of 1699 & large majority of had the power of weder the w the report, awarted being opposed, amt they papers required by law to ‘be “opreme Court, the H the Hoard of aod relieve duty ect ort mance sin reel tele property, by imaginary for lhe purpeee of taasbtting oer, ni eorporetios counee) thet io wm cows large ruse @ere charret for room hire, whi the rom of some public fun y owes ceed by te co enedoners ond which room was pald fer out of the them ernie, awe Lee © tenses the yo eeting dervntoued ¥ 4 sows Tore 9 tract of lawl afectet by . that be one (he owner ofa he reelly iujere the the enormeoss ao the openiog oul work serous im ary (© many cotatee affected by the im wovemest, be hope that (he comuitter would report in favor of © re fore) of the ordinance Wrasem Th Peore eet Chet all the owners, with bat or three © ‘ , thet 1) wees serament le vie