The New York Herald Newspaper, June 1, 1869, Page 5

THE FREE PRESS. ITS TRIALS, DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Anomaious Condition of the -Law of Libel. Slight Advance Over Anti- ; quated Notions. HISTORICAL REMINISCENCES. REVIVAL OF LIBEL SUITS. It ts the boast of this country that in its funda- mental laws—federal as well as State—the inviola- Ditity of the freedom of speech and of the liberty of the press 2s fully guaranteed. It is 0 by custom and Parliamentary enactment in England; bot not even there, the freest country of Europe, 1s the liberty of ‘the preas made sacred by written constitutional pro- Visions, 1t is conceded by all that no heaithy politi- al lite can develop itself among a people where the frat requisite for 1t is wanting—perfect freedom of discussion and criticism by word of mouth and by the pen, through tne public press, Hence we geo the demand for a free press Inciease in France with every passing year, it is for this reason that regenerated Germany, in the North Ger- man Paruament, at Berlin, as well as in the Diets at Munich, Stuttgardt, Kavsrube and ‘Vienna, measure upon measure has been introduced, iscussed, and in some instances are emanating from the liberal meimbers, and all tending to enlarge the freedom of the press and place it forever after upon solid, secure ground, These measures have of late succeeded most in Vienna, under the liberal guldance of Baron Beust, the present Chancellor of the Anstro-Hungarian empire, and latterly there ‘Was introduced by Pariiameutary enactment, sanc- tioned by the Emperor, trial by jury for all offences against the press Jaw. In the other South German States this had obtained for years past, but in en- Mghtened Prussia it is still denied, and a mere edict of some police official 1s enough to cause the seizure of a whole edition of a paper containing an oflensive article, jast as the same thing is done in France. ‘The prince of the politico-satirical journals of Ger- Many, the Kladderadatsch, of Berlin, has more than once been the victim of this super- vision, and its principal editor has on several oc- casions paid for his journalistic temerity by several weeks imprisonment in the Molken Markt, a city prison in Berlin, In Bavaria they managed things na more liberal way years ago, even, The editor of the Volksbote, at Munich, was sued for libel on the chief of staff of the Bavarian army during the memo- Yabie German war of 1860, and on the case being tried pefore the jury the editor was triumphantly ac- quitted amid the genera applause of the people, it being considered a verdict of condemnation upon the id im which the Bavarian army haa been man: Of all such troubles, to which the continental reas Of Europe is even now to some extent sub- jecied, the American people fortunately know out ittle, From the beginning the liberty of the press Was considered one of the main pillars of the re- publican edifice, and its safety from encroachment ‘was not left to legislative whim or caprice, but firmly Ripeee, as one of the buiwarks of free, constitutional Still, for mi years, and even now, this Doasted fréedom of the press is e7; to insidious attacks. This is owing to the old traditionary max- 4s of the common law, which we inherited from Eng! ‘and to the stiff-necked adhesion of our courts and judges to the authority of cases, whether cited from the ih or American be and whether recent and in consonance with the advanced spirit of the times or perhaps a gene- ‘ation or may be even a century old. This complaint refers especially to the systein of libel suits against the pubiishera of newspapers, C3 means of which every censoriously criticised public oMcer or every ex) rogue seeks to re-establish himself in public esveem by attempting to bleed the publisher or edi- tor and fill his own pockets at the latter's expense, PRESENT CONDITION OF THE LAW OF LIBEL. It is true, however, that we have made some pro- over the antiquated ideas of the last century. ‘he theory of libel has been far more liberalized than it was heretofore. ‘the outrageous principle, ascribed bysome to Sir MatthewHale, and for along time rigid- jy adhered to in England, that ‘‘the greater the truth the greater the libei,’? 1s now no longer recognized. Jo England they e encroached upon this rule by what is called “Judge made law,” the courts inventing the distinction of privileged communica- tions; aud while our courts have followed this lead ‘we have thrown a further protective shield over the liverty of the presa by enacting in our constitutions that im actions for libel the truth of the alieged hbel may be given in evidence by the defendaut, and that the article was published from good motives aud for justifiable ends, (See the constitution of New York ‘of 1846, article 1, section 8) ‘his sweeping pro- vision, apparently covering everything in the aha} of an action or prosecution Dbel ‘was, however, cropped down, and Minitea by the courts, in that they decided that in civil suite for dai based upon the publication Of an alleged libel, the truth cannot be given in evi- denee as a justification, except upon notice to the other party and by laying the foundation for tina Proper plea contained in the answer, and by fur- her exaciing of the defendants in such cases that euch plea of justification must be as precise as a count ip an indictment and as broad as the original eb and the proof in support of it must be as ve as that required by the rules of criminal tice on the trial of an indictment, It was only under the imperative provision of the Code of Pro- cedure (section 165) that the courts reiaxed some- What in their severity and allowed mitigating cir- cumetances to be given tn evidence if the truth could hot be proved, in justification, as the rigor of the criminal code demanded, and this only in mitigation of damages. WHAT IS A LIREL? Row firmly our couris and judges adhere to the o}d definitions of what constitutes a libel is casily ween by looking into afew of the decisions of our highest courts, even of very recent date. The deii- nition given of the nature of a Hbel by Alexander Hamuiton reads as follows:—‘‘A censorious or ridi- culling writing, picture or sign, made with a mis- chievous and malicious intent towards government, magistrates or tudividuais.”” This declaration was made at a time when the federalist party was in power under Jolin Adams, and the popular excite- ment provoked by the enforcement of Ure allen and sedition laws ran at its highest tide, It is as con- cise @ statement of what these laws aimed gt as ever given, and it musi be taken as a political decia- ration in favor of the federalist legisiation. And yet in & number of libel suits, decided by our former Court of Errors, and again by the present Court of ys gan this definition is praised as the very acme of legal precision and discernment. Again, in the well known literary libel case of J. Fennimore Cooper against the Commercial Adver- User for @ somewhat severe and perhaps rather wage criticism of the former's “History of the Unived States Navy,” relerring espectaliy to te account of the naval engagement on Lake Erie ‘under the late Commodore Perry, the opinion of the pg Teported in the second volume of “De- nio's rts," On pages 203-308, goes still further back into antiquity than the time of Alexander Hamilton and quotes ap moving the defnition of hibel elaborated by thi rd Chief Justice Holt, of England, as follows:—‘“‘Anytiing written of another, which holds him up to scorn and ridicule, or might Teasonably be considered as provoking him to a breach of the peace, is a libel.” Under this defint- jon, rigidly construed a enforced, as it was im Chief Justice Holt’s day and under his rule, every police report and every report of arow or a per- sonal debate in Congress or a State Legislature, or ‘the description of the inkstand thrown about each others’ head occasionally by our city 1athers, would be adjndged @ gross libel and subject the publisher of e journal to heavy damages. And a still older Auition, probably dating back to the days of Sir Edward Coke and the Year #ooke, was deckied by the Supreme Court of Massachusetts to be the true ‘one, reading as follows:—“‘A malicious publication, pressed in printing or writing, or by sign and pic: ures, tending either to blacken the inewory of one ui or the reputation of one who is alive, and ex- pose bim to public hatred, contempt and ridicule.’ (4 Mass. Rep., 168.) And as courts almost as often fe notdo rule that in such cases special proof of malice is not needed, as the law presumes tts exiat- ence, this definition would also cover almost every- thing, and would render the ponmeaton of a daily journal such as the wants of the time demanded not Ouly highly dificult, but almost utteriy impossible WHat OUR VATURE HAS DONE, The oppressive condition of the law of libel, owing to the persistency of courts to adhere to o'd, worn: Out and blown-up traditions, at last influenced the Legisiature to exert its power in order to provide a Femedy for the evil and protect the public press tn ite eiforte to gather the ‘wot the day and spread it before the publio wit! i possible speed, in the feauion Of 1864 the following act was passed, in- ‘9 this effect. tended to i of that year, Tt is chapter 130 of the @nd the first section reads editor or rletor of q an; be action, atv or eriesinan Yor a tel ine ee re howapaper of any Judicial, legisinuive or oiler ta ings of wiiy atateme \ fade clr ahaa en ee at ‘The second section of this act vides that this vilege aball notextend to libelous rhe added to auch comments or spd OF reporter, ‘aud still the by the courts Would time this act was ‘that the ‘of 8 man over hi a court of compe Fiction: and what Waa said and done wile dee inte ontefat progacdiag mor @ falar Rare a is to be hoped that in the fu- ture the courts, Whenever called upon to decide a8 @ publication is libellous, will take @ Oe view of the question; that they will look into the nature of the publication of a modern news paper, and not apply to the modern lightning press principles of jurisprudence dug out from musty law reports of centuries ago. 4 FEW DISTOPIC REMINISCENCRS OF THE TRIALS OF TE PRESS IN THE Past, One of the most remarkable evidences of the de- sire of the federal government to limit and restrain the freedom of the press and circumscribe its Ronee and influence has already been referred to, Directly 1t conld not be done, for there stood a constitutional provision prohibiting it in express terms; but indi- rectly it was attempted by pretend: to restrain the excesses of the press and so-called Neentiousness, This it was sought to effect through the alien and sedition laws, where certain publica- tions and criticisms of federal officers were declared offences against the United States and subjected to summary punishment, Many were the editors and printers thrown into prison during the last two years of John Adams’ administration, until the result of the Presiden’ election of 1800 opened the doors of their cells and tie first Congress thereafter re- pealed the law. ‘The liberty of Se rem. its right freely to criticise the oficial acts of ali pubiic officers, was the subject of long and earnest discussion in BS atory to and during the impeach! judge James H. Peck, United States District Ju for Missouri, It all came about a ne" per arti and the course of the ji in ‘There action pending the United States about som: In December, 1825, the J the heirs and they Peck published in the Missourt Republi borate opinion, to which Luke Edward Lawless, the attorney of the heirs, published a respectful reply over the signature of “Citizen,” in the Inquirer, Judye Peck considere:| this reply ‘an act of contempt of his court, and he aed first the editor of the paper arrested, and then Mr. Lawless, who admitted hay- ing written the article. After various proceedings Lawless was sentenced to twenty-four hours of li- prisonment and suspended from practice a8 an attor- ney for Seiten: months, For this the Judge was iinpeaehed by the House of Representatives in May, 1830, and the trial commenced before the Senate in December. The leading counsel for the Judge and conducting his defence was that gifted son and ora- tor of Virginia, William Wirt. ‘he following sen- tences, quoted from his closing argument, contain all that ever beei said—and never better—on this side of the argument:— Ite said that in puntshing this publication a4 a contempt the Judge has invaded the liberty of the press. What is the Uberty of the press and ia what doos it consist? Does it consist in @ right to vilify the tribunals of the country and to bring them into contempt by gross and wanton misrepresen- tutions of thelr proceedings? Does it consist in a right to obstruct and corrupt the streams of justice by public mind with regard to causes in these tri they are heard! i the liberty press? If so, the defamer has a charter as free as the winds vided he resort to the press for the propagation of his slan- er, and, under the proslituted sanction of the liberty of, the pros, hoary age and virgin innocence We ut hls mercy. This js not the idea of the liberty of the press which prevails in courts of justice or which exists in any sober or well regulated mind, The Iberty of the press is among the greatest of blessings, clvil aud political so. long as itis directed to its proper object—that of disseminating correct ‘and useful information among the people. But this greatest of blessings may become the greatest of curses if ft aball be permitied to burst fis proper barriers, ‘the liberty of the ae has always been the favorite watchword of those who vo by its licentiousness, It has been from time immemo- rial, is still and ever will be the perpetual decantatum of all libellers, * * * To be useful the liberty of the press must be restrained, The principle of restraint was imposed upon every part of creation, By restraint the planets were kept in thetr orbits, The earth performed ite regular evolutions by the restraint of the centrifagal foree operating upon tt. The vine would shoot Into rank luzuriance ff not undur. the restraint of the laws of nature, by which everything was preserved within ita proper bounds. Was not everything on Garth impressed with this principle? And was pot the iib- erty of the press to be restrained to the performance of its rightful functions of propagating truth for just ends? This argument proved successful at the time, and, as the resulg showed, not ali the eloquence of McDumMe, of South Carolina, Storrs, of New York, and Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, arguing for the right of free and unrestrained criticism of all the acts of those in public office, could convince the Senate; for out of forty-three Senators voting, twenty-two pronounced Judge Peck not guilty of “high misdemeanor,” as charged. Thus the liberty of the press was again sought to be hampered by Testrictions in the house of its friends, in the Senate of the United States. The proceedings in this city a few years ago, when a Judge of our Supreme Court was secking to punish the editor of, a morning Paper as for a contempt, ou account of'a law report published in that journal the day before, was un- Goubtedly patterned alter the affair of Judge Peck in Missouri, Much more numerous than these and similar croachments upon the ireedom of the press have been other attempts to compel its silence and di- minish its usefulness, ‘hese were and are resorted to by individuals who claim to have been defamed and libelled, and brought into contempt and ridicule among all good citizens of the community vy some ee of and concerning them, and for which jefamation of character they generaliy are willi to receive, as @ healing plaster and unfailing anti- dote,@ judgment in their favor of some thousands of dollars. Looking over the records of prominent libel suits In this State one is unavoidably reminded of some very interesting occurreaces of our early and later political history. ‘Ihere is, tor instance, the case of Genet vs. Mitch- ell, reported tn 7 Johnson, 120. Monsieur Genet was the Minister of the new-born and rather turbulent French republic to this country under Washington’s admivistration, Everybody knows the troubles that the enthusiastic French republican fel! into when he attempted to violate our iaws—wage war against Engiand from our shores—and being peremptorily stopped by Washington, soaring. to ap! from the government to the people. it was about this time that the defendant Mitchell charged Genet pub- liciy with having betrayed his own government by communicating his private instractions to others, For this an action for libe! was brought by the irate Frenchman, which was @ little more sensible than calling for “‘cotfee and pistols for two.” But he got very little out of it. Another somewhat historical Itbel suit was that commenced by Lieutenant Governor Root, in 1824, at King & Verplauck, publishers of the New York american, which paper had siated that some day in August, 1824, while presiding over the Senate, Lieutenant Governor Root was so drunk as to be unfit for his place and 4 disgrace to the station. ‘The evidence for the defence was very voluminous and tended to prove that the editor acted on good and sufficient information; but under the ruling of the court as to what was necessary to make the proof of justification available and successful the plaintiff got @ verdict of $1,400. The case of Littlejohn against Greeley had its origm in the “Philosopher's” habit of growling and scoiding at everybody who is not of his own mind, and hence calling one day Mr. Littlejohn one of the most corrupt members of the Legisiature brought him @ summons and complaint for libel and @ small verdict on the result. J. Fennimore Cooper took umbrage at the way and style im which the OCormmerciai advertiser and whe Tribune criticised his naval iustory. He denounced it as defamatory, brought his actions and recovered sinati verdicts in both cases. A rather humorous case was that of Mezzara, an Italian portrait painter in this city. He had finished ‘the portratt of a gentleman, who afterwards refused to take and pay jor it. Mezzara sued the refractory customer, ined a judgment, and, under the exe- cution, the Sherif seized the picture, on which the painter bad added to the head of the portrait a pair of asses’ ears. This, on the complaint of the original Of the picture, was held by the Criminal Court of the city to be a libel. An interesting reminiscence is offered in the libel case of Jacob Gould fust Thurlow Weed, which originated in the anti-Masonic excitement—the al- leged kidnapping and murder of Morgan, who was afterwards said to have been “a good enough Morgan till after the election.” eed edited that time—1827-28—the Antt- Masonic Inquirer, at Rochester, and chi Gould with being in the pay of the Masons, while pretending to act on an anti-Mason committee. Reading the mass of testimony offered on the trial and the s and nderous reasonings of the judges, now the ight of eee “iene evokes @ hearty smile, But Gould got a verdict of $400, As Gould was so successful in his libel suit against him, Thurlow Weed may have believed it the best means of healing his own offended honor, and in 1846, or thereabouts, he rushed into court himself and sued Foster & Stimson, of the Day Book, for re use they asserted that in 1840 he had recet $5,000 for securing to some one the Cg of Pork Inspector in New York city, from Governor Seward. The result of this sult waa not overgratify- ing, ag the expenses outran the income. rT. Delavan, one of the wealthy temperance men of Albany, got himself into trouble with the brewers and maitsters on “the hill,” by publishing in the paper that they used stagnant water in their estab- jisimenis in the manufacture of beer. No less than three libel suits were commenced against him, two failing of which only were successful, the third hg (cha ae ital ‘date nother interes! sait has jast been det cided at the General Term of the papreme Court in he Seeond Judictal District, agsinet the plaintiff, Elpathan 1. Sanderson, of Brooklyn, who, on the trial in the Circuit, secured @ Verdict against Cauldwell and Whitney, of the Sunday Mercury, for $5,000, Mayor Hall was the attorney for the liberty of the press, and to his masterly presentation of th case on behaifof the defence, and his exhaustive points, legal, philosophical, humorous, historical aud poetical, obtained a reversal of the verdict and the granting of a new trial, Thus the injured repu- tation of the plaintiff is not healed yet. ‘In connec tion with this a little aneedove must be told. On the jury in the court below was a German, a friend of the defendants, and he eagerly voted in the jury room for the bighest amount of damages suggested by the others, ‘This becoming known and talked about, he was asked one day by an acquaintance why he had done so, to which he archly replied, With a peculiar twinkle in his eye, ‘You see, if the verdict had peen for & small sum, they (Cauldwell and Whitney) would have been stuck fo pay. The Jarger the sum came out frem the jury, the less likely will they be to get ared penny.” ‘This seems to be shrewd, if not correct reasoning. Still another sult is worth mentioning, which abont fourteen years ago conynised our waole German Pepueice from the Battery to Harlem Bridge. {t wae a suit brought by Gustave Neumann, the editor of the Staats Zeitung, against Karl Hein- gen, editor of the Pioneer, then publisied in this city, now in Boston, for heay, mages ne of % libel which appeared, tina A concern mig Mune? in Wie latter journal, The reeuis wos @ verdict for six and a half cents cemnare, wich brought out the broad grins of many of our THE LATE REVIVAL OF LIBEL SUITS, we sea a otis nt alr ow ae na oe respect suite Ww r few tween. But lately they have been revived, and at a rate so tremendous that, in comparison with the demands made upon the preas by offended honesty in former years, they were a8 but @ moth upon the em of @ locomotive, The irresistible and irrepressible James Fisk, Jr., of Erie-Grand-Opera- railroad notoriety, in to have recourse to this sost of rehabilitation of wounded honor, and he opened with @ libel suit fo ings ywies, of the eld juickly follows it up ir. Greeley, of ngrrg> ageing Mr. Norvell, of the ‘ $100,000, and i it Mr. snug amount of a Troup million, Not to be outdone by railway jaye’ ity of Mr, Fisk, Mr. John Russell Young commenced about ten suits in Oifferent peri of the country, and two or three of is city, and two Philadelphia, each at figure not the exact of $100, @ trifle less would aa him, The Evening Mirror at Indianopotis lately been sued for $30,000 damages for libel by one Talcott; and a case is now pending at Pit pangs by an ex-member of the Pennsylvania State Leg! lature, against the Pittsburg Leader, which journal had charged him with venality and corruption. Thus the: revival of libel suits goes bravely on all over the country. There are now no less than 766 libel suite ding against editors or publishers in this country by personages who claim a plaster of green- backs for their wounded reputation, and the total amount of damage alleged to be done to these 756 injurea piaintifs sums up $47,500,000. Who will deny nereaiter the power of the press? NEW YORK CITY. KE COURTS. GIITED STATES OISTAICT COURT. The Quaker City Seizure—Claimant’s Answer te the Libel. Before Judge Blatchford. The following is the claimant’s answer in this case:— To the Honorable Samvst. BLATOHFORD, Judge of the District Court of the United States for the South- ern district of New York:— ‘The answer of Albin M. Jephson, of London, Eng- land, owner and claimant of the steamship Columbia, her engines, tackle, furniture, £c., to the libel of infor- mation of Edwards Pierrepont, Attorney of the United States for the Southern District of New York, who prosecutes on behalf of the said United States against the said steamship-Columbia, her engines, tackle, &c., In a cause of seizure and forfeiture, al- leges as follows:— First—Your ciaimant asserts that the sald steam- ship Columbia is now and was at the time of her seiz- ure by the marshal under and in pursuance of the monitton issued herein lying in the port of New York, within the Southern district of New York and with- in jurisdiction of this honorable court, and that she = at the time of said seizure ready to proceed to Second—Your claimant denies each and every other allegation in the said libel of information contained, and avers that the same are wholly untrue. And he further denies that, by reason of the alleged prem- ises in the said libel set forth, or by reason of any other matter or cause, the said steamship, her en- gines, tackie, &c., became or is forfeited or subject to forfeiture, wherefore your claimant prays that the said libel may be dismissed with costa, and that the said steamship, her engines, &c., may be re- stored to the possession of your claimant. ALBIN M. JEPHSON. Subscribed and sworn to before me this Sist day of May, 1369. JOSEPH GUTMAN, Jr., United States Commissioner. UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COUST. Post Office Embezzlement Case. Before Judge Benedict. The United States vs. George J. Delaney.—'The defendant was this morning arraigned on a charge of embezzling @ letter from the Post Office contain- ing valuable enclosures. After a jury was ordered to be empaneled the defendant pleaded guilty. Sentence deferred. UNITED STATES COMMISSIONERS’ COUNT. Discharged. Before Commissioner Shields. The United States vs. Benjamin Symon.—The de- fendant was charged with attempting to pass coun- terfeit stamps of twenty-five cent currency upon a number of apple and peanut venders. After a full examination the Commissioner discharged the com- pees the evidence insufMicient to hold him for trial. EXTRA OYER AND TERMINER. Proclamation by the Governor—An Extrnor- dinary Term of Oyer and Termiucr to be Held by Judge Cardozo. The following proclamation, directing the holding of an extra term of the Court ef Oyer and Terminer by Judge Cardozo this month, will be of interest to @ certain class of the communitv:— Stare or New Youx, Exnoutive Drranrursr) ALBANY, May 24, 1869. I, JouN T. HOFFMAN, Governor of the Stale of New York, by Virtue of the power reposed in me by section twenty-third Of the Code of Procedure of this State, and at the solicitation of Samuel B. Garvin, District Attorney the city and county of New York, and in my judgment the pudlic good requiring the same, do hereby appoint a apecial court of Oyer and Terminer, to be held im and for the city county of New York, Hail of the said ‘city, to be commeuced on Monday, the 2th day of June next, and to be continued and beld as long as it may be necessary. And hereby direct the said Dis- trict Attorney of said city and county of New York to insu precept according to the statute in such case made and p vided, directed to the Sheriff of said city and county of New York, to do and perfor m all that may be required in and by said precept. And I hereby designate and appoint Albert Cardozo one of the Justices of the Supreme Court, as the Justice who shall hold sald extraordinary term of Oyer and Terminer. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and aM™xed the privy aoal of the Siate, at the city of Albany, the 2th day of May, 1369, JOHN T. HOFFMAN. By the Governor: Joun D. Van BoRRN, Private Secretary. SUPREME COURT—CHAMBERS. The Liability of Divorced Pers Refore Judge Cardozo, Charlotte FP. Derby vs. Chauncey L. Derby.—The parties to this suit were divorced some four years ago, the decree in the suit being the usual one, re- leasing the plaintiff’ absolutely from the marriage, forbidding the efendant to remarry during the life- time of the plaintiff, and granting her alimony at the rate of $1,200 per annum. Mrs. Derby subsequently married a Mr. Wheaton, of the United States Army, ‘The defendant aiso remarried, and, as Mrs. Wheaton claims, has not paid alimony for the last Ofteen months, The case now comes up on @ motion to punish him for contempt in remarrying and for the pe bt ofthe alimony. The defendant claims that he was married tn New Jersey, and therefore committed no offence against a New York court, and claimed that as she has remarried she is not entitled to alimony. The Court took the papers and reserved its decision, SUPREME COURT—SPECIAL TEAM, The Time for the Fulfilment of C portant Opinion. Before Judge Ingraham. Join EF. Hubbel vs, Pauline Von Schoening and another.—This was an action for the specific per- formance of a contract for the sale of real estate. The facts suMciently appear in the following opinion of Mr. Justice Ingraham:— The contract for the sale of the lots for which this action is brought provides for the delivery of the tracteIme- deed and the ment of the money on the 24th of January, 1868, ® place named therein. wi that =, the venders waited at the place a half-past nine in the morning until six In the after- onset ib a oer id not ap) lace until four P. M,, when he said he was not , and asked an extension. This was re- Insed, and the defendants insisted that the contract should be closed, and tendered the deed. Subsequently the plaintit? offered to pay the money and demanded the deed, to which the defendants re- hh would have nothing more to do with it. je only material question is whether the defendants Were bound to accept the tender on a subsequent day to that fixed in the contract. The rwié un- a on “ a! LR not Lg to the st ract, unless made so by done in various, were. a Roth Bue om oF fb. serting in the cohtract a provision that it ®hall be vota if not performed on the day designated. If neither party appears at the time and place fixed to complete the contract, or if no time or place is named, then the time if not essential and the per- formance can be enforced afterwards. So when the party gives notice of the intent to ire perform: ‘ance on the day and is ready and tenders perform- ance on nis part, he cannot be compelied afterwards to perform work, or be liable for damages for his refusal, Ifthe vendors, ag in this case, attended to perform, waited the whole day, and Onally mi a tender of the deed, which was refused by the ven- dee on the ground that he wae not ready, I see no reason on which it can be held that he should be compelled afterwards to perform, It is clear that 0 damages can be recovered, because there has been no breach on bis ep and equity should not compe! @ performance of a contract which the party offered to perform at the time designated. There are undoubtediy cases of hardsbip where a party has reserved the greater pert of the purchase money and takes advantage of the non-completion of the con- tract on the day designated to fortert the money paid. Inanch cases equity would relieve by peiling either performance of the contract or refunding the money paid, But no euch reason applies where the sum id was only & nominal’ amount to give validity to the con- tract. Mr. Justice Ingraham then guoted at some length from the cases of Dominick va. Michael, 4 Sandf., 3745 Benedict va. Lynch, 1 John’s Oh’y, 870, ond Parker va Thorold, 11 toe. Lay and Eq. W378, in support of these views, aot continnes:;—In fact, the very nature of the cont: is such that per- formance by either must be @ 0 6 claim for a cule formance. The complaint should dismissed. ag SUPERIOR CBURT—SPECIAL TERM. Decisions. Judge Barbour rendered judgment in the fotlow- ing cases:— Townshend ve. Gould et at.—Pindings settled. Pa- pers with Special Terin clerk, By Judge Monell, Livingston et al. vs, Murray & al.—Judgment, &¢., with Specia! Term Clerk, By Judge McCunn. Knapp vs, Steen et al.—Motion granted. Moran v3. pe al,—Motiou granted. Phelps vs, Trim et al.—Motion granted and cause ‘Salmons vs. Meyer.—Motion granted, Reynolds vs, Reynotds,—Motion for allmony grant- hh vs, Strauss.—Motion granted. renzle vs, Hiller.—mMotion granted. Young vs. White ct al.—Motion granted with ten dollars costs, Prepay vs, Raphael.—Motion denied with ten re @obons vs. Gibvons.—Motion for alimony and counsel fee denied. Cause referred to a reieree. Rausch vs, Miller, Impleaded, €c,—Motion dented ‘with ten dollurs costs, Isaacs vs. Koch ¢t al,—Motion staying proceedings five days granted, Brown vs. Patterson.—Motion granted. Wigdon vs, Bass.—Motion granted, Townshend vs, Gould et al.—Motion staying entry of judgment, with costs to abide event. man vs. Sixth Avenue Railroad Company.— Motion granted. New York Belting and Packing Company va, New York Laundry Manufacturing Company.—Motion Miller et al. vs. McKaine,—Motion granted, , Gray, Adminisirairiz, vs. National Seamship Company.—Motion granted. Ring vs, OBrien, Sheriff, éc.—Motion granted. Phelps vs. Trim et ai.—| fnd on examining the pa- pers with care that the referee was consented to, Felman vs, Woodward & Brown.—Judgment for plaintiff with costs, Colgate et al. vs, Corelt.—Proceedings dismissed, with ten doilars costs, Hefferman vs, BE. P. Ross, President, &c.—Motion denied, with ten doliars costs, COURT OF GENERAL SESSIONS. Close of the May Term-Heavy Disposed of—Important Opinion Bedford—Remarks of District Garvin. Calendar of Judge Attorney Before Judge Bedford. At the opening of the court yesterday morning his Honor Judge Bedford delivered the following opinion:— The Perple vs. George W. Swepson, Robert R. Swep- son, E. Nye Hutchinson, Robert F. Hoke and Thomas J, Sumner.—On the 14th day of April, 1868, the Grand Jury of this county found an indictment against the above named parties for entering into an alleged conspirary in this city on or about the Ist day of January, 1866. The facts, as I understand the case, are simply these:—Mr. Thomas D. Carter, a resident of North Carolina, employed Robert F. Hoke, one of the indicted parties, as his agent and authorized him in that capacity to visit New York and negotiate for the sale of cer- tain Jands in North Carolina, It is also alleged that Hoke on arriving ia New York had an interview with George W. Swepson, Robert kK. Swepson, E. Nye Hutchinson and Thomas J. Sam- ner, in which interview tney entered into a con- spiracy to cheat and defraud Mr. Carter out of the real market value of his lands in North Carolina. It is further alleged that in pursuance of this design Hoke, the agent of Carter, with the consent, know- ledge and approbation of the other indicted parties, wrote @ letter while in New fork to Mr. Carter, then in North Carolina, in which letter Mr. Carter was given to understand that his lands in North Carolina could not be sold in this city except at a compara- tively nominal price, and that this letter was writ- ten with intent to deceive Mr. Carter as the real value of his lands. Upon these facta the indict- ment is drawn under tne following section of the Revised Statutes:—“To cheat and defraud any per- son of any property by any means, which if execu- ted, wonld amount to a cheat or to obtaining money or property by false pretences.” (And I may here say that the only conspiraces pun- ishable crimmally by the laws of this State are those enumerated in the Revised Statutes, the common law conspiracies being ignored.) The defendants demur to the indictment principally and substan. tatly upon the following ynnds:—First, it was a mere opinion expressed on the of the defendants relative to the of the land and not a frandu- lent representation. Second, that it was clearly a ease where, had the complainant used ordinary care and prudence, he would have avoided any imposi- tion in the matter. Ido not think these points, together with others ou de‘endants’ brief, are well taken, and [ am of opinion that the indictment 1s properly drawn. 1 am also of opinion that this case involves peculiarly and particularly questions for & jury to pass upon. And these questions are to my mind as fgliows:—First, whether from the evidence the defendants did conspire, as is alleged, to cheat and defraud Mr. Carter out of the real market value of his lands. Second, whether Hoke wrote the letter with the intent to defraud, &c., and whether the letter was written with the knowledge, consent and approbation of the other indicted parties, Third, whether the letter was written in furtherance of a common design on the part of the defendants to cheat and defraud, or, in other words, to influence Mr. Carter to sell his Jands below the real market value. Itis for the jury to find the affirmative or negative of these propositions, and as they find so stands the guilt or innocence of the parties indicted. ‘The demurrer 1s overruled, without pronooncing judgment upon the defendants, but giving them permission to plead not guilty and to demand a jal. Joseph H. Choate for the defendants; Joseph 8. Winter for the people. REMARKS OF DISTRICT ATTORNEY GARVIN. Districts Attorney Garvin rose and said:—Your Honor—Not having been much in court myself dur- ing the present month, being otherwise engagea, | have had some curiosity to examine and see how well my assistants—those who draw indictments as well as those who try them—have performed their duty, and although I intend generally to know what 1s going on in court every day, I was not really aware of the vast amount of business which bas been transacted during the present month. 1 see that there have been ninety cases presented to this court, in which there have been seventy convictions and twenty acquittals. 1am also informed that the Grand Jury have found one hundred and forty- eight indictments, passing upon over one handred and sixty cases during the month of May, which is an enormous business to be transact by your Honor and by the Grand Jury. It will also be ob- served and your Honor will recollect that there have been some very important triais during the present term, in which the petty jury pave not only discharged their duty well and man- fully, but they have in several instances convicted in cases where the public interest seemed to demand most thorough and exemplary punishment. Your Honor will recall the case of the express robbery, the case of Armstrong, who was eonvicted of per- sonal robbery, and the case of O'Connor, who was tried as a police officer, and against whom a bench warrant is now out for the purpose of bringing him im that be may receive the punishment due to his crime. There is another circuinstance which bas occurred during the present month, to which I have had my attention ca/led, and which is an interesting thing in the history of jurisprudence. The law that has been by the Legisiatare, allowing pris- oners to take the stand as witnesses, has gone into effect for the first time this month. Your Honor very weil remembers when the law first went into effect allowing persons iu civil cases to testify, doubts we had as to the propriety of that descripuon. But the Legisia- seen fit steadily to go on in regard to these old rules of evidence, both civil and criminal, until it has come down to the ition that in all courts, civil as well as criminal, where men were brought in chi with crime, a8 Well as those who ‘were parties in action, they could take the stand and testify; the great principle ig a aman ie brought into court and testifies before a court - jury, that they are to say, on seeing and heat ng hin testify, no matier how Tay be his interest the resuit, whether, on the whole, they believe what he says, th ig it @ matter of pure credibility fe be upon by the court and jury. Now, this LT innovation; and when I read the first case which transpired before his Honor, Judge Dowling, 1 was somewhat staggered as to how this thing was going to work. He said to the prisoner, You can swear.’ He stood up and did swear, and the Judge ronounced judgment. The next case nah g be- fore your Honor, and this thing was put to the test, I am inclined to think, although it may ret somewhat the administration of justice, it may, in some peculiar cases, quicken tt, and enab'e parties to go to trial because they know exactly what has transpired themselves, where wit- nesses may not know or where they may not be able to get them into court; so that, on the whole, I am inclined to think that this law, although new end un- tried criminally, is one, to work well in our courts of justice, Tam delighted to see that not only the police magistrates, but your Honor and all other persons who are engaged in the administration of criminal justice, are disposed to give prisoners the full beneiit of this law. Lam pleased with the man- ver in which the business has gone on during the feeen month by his Honor (who always discharges his Cuty weil), but by my assistants, Mesers. Huteh- ing: ‘weed, Blunt and Vanderpoe!, and all con necied with the office. Afier a few prisoners were discharged the court adjourned lor the verm, COURT CALENDARS—THIS DAY. ScrneMe CoURT—CHAMBRKS.—Nos. 68, 85, 105, 109, BE ee 218, 10, 286, Gail a0 A 20% 28s MawINR COURT—TRIAL TRAM.—No® 2079, 9094, 3095, 9038, 9089, 3060. 3041, 9042, 9042 CITY INTELLIGENCE, nnn Tas WaaTHar.—The following record will show the changes in the temperature for the past twenty. four houra, in comparison with the corresponding last year, a8 indicated by the thermometer at syiaat 3 pharmacy, HERALD bullding, Broadway, corner of Ann street:— ae 3P.M.. 82 ol OP. 80 70 OP. % 6 3 ins 16 3 Pr Pa verage perature yesterday... seenegees Average temperature for corresponding day Ls Average temperature Sunda: 6736 ae temperature for corresponding daje i Average temperature for the week ve Average tefiiperature for corresponding berg 7 Average temperature Tor the montii ee 60 Average temperature for corresponding month Saute Down.—While logding a truck at pier 23 East river yesterday Beggged Cassidy was knocked down and severely injured by a sack of salt falling upon him. He was taken to Bellevue Hospital. SuppEN DgaTH.—Sarah Moffat, a woman fifty years of age, who has been ill for several months past, died suddenly yesterday afternoon at 37 Oliver street. Coroner Schirmer was notified to hold ap inquest on the body. FELONIOUS ASSAULT.—At an early hour yesterday morning John Conroy, of 0, 637 West Thirty-seventh street, was seriously injured py being struck on the head with @ stone in the hand of an unknown man. Taken to Believue Hospital. Tax RECBIVER’S OFFICE.—The Tax Receiver re- Ports that he has collected the following taxes from May 2% to May 31, inclusive:—! 2%, $11,143 57; May 25, $4,230 85; May 26, $3,266 12; May 27, $2,577 25; May 28, $3,053 33; May 29, $3,136 99; May 31, $3,351 80. Total, $30,719 91. FATAL FERRY CASUALTY.—At two o'clock yester- day morning Mise Ellen Fitzpatrick died at her residence, No. 187 Seventh street, from the effects of injuries received last Thursday evening. Being then at Hunter's Point, she had one of her legs crushed between the ferryboat and bridge, thus hegre Jatal injuries, Coroner Flynn was notified to hol an inquest over her remains. FaLL OP A BUILDING.—Yesterday morning the roof of the carpenter shop of George Freeman, No. 4 Seventh avenue, fell in, injuring three workmen— Jacob Coon, of 224 West Sixteenth street, who was cut on the head; Timothy Codin, of Thirtieth street, in the eye, and James Forum, of Mott street, hurt badiy internally, The latter was sent to Bellevue Hos- peal and his fellow sufferers to their homes, their injuries being slight, FounD DROWNED.—Coroner Rollins yesterday held an inquest on the body of Lawrence Olvany, fifty-five years of age and a native of Ireland, whose body was found floating in the dock foot of pler 34 Fast river. On the 3d of March deceased was seen about James slip, partially intoxicated, and having been seen no more alive, is thought to have been ac- preg drowned. The remains were identified by the widow, who lives at No. 3 Pelham 8! Deceased has left four child ren. COMMISSIONERS OF THE SINKING FUND.—The Com- missioners of the Sinking Fund met yesterday. The most important business transacted was the adop- tion of a resoiution that the Commissioners would attend in a body the auction sale of the francnise to run a railroad through Twenty-third street, winch sale takes place in a few days in the Governor's Room, in the City Hall, and that said sale be con- aes upon behalf of the Commissioners by Mayor OCCULTATIONS OF PRAESEPE.—Our satellite will pass over a number of the stars of this beautiful cluster, the “Bee Hive,” or nebula of Cancer, during the coming three years. Un September 3, following the t solar eclipse of August 7, the moon, shortly before the period of new moon, will occult Delta Cancri, at forty minutes after three o'clock in the morning. At other portions of the globe, be- tween the parallels of seventy-two degress south and seventy-three degrees north of the equator, man, more stars will be occulted. 3 4 vet. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. CavGnT IN THE AcT.—Eerly yesterday morning a man was discovered trying to get into the liquor store No. 45 Beaver street by means of a false key. On being arrested he gave his name as John Kean, and pretended to have mistaken the place for his residence. He was taxen before Judge Hogan, at the Tombs, and committed in default of $1,000 bail to answer a charge of attempted burglary. ATTEMPT AT BURGLARY.—A young man named John McCarty was arraigned yesterday before Jus- Uce Mansfeld, at Essex Market Police Court, charged with attempting to enter the premises of Mr. William Jarvis, at No. 193 Delancey street. John endeavored to break open @ basement window, but was caught and interrupted by Mr. Jarvis. He ran away, but was captured by oficer Post, of the Thirteenth precinct. He was held for examination in default of $1,000 ALLEGED FELONIOUS ASSAULT.—Benjamin Price was yesterday morning taken before Justice Hogan, at the Tombs, on a charge of striking Michael O'Conner, of No. 6 Cherry street, over the head with an iron bar, He was fully committed to answer the charge. ‘The facts showed a sort of family fight, in which John Sigmon ge mixed up, and was also arrested on a charge of striking and kicking Mrs. O'Connor. The man Thomas was or- dered to be tried at the Court of Special Sessions, POLICE TRIALS. Dog in a Policee ihe Treasurer’s An Insutted Female Throws man’s Face—The Robbery Oftce. Commissioner Brennan yesterday presided at the hearing of evidence in some thirty charges against officers. But two cases of interest were heard. William Hawkins, of the Forty-second (Brooklyn) precinct, was charged with grossly improper con- duct, The complainant is Mrs. Ann Harden, itving on the corner of Clinton place and Hamilton avenue, who charged that on the 22d May this oMcer, in company with an undertaker named Andrew Leonhardt, brought an empty coffin to the residence of Mrs, Sullivan, where she was visiting, and insisted upon taking it in the house, As there was no corpse on the prem'‘ses Mrs, Sullivan ordered them away, when Hawkins became very abusive, and told her she ought to have been in A comin thirty years ago as she was past that time of life when heirs promised to arrive at her domicile. Mrs. Harden's mdignation knew no bounds. , She took the part of her friend, when the policeman told her to mind her own business, and wound up calling her a disgusting epithet. Mra. Harden boiled over with rage at the reflection upon her character and sppearence, and seizing a small dog horied it into the face of the officer, who seized her and dragged her to the station house, where she was discharged. The undertaker and Mrs. Sullivan sustained the complainant throughout. The oficer admitted all the statements made except the unmentionabie noun. Mr. Brennan informed him that he did not consider him fit for a place in the department for a munute, and he would refer his case to the Board, as his action was as outrageous as any that had come under his notice. OMecers Ashton and Finch, of the Broadway squad, wy Sergeant Davis with failing to detect @ robbery at the Treasurer's office, which they had been ¢ lly detailed to guard. The evidence showed that the former went on daty on the night of the 24th ult. at six o'clock, anid was relieved by the latter at fifteen minutes before nine P. M.; that at that time Finch was fatly under the influence of liquor. Finch re: on until twenty-five min- utes past six A. M., on the 26th. He admitted up- setting the inkstand and mucillage, but denied all = rf peers, of one Xf = Sane eighty cents and some pos stamps. He that he was under tne tnfluence of liquor, and stated that he had taken but one giass of lager es ‘The matter was referred to tbe Board for lis acon. ALLEGED ATTEMPT AT MURDER. ‘Throwing His Wife From a Window. OMcer Finn, of the Fourth precinct, yesterday morning reported to the Coroners’ oMfce that Mre. Margaret Barnes was lying in Bellevue Hospital in @ dangerous condition, from the effects of injuries re- ceived at the hands of her husband, Michael Barnes, ‘who, she all threw her from the second story ‘window of their residence, 81 Roosevelt street, to the wement. Mra. Parnes alleges that at about two Prclock on Sunday morning her husband came home intoxicated and commenced to abuse and beat her in @ brutal manner, According to ber statement, made to officer Finn, while she was lying in bed Barnes kicked her and bees ys upon ee | terrible juries, ee eenen, itis allog , he seized and threw her from 6 was found soon afterwards d_ removed ee ee eeletes Warden Brennan fearing she m no! over notifed Coroner Rollins to take her ante-mortem statement. Barnes is in the Tombs, The statements of Mra. Barnes were somewhat contradictory as she denied to one of her acquaintances that (he prisoner had thrown her from the window LRASURE Panty Daowned.—In the township ot Weckian Barry county, Mich», on May 19, three attended by three young men, went hae | vera boat on Jordan Take for a pleasure ride. After getting into water one of the young indies fell Pe aA and in the effort to save her the boat was capsized, [eps pee the whole party into the water. One of ti i men and ail of the young ladies were drow: MARRIAGES AND DEATHS. BRAISTEN—SANDFORD.—On June 2 1844, Rev. Dr. Dewey, Mr. Pater D. teri Miss Exiza, daughter of Abner Sandford, all of “ oy. No cards. Sh 1OL DMANN—Wo0opDs,—I1n Broo! E, D., on nesday evening, May by Kev. A. H. D., Louis CHARLES HERMAN GOLDMANN, A 7am to MARY ANGELINE, daughter of H. M, W ton rs please copy. PIERSOn- Syren On Thursday, May 27, by the Rev. Willlam Reld, NEWTON PIZKSON t0 BARBARA Sure, all of this city, California papers please copy. 4 Ticuinas Cam annne—At the Episcopal church, in Rockford, on Tuesday evening, May 25, by the: Rev. J. E. Walton, Dr. HENRY RICHINGS tO MARIA, daughter of Francis D. Cammann. TELFER—CLARK.—In Rochester, on Thursday, May 21, by the Rev. Dr. Campbell, Mr. JOHN H. TRLFER, of New York, to Miss Sanat H. CLARK, of Roch- Died, BowMAN.—At Westfield, N. J., on Monday morn- ing, May 81, JoHN Bowman, an old citizen of New York city, in the 88th year of his age. ‘The relatives and friends of the family are respect- fully invited to attend the funeral, on Wednesday af ternoon, at two o'clock. leave foot of Lil pepe New Jersey Central Railroad at o'clocl BReEttT.—At on Sunday, May SARAH BRETT, daughter of James and Helen A. it, in 37th of age. Mp aneset tro ae residence of Samuel White, on ‘Wednesday afternoon, at one o’clock. Conveyances will be in waiting at "9 station, Harlem Rail. road, on arrival of the ten A. M. train from Been sixth street, New York. The relatives and are ® invited to attend the funeral, without further ” notice. BUcKELaW.—At Jamesburg, N. J., on Sunday, AMES BUCKELEW, aged 68 pears. aauneral services at hig ate residence, on Wednes- morning, at eleven o’cloc! BERGEN.Suddenly, on Monday, May 31, PRANK S., oo ot Mihash ¥ and Mary Bergen, aged 11 years and 11 mont The relatives and friends of the family are respect- fully invited attend funeral, irom Featdence of his father, Forty-ninth street, Sou Brooklyn, on Thursday afternoon, at three o'clock. BURNS.—OD aig May 29, after a jong end Protand, ln tne‘ooth gear of hérage, re! : Relatives and friends of the family are respectfally invited to attend the funeral, this (Tuesday) after- noon, atone o'clock, from her late residence, 353 West Tweny-fifth street. CoonaN.—On Monday morning, May 31, at nine o'clock, after a long filness, ANNA MARIA COONAN, es oer of seus = ae anaes Coonan, aged 10 years, 11 months an ‘The relatives and friends"of the fatnily are invited to attend the funeral, from the residence of her parents, 20'Tenth avenue, corner Twelfth street, on ‘Wednesday afternoon, at half-past twelve o'clock. ORoFTs.—On Monday, May 31, MARGARET MIDDLE TON, daughter of Thomas and Margaret Crofts, aged 2 years and 6 months. 4 ‘uneral from the residence of her parents, No. 72 Lafayette avenue, Brooklyn, on Wednesday afternoon at three o'clock. Friends are respectfully myited CALLow.—On Sunday, May 30, CORDELIA, Wife of Wilham Callow, aged 26 years, 5 months and 23 days. The funeral will take place from Grace church, apace, L, L, this (Tuesday) afternooon, at two o'clock. Em™Mens.—At Hastings on Hudson, on Monday morning, May 31, at twenty-five minutes of two o'clock, of laryngitis, Exi.y Avausta, yo Caper be oe and Frances Emmens, 16 years and 17 days, ‘The relatives and friends of the family are invited to attend the funeral, this (Tuesday) afternoon, at half-past twelve o’clock. from the residence of her — A brie Tealee iad Voces Os Greenwi emetery. Peers Hudson River Railroad oe ‘Twenty-ninth street, at ten mmutes past two P. Fink—On Monday, May 31, GEORGE AUGUSTUS FINK, aged 68 years, son of the late Alexauder Fink. The relatives and friends of the family are re- quested to attend the funeral, on Wednesday after- noon, at two o'clock, from his late residence, No, 11 South Third street, Brooklyn, E. D. Frrzparrick.—On Monday, May 31, 8. H&LLON FITZPATRICK, born in county Limerick, Ireland. The friends and relatives of the family are re spectfully invited to attend the funeral, from her late resid 187 Seventh street, this (Tuesday) afternoon, at two o’cloek. F ee paroniay, May 29, WILLIAM HAYES, in the year of his age. ‘The relatives and friends are Invited to attend the funeral, from his late residence, No, 433 East Ninth ce this — ) sree ee CN age enny (Ire) papers please p HaDLeY.—On Sunday, ne 30, SaRan Hap- LEY, widow of Daniel Hadley, in the 7lst year of her age, at the residence of her nephew, A. Van Tassel, atreet, between and Fourth avenues. Services to be held on Wednesday Tenytowny og Wednesday. attern wo, OD two Brelock. ‘Train leaves foot of Thi iy invited to attend. IANLON.—At Buffalo, on Sunday, May 30, Mary H. HANLON, aged 17 years. The funeral will take place in this city from the Thirteenth street Presbyterian church, near Sixth avenue, this (Tuesday) afternoon, at one o'clock. Fore toaee ee ee . = Be members of New or! 3 . an . M., are respectfully invited to attend. 4 HvutcHEon.—On Sunday morning, May 30, Wit L1aM HvtcuFon, Jr., in the 43d year of his age, Relatives and friends of the family, also members of Nassau Lodge No, 536, F. and A. M., and mem- Clube are respectrully invited to attend the funerah, Mubs are respectfully invited to atten on Wednesday afternoon, at half-past two o’clock, from his late residence. 180 Atlantic street. Hawn.—In Jersey City, on Sunday morning, 30, of consumption, JAMES W. Hawn, in the year of nis age. (Episcopal) streets, Funeral service will be held at Grace church, corner of South Seventh and Erie this (Tuesday) afternoon, at half-past one o’clock. Relatives and frends are respectfully invited to at- tend, without farther notice. KERNOCHAN.—On Sanday, May 30, CHARLOTTR Watton, wife of John A. Kernochan, ana daughter of the late Jonathan Ogden. The relatives and friends of the family are respect- fally invited to attend the funeral, from St. Mark’s church, on Wednesday morning, at eleven o'clock. LawrRence.—On Monday morning, May 31, Henry LAWRENCE, @ native of hane, parish of Rath- drum, county Wicklow, Treland, aged 71 yeara, The funeral will take place from his late dence, 33 Crosby street, this (Tuesday) afternoon, at ba Ne og icklow papers please copy. MINNELLI.—On Monday, Way 31, at his Lg ron 109 East Twenty-etghth street, A. JosErH, son Professor D. Minnelit, aged 9 years. McBripk.—On Sanday, May 30, James Josera McBripg, only child of John and Bridget McBride, aaea lyear. e funeral wi!i take place from 1,070 Firet avenne, near Fifty-eighth street, the residence of his parents, this (Tuesday) afternoon, at two o'clock. OLVANY.—On Monday, May 31, LAWRENCE OLVANY, in the 55th year of his age. The relatives and friends of the family are respect. fally invited to attend the funeral, from No. 3 Pelham street, this (Tnesday) morning, at ten o’clock. Interment at Calvary Cemetery. RvusseLt,—In Brooklyn, on Sunday, ani Ep- MUND R. Russevt, formerly of New Beatord, . in the 50th year of his age. The friends and relatives of the family, aleo the members of Nassau Lodge F. and A. of Brook. lyo, are requested to attend the funer services, at his late residence, 20 Fourth place, on Wednes day morning, at ten o'clock. MerPann.—At Callao, Pera, on es of yellow fever, EpMuND SHEPPARD, third the ship Nor Wester, son of C. W. and Eliza Shep- pard, of Greenpomt, L. I, aged 21 years and 9 months. Sreivreipt.—In Brooklyn, on Sanday morni Mav 90, Satan, daughter of Charles and Bhaaberd Stermfeldt, aged 8 years, 8 months and 20 daya. Wrap the cold white sheet around her, Lay her hands upon her breast, Lay her r comin, Little § is gone to reat. Friends of the family and acquaintances are respectfully requested to attend the funeral, from the residence of her parents, 65 Flushing avenue, Brooklyn, this (Tuesday) afternoon, at two o'clock. Srerny.—In this city, on Monday, py ty after a short tIIness, James Sirkrry, a native of the parish of Tullacorbet, couuty Monaghan, Ireland, aged 63 ears, . The remains will be taken from his late residen 24) Monroe street, to St. Mary’s church, corner Grand and Ridge streets, on ee aa nine o’clock, Where a solemn mass of requiem be offerred up for the repose of his soul, and thence to Calvary Cemetery for interment. friends and relatives are respectfully invited to at- eecAcrre—On Monday, May 31, PAILIprin® Scncrrr, daughter Che) and Caroline Schutte, are and 9 months. ote Biatives and friends are invited to attend funeral, from 242% Water street, Brooklyn, past two o'clock this (Tuesday) afternoon. Virtvr.—On Sanday, May 30, Nerrr PAL mar eniid of ere aoe Emma Virtue, aged 2 nthe an ays. mine funeral will take place from the residence of her parents, No. 39 Vaudam street, this (Tuesday) afternoon, at one o'clock. ‘Wine.—At Flushing, L. I, on Monday, ba 4 st, the 70th year of his very suddenly, JouN WINE, in age, ‘The friends and relatives are ay sh invited to attend the ¢ eral, from the nds’ meeting noes TR Wednesday afternoon, at two o'clock, ee Wurrrnovse.—Tk tooklyn, on Sunday, May 9, after @ lingering fil 3, Josera T, Wuirenovss, in the 434 year of his kee. Notice of the funeral will be given hereafter. New Hampshire and Boston papers will plese beg ver.—In Rrookiyn, on Friday, May 28, JAMES % be |AVER, Of the firm’ of Weaver & Sterry, New ‘ork, 1 friends of the His friends and the relatives an ‘Marte f his father-in-law, Rab tse, tre inv ten fo attend the faueral eet. vices, this (Tuesday) aftersoon, at hnli-past four O'elock, at the resiionce of his father. James Weaver, 122 Remsen sireet, brovkly ie street twelve o'clock M. The friends and relatives --+