The New York Herald Newspaper, February 20, 1874, Page 8

8 THE COURTS. Simmons Senteneed---Three Years and Six Months’ Imprisonment. QUESTION OF MARITIME LIENS, Phe Camden and Amboy Railroad---Important Salvage Question. ne BUSINESS IN THE OTHER COURTS. ocamaniediammaniaes Bankruptcy Proceedings—Informers’ Moieties— The Oyer and Terminer Grand Jury in Court—The Manhattan Quotation Tele- graph Company—Jewish Congre- gations at Loggerhead Frederick Henry, who had been in jail for the t past seven monthson a charge of having per- sonated the father of an enlisted mipor, was dis- charged yesterday on his own recognizance by Commissioner Shields, the District Attorney con- | senting. In consequence of some reported distarbance on the line of the New York, Oswego and Midland Railroad, jour deputy marshals were yesterday @etailed, upon the application of W. A. 5 Hewitt, the receiver of the road, to proceed to Middleton and other places on the road lor the purpose of preserving the peace. Judge Brady, in the Court of Oyer and Terminer, yesterday, sentenced Simmons to State Prison for | three years and six montis. He also sentenced John Keefe, recently convicted of manslaughter in the fourth degree /or killing Patrick McNamara, to taro years in State Prison at hard labor, being the | 2¥ full penalty. A Grand Jury was organized in this Court yesterday, and, alter a charge trom Judge | Brady, which will be found in full below, entered | upon its duties, The Court then adjourned to next Tuesday, when King will be placed on trial for the alleged murder of O'Neil. SIMMONS SENTENCED. Further Appeal tor the Clemency of the | Court—He is Sentenced to Three Years and Six Months in State Prison. Atthe opening of the Court of Oyer and Ter- miner yesterday, Judge Brady on the Bench, the | jn court room was crowded with the friends of John | & Simmons and the usual complement of curious, | but weil dressed idlers, to hear the sentence to be passed upon him, in accordance with the verdict | @i the jury finding him guilty of manslaughter in Bne third degree for killing Nicholas W. Duryea. Simmons, who still maintained the same placidly @ol demeanor as cuaracterized him throughout | ‘whe trial, was accompanied by his three brothers; but bis wife and daughter, who dcoubtiess wished | to be spared the trying ordeal of seeing him sen- | tenced, were not present, PLEA FOR LENIENCY. After Mr. Sparks, the Clerk, had put the usual | faterrogations to Simmons as to his age, Which he | gave as forty-seven, and as to his having learned any mechanical trade, which he said he had not, Mr. Fellows, one of his counsel, made a most urgent plea for the ieniency of the Court, He pro- ceeded to comment on the evidence, Which he | argued established that the deceased had been | pursuing the prisoner with threats, that the de- | eased called at prisoner’s office and was holding ® mysterious interview with one of his clerks, that the prisoner had a right to demand his busi- | mess, and that the assault outside was commenced by the deceased. He also commented on the fact that the two witnesscs—Dawson and Striker— Jocked up in the House of Detention by the District | Attorney, were not called by the prosecution. The only other witness who could tell the events preceding the struggie was tne prisoner ‘and he was not sworn, for good reason, He would rave been subject to the flerce ordeal of cross- examination by the District Attorney as to what took place during that deadly struggle when he Yay stunned and dazed in the grasp of his enemy, He never yet undertook to.tell it to his counsel, and he could notteli it, and his answers might lace bim in an unfavorable light before the jury. The breaking off of the top o! the dagger sheath Would snow that the blade was drawa when in a NEW YORK HERALD, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1874.-TRIPLE SHEET, and for some @isabled, and he to bave beep contined in prison tor a period ® monbs I have taken into consideration all | tu fuun-of this case’ disturbed ¢ conficting ei ry mich, because there are nts in it; elements of murder and ¢le- menws of ustification; perpiexed as I have been, Hoan imagine the jury were and. they dropped. trom charge of murder In the Sirst degree to (he cone iu-ion that it she prisoner were punished asthe law peripits ior man; slaug! lér in the \hird degree the administra tivo of justice would be accamplished. “(have taken all these things into consideration, and it is my judument that it is due to socieay, that claims vrotection from the Use ol the kBite, Sop common for severai fears past in this city, that the rt soner shall be punis! extent of being con- med in the State ears und six months, an that ‘addressing th of the sentence of this Court—that you de conve in tie state Prison at hard | Jabor Jor three years and six months. The prisoner received the sentence without any | ae emotion, and then was remanded to the ‘om QUESTION OF MARITIME LIENS. How They are Affected by State Laws— Important Question, A question of considerabie interest and impor- tance was determined yesterday by Judge Woodrum, | im the United States Circuit Court, It ap- pears that a vessel mamed the Edith was sold under @ decree of the United States District Court, After paying out of the proceeds of this sale certain claima of the libel- Jants there remained in the registry of the Court @ sum of $31,176 82, This amount was to be dis- tributed among the claimants, A shipwright named T. D, Poole and other persons presented to the Court @ petition stating that tuey had re- paired the ship and furnished supplies for her use. For these repaira and supplies they alleged that they had @ lien, and petitioned the Court that | the hen might be extinguished by the payment of its amount from the sum remaining in | the custody of the Court. This claim was opposed by Daniel Tyler, the mortgagee of three-\ourths part of the Edith. To Tyler was due a sum which, after payment of another mortgage for one-hail of ‘the vessel, exceeded the residue of the amount al- | ready mentioned, Charies Caron, a bankrupt and owner of the ship, through his assignee, John Sedgwick, was ‘mong those who resisted the clatm of the peti- tioner. It was decided by the District Court that Poole and the others bo lien A ee the ship, nor as between them and the mortgagee | and assignee in bankruptcy any title: to art of the $31,176 82, and the Court accordingly ordered that the surplus, after paving the mortgage on one-ball of the saip should divided between the assignee and the mort- gagee Tyler. The petitioners, thus finding them- selves saut out from having apy portion of the sur- Plus sum, appealed to tne United States Circuit Court for an eniorcement of the rights which they claimed, Phe decision of Judge Woodruff, ren- dered yesterday, is written at very corsiderable length. He upholds the decision arrived at in this case by the District Court. His Honor states that the Edith was a domestic vessel, her owners re- siding in New York. The repairs dune upon her were done by the petitioners while she was in navigable waters at New York, by direction of the owner and master, Soon after the repairs were done and the supplies furnished the pe- titioners made an effort to enforce & lien thereior upon the ship, proceeding | whi attempt under a statute of tne State of New York. In pursuance of this statute they sued out an attachment, and, piacing it in the bands of the Sheriff, they caused the snip to be | seized, The result was that what is called a “sat- isfactery bond”? was given by the owner of the | ship, and she was released from custody. Inde- pendent of the technical objection that the peti- | Homers do not come beiore the Court setting up | @uy lien on the ship acquired under the statute of | the State of New York, those proceed: to en- force @ lien under the State law will avail nothing | against the claim of the mortgagee. The statute | of the State of New York in question, so far as it | attempts to give a remedy for the eniorcement of | @ Maritime contract, which ia not according to common jaw, 8 unconstitutional and | void, and the remedy given by statute for the | eniorcement of such coniract is not a common | jaw remedy. That statute (continues the Judge) | Was an atvempt (so far a8 maritime contracts were | embraced there) to take jurisdiction from the Admiralty Courts, and to prescribe a new incident | to such contracts and eniorce a right conferred by | @ proceeding strictly in rem, * * * If the lien | exists a8 the creature of the State law how is it to | be executed ? strike out the mode of proceeding | for enforcement preacribed by the statute and | there is no common law provided by which the | State Courts can give itany efficacy. And the | amount it is sought to enforce as a lien in the Courts of Admiralty proceeds upon the idea that the States can give to those courts jurisdiction not known or pertaining to them under tne laws of the United States. The Judge, in conclusion, holds tnat, under the maritime laws, the peti- tioners have not any lien upon the vessel, THE CAMDEN AND AMBOY RAIL- ROAD. Important Salvage Question Affecting the Raising of Sunken Vessels. Yesterday Judge Woodruff delivered an opinion in the case of the Camden and Amboy Railroad and Transportation Company vs. The Steamboat America, He says:—‘I think tue exceptions filea in this case were properly overruied. There is | nothing to snow that the libellants did not exer- cise @ just and wise discretion in raising the Fair- } pene, patientiy, but fearlessly, with your 4) tight place—that is to say, when the prisoner iay | eld. Until she was raised it was impossible to wpder is assailant. As the Coroner’s jury and | determine whether she could be raised with- the jury on the trial both found the prisuner to be | out too great expense. Had she not been | mo murderer, but that he struck in the heat of passion, counsel asked that the Court, in passing Bentence, take lto consideration bis previous | ee character, the character for turbulence given | the deceased, and the element of jear which | entered into the act of the prisoner, and which prompted him to draw the weapon, A PEW WORDS OVER THE LAST WORD. District Attorney Phelps—I desire— Mr. Joun Graham (rising quickly to bis feet)— ‘Ro one has @ right to speak now. The case 1s | closed. In the case of Mr. iweed I witnessed a | Most inhuman scené—a public address from the | counsei for the prosecution. No counsel, except | the prisoner’s, had @ right to address the Court | aiter arraignment. | protest, as a criminal lawyer, | and in the name of humanity. The scene is closed when the prisoner is drawn to the bar for arraign- Ment and sentence. It the District Attorney had | anything to say be snoud have said it before ar- raignment. | Judge Brady—I have never known of the enforce- | ment of any such rule, especialy where counsel | for the prosecution presents a appeal in the na- ture of an argument, Mr. Graham—We have ‘he last word. When the | prisoner is arraigned it is for him, if he can speak, | or for his counsel, and no person else has a right | to speak. There is no bok that establishes auch precedent, I wish to have my protest recorded. I | Baw the finger of deflance and ridicule directed at | Mr. Tweed by paid counsel, and merely for the | purpose of being reported in the papers. Mr. Phelps—But you were silent on that occasion, Mr. Grabam—Because 1 was in contempt then, | and 1 did not dare to speak, for { was afraid | @nother would be put om me. (Laughter.) Mr. Pheipa tuen proceeded to say that the pris- | @ner had the beneft o: deience by able counsel, | The jury found the killing to be unjustifiable and the man’s life could be taken without excuse, and | i was for the Court to say what penaity the vio- lated sanctity of buman lie demanded. Aa to the witness Striker, Mr, Phetps said he be- Neved him to be a myth, not having laid eyes on him since the inquest. The witness Dawson was not produced, his evidence being only useful in re- buttal, and it happened not to PASSING THE SENTENCE. Pn Brady proceeded to pass sentence, as fol- ws — raised, and had the libellants come into court | Claiming her value, the objection that they should have raised her or proved that she could not be | Taised and repaired would have been effectively urged by the claimants of the America. The libei- laut was at liberty and in fact bound to go far enough to enable proof to be given of the extent of loss, and the proof does not show that more than that was done, As to interest, it has been often said that in acts of tort where the damages are unliquidated interest 1s not to be allowed asa matter of law, but it rests in the discretion of the jury. The proposition is not unqualifiedly true Witnout exception. Thus, in actions of trover, which are actions of tort, the value of the property, witn interest thereon, is heid to be the rule of damages, Where the value of the thing lost or the cost of repairs and the like are the teat OF measure of recovery, and the amount of damages becomes mere matter of computation, mterest is as necesgggy to indemnity as the allow- ance of the principaW sum. But if the allowance Of interest rests in discretion, still the indemnity | of the party for injury from a collision occurring through the fault of another vessel should be the | object of the Court in the allowance of damages. | In this view such allowance was, I think, proper. It is in such Case not allowed as punishment; it is pot like the allowance of punitive damages in ac- | tions of slander, assault aud battery and like cases, | It gives indemnity only. Let the exceptions be overruled, and a decree be entered for the amount reported. BUSINESS IN THE OTHER COURTS. UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT. The New York Shuttie Company—In Bankruptcy. Before Judge Woodruff. In re the New York Shuttle Company, a bank- rupt, Judge Woodruff yesterday delivered the {ol- | lowing opinion :— ‘The injunction in this case having expired by its own limitation, the question whether it should bave been dissolved by the District Court seems rather speculative thaa useful, But I do not think 18 this cave the only reliable judgments thatcan be pro- ‘mounced are those peeee persons engaged in the inquiry, | ‘whether the prisoner at the bar vas vuilty of the orence charged in indictment, those who were interested hearing sil the evidence, in guarding the rights of | Paper’ and the prisoner at the bar. Although itis abit of ee community to express opinions | ithout being sufficiently advised asto | umstances, to express them treely, I must say it is @ custom more hovored in the breach | than the observance, Many opinions have been ex- pre it this “case; Mable op sons age. Kee of i | jable opinions rsons who are | immediated, investigation reniered | pecewary ty the lnwe ts the Thave reflected about | this case since its coneiusion; I have jected about it ‘with rererence to the sentence which it becomes my duty ow to pronounce, Itiss it of mine to retlect upon the degree of punishme: ith which crimes sheuld be | visited. I have not only done it in this case, but { nave | Gone It in almost all the cases in which there bave been | convictions before mé,and it is a practice I intend to | continue as jong as I sit here. Wherever discretion is ‘vested in the Court, and in this case, as in similar cases, there is & discretion vested by the Legislature | In the Court that it must be presumed to rest upon the | circumstances which may be revealed init, which may | Spring out of the case itself, in the panishment of th €fime for which the persou may be comyicted. We ha not \earvea precisely the ores in of the quarrel which prone between the prisoner and the deceased, DUE the jury have taken into consideration all the circumstances; ‘a jury of very great intelligence—I do not hesitate to s ‘the finest jury 1 hi thered together ins capital case—they have determined that murder was not Porvetraied, and that there was no justifieation tor the jomicide, “All the theories that could sented on behalf of the prisoner were ‘with great ability by his counsel, of whose devotion f am witness But that jury bave determined that tl killing Was annecessary, that there was vo justification for the act, aud have suid substanually that it was done in thé heat of passion, There are two things to be accomplished by the ferecnt Which isto be visited Ubon & prisoner—one the punishment tor the offence nishment io referenc it, but the only re- ad for, which he was Arraigned ‘ulvcrnvicie’, In amishment. “tor ‘mans | js the third degree is light. I think the feats considering what should be done, have the infirmity of human nature the value of lite when they vested discretion (rake punish from two to four Us case it Tg id in eet it Waean a iy ul may sa trom ‘idence (hi. begun by the deceased, but tt ended in 4 tanuee the jury say was unncessary tor the protection ot rs Dd £ hife of person watalied soma, notwithstand. | My 10 LAYS DEAL joinees! any inivred—thouwd nog wor. | Many opinions, doubtiess, | Pi | juror, the peorenee of the Bankrupt law and the power of the Bankrupt Court over liens, and over prop- erty subject to licns, the operation o! bankruptcy in pending suits, and due protection to the a b byte will oe the possession by ie assignee of property of the bankrupt to be interfered pats by force, or that the Court should permit its oficera to be thus ousted of jon. if the urchaser tn the foreclosure deemed himself en- titled he should have applied to the Bankruptcy Court for retie(, or, under the second section of the Bankruptcy law, have brought an action in which the question should be formally determined, and not forcibly oust the assignee, anu so seek to drive him to @ suit or other proceeding to test the questions invoived, Collision Ca: Alenry N. Wickes, lbeliant, appellant, vs. The Steamship Circassian—Helen M, Fiedler, Execu- trix, claimant and appeiiee.—In this case the Judge suys:—Let the libel be dismissed with costs im accordance With the decision appealed trom. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. The Sanborn Contract—Intormers’ Mote- th In the case of the United States vs. Gonzalez & Leibnitz, reported tn the Hexacp of yesterday, and involving the points now weil known in con- nection with the Sanborn contract, a result has just been reached, The defence yesterday closed their case by the examination of witnesses. Coun- sel for the government, Mr. Goodlett, called atten- tion to the fact that thé grounds upon which a new trial of this suit had been granted—namely, that the witnesses for the govarnment, one or both, were interested in the result—had not been sus- tained, and moved that the motion granting a new triai be set aside and for leave to withdraw a Alter hearing the other side on this poins Judge Blatchford granted the motion. The result of this {a to leave in force the judgment. in favor of the government as founded upon the first verdict | given for them. The action in this case was originally brought against tne defendants for the | Coudempugtion 1 @ large quantity of cigars on the | ground that they had not been stamped according to Jaw. . Notice to the Bar. Jndge Woodruff will opem the February Equity Term of the United States Circuit Court on Mon- day, the 23d tust, at No. 27 Cuambers street, ut eleven o'clock A, M, COURT OF OYER AND TERMIKER. Judge Brady’s Charge to the Grand Juary—Fearless and Fall Inv: stign- tons and Prompt Presentments lu- vited—Names of the Jury, As the Grand Jury of the Court of General Ses- sions have finished their work, and two grand | Juries not being allowed to sit at the same time, Judge Brady yesterday empanelied a grand jury for the Court of Oyer and Terminer. Yhirty-one answered to the panel, As there could only be twenty-three on the jury eight had to pe excused, but only ‘our offered themselves for excuse. Judge Brady congratulated the county that so many gen- Uemen desired to serve it, but struck off the last four on the list, He then selected Mr. Smith Ely, dr., for foreman, but the latter asked to be excused from that position, as it was several years since he haa performed grand jury duty. The Court then selected Edward Cooper as foreman. CHARGE TO THE GRAND JURY. The above preliminaries having been finished, Judge Brady proceeded to charge the Grand Jury, as iollows:— GENTLEMEN OF THE Grand Jony—The duties which you have to perform, though simple, are fraught with ino- mentous consequences to the people and ihe accused. It is your province to icquire—and for that purpose you are organized and become an integral part of this Court—into the trath of such charges as may be laid be- fore vou and to determine whether there is sufficient ev!- dence to warrant an indictment, You stand between the State and the citizen, with the responsibility resting upon you to do justice to both—to see to it that you present no ‘one from envy, hatred or malice, or leave’ ai one un- represented through tear, tavor, affection Ko hope of re- as ward, and that you ‘present all truly they come to your knowledge accor to the best of your understanding, This, je of your oath, is » plain, compre- the embod! ment of the law. You should, theretore, proceed dill- in hensive and just. aving but one object in view, and after due and caretul inquiry, to present the offender, whoever be may be, when you shall become satisted that he has violated some law of the land which subjects him tocriminal punishment, This should not be done, on light or insufficient testimony, You should, ‘ed by that great commentator Blackstone, be ly persuaded of the truth of an indictment so far as the evidence goes, and not rest Mereiy with remote probabilities—« doctrine at solemnly, mught applied to very oppressive par; The “evicencs’ recelved “by you anould be nor facts within the knowledge of the witness, and not of such as have gathered ey information and thereto . Guided by these elements your conclusions must be satisfactory to yoursel nd io the people who look to you tor protection ves inst dan- ger in every form {rom the felon, for in. the die, faithtul and feariegs administration of criminal justice resides the greater security of the citizen, are the only ations which I deem it uty to make ion. You are doubtless but it nevertheless proper to advise you that sixteen of your number is necessary to make quor and that the concurrence of twelve req to find an indictment You have the right to ask the aid of the District Attorney whenever you Gaeta: at regula: but pele er pon pa ae not being one of you sl prese! is your dis- Cussion.” You will also bear in ming that it is wecessar for you at once to select from among yourselves a ‘clerk, who shall preserve the minutes of your proceedings and the evidence given betore es) and that you are prohib- fed from disclosing, except to the Court and thi et Attorney. that you haye found an indictment agai any person for & felony, not being in actual confine- ment, until the defendant be arrested thereon. In obe- dience to the statute I call your attention particularly to the excise, usury, lottery and election lawa, also to the conclusion that they were deemed by the legisiature of great importance, The multitude of offences cod from the excessive use of spirituous Hquors, and. the ef- fect of deleterious liquors used even in moderation has no doubt had its influence and properly so, 10 that the Excise Jaws shoula be the subject mention; and the apprehension that the viol: Election laws might sometimes result in subverting f! franchise and in that MKS prevent tne election by vot ot the person really chosen may have exercised similar control in regard to them, However that m be, and whatever reasums may have prevailed in reter- ence to the other laws mentioned, having referred to them my duty 4s discharged. Gentlemen, you may now reture, NAMES OF THE GRAND JURY, The following are the names of the Granda Jurors:—Edward Cooper, foreman; Edward V. Loew, Allred W. Budiong, Henry Thompson, sin: clair Tousey, George Smith, James Mott, Smith Ely, James M. Requa, William KR. Garrison, Jacop L. Engle art, Theodore Perry, Limon Senheimer, Thomas Bond, Daniel W. Chapman, Charles W. Hull, Benjamin B, Atterbury, David L. Einstein, Henry Simpson, Theodore T. ‘Wiimerdit » Seth E, Thomas, Frederick Clarkson and Samuel J. Tobias. SUPREME COURT—CHAMBERS, Jewish Congregations at Loggerheads. Before Judge Donohue. ‘The headquarters of Tweed’s ola club, No. 105 East Broadway, for some time past has been occupied as a Jewish synagogue. The worship- pers meeting here called themselves the Congre- gavion Kenerseth Israel of Russian Israelites, A disagreement arose and the disaffected party, com- prised principally of Lutherans, formed a new congregation calling itself “The Congregation Kenerseth Israel Merets Russia.” A’ dispute arose ss to the property, comprising, a, other things, tt is said, one of the largest an most valuasie Talmudical libraries in this country, and the result was an injunction served on the President of the latter congregation not to inter- fere with the same until the matter was adjadicated in the courts. Jt is said that this Court injunction was ruthlessly thrown upon the floor and de- flantiy stamped upon, and upon tnis alleged fact a motion was made in tnis Court yesterday to punish the offenders ior contempt, There was quitea lengthy and spirited argument between Mr. Morris Wise on behalf of tire plaintiffs and ex-Judge Car- dozo for the defence. Judge Dohohue took the papers, reserving his decision, The Manhattan Quotation Telegraph Company in Court—What Constitutes a Witness’ Contempt Before a Referee. Klernan vs. Manhattan Quotation Telegraph Company.—In this case plaintiff, who represents the Gold and Stock Telegraph Company, asks an injunction against defendants, who are charged with appropriating cable news trom England re- specting financial matters. An order for exam- ination of Abbott as @ party before trial was made and the matter sent to a reieree to take the testi- mony. The question was put to the witness dur- ing the course of the examination, ‘How does the Manhattan Company receive its messages from abroad?” and it appearing by the answer that these messages are first received by a bankin, house in this city before they are communicate to the Mannattan Company, the next quesuon was, “What banking house is that?’ Mr, Ab- bott declined to answer this question, and @ motion was made before Judge Barrett to punish him for contumacy. Upon this motion Judge Barrett reudered the tollowing opinion:—“The rulings of the referee were plainiy right. The gravamen of the complaint is the charge of im- propery obtaining and using the piainti’s news. ne plaintiff has @ periect right to show if he can that the delendant’s claim of obtaiming the news fairly is asham, and to prove their assertions upon this head thoroughly 1 bave gone over the examination and am by No means satisfied with the course either of the devendant or nis counsel. As to the aefendant, his answers seem to me to be eva- | sive and confasing. As to counsel it was a contempt for him to advise his client not to answer, Indeed the reieree erred in permitting consultations be- tween the aelendant aud his counsel while the former was being subjected to examination. It Must be understood that the examination is to be treated as though the case were on trial. Counsel May object to irrelevant or improper questions, and, i! the ruling be adverse, except. But née quite mistakes his duty when he follows his excep- tion by advising his client not to answer. Were the case upon trial such conduct would not be tol- erated fora moment; nor should it be upon this examination. The defendant is clearly in con- | tempt, and jor a second time. Once belore he was admonished by the Court to answer a perfecti Proper question, as’ required by the referee; but, upon his explanation that in tuus refusing he did not intend anything more than an assertion tuat he had previously given ai) the iniormation on the subject which he recollected, the motion to panish him was not pressed. The examination was then resumed, but no better spirit wag evinced, and again the plaintiff has been subjected to the trouble, delay and expense of moving the Court. This course Of conduct must be stopped, The defendant is clearly in contempt, and unleag he shall within two days pay the referee's and stenograpner’s fees incurred up to this date and the costs of both motions, and shall attend before the referee and answer the question propounded to him, and continue such examination under the direction oi the referee, an attachment must issue agains: him,’’ Deiendant Abbott has appealed to the General Term and astay Of proceedings was granted by Jucge Barrett yesterday from the order commit ting him: to the County Jail for disobedience of the direction of the Court. Interesting to Holders of Second Mort- g2ge8. Augustas D, Ruggles vs. George W, Marden and Joseph P. Wiswall..—This case involved some deli- cate and nice distinctions in the application or Kterpretation of contemporary mortgages. The piaintid, as alleged, gave defendant, Marden, @ Castel mortgage to secure a note of $1,500 at five months’ credit, Subsequently he also gave, it is said, & second mortgage on the same property, with an addition of other property, and the term of the second mortgage was made on demand, with & provision that any moucys realized from the sale of the property mortgaged should be applied pro tanto to the extinguishment of the note. Defendant attempted to foreclose we second mortgage, but was resisted Ly whe | laws against ‘taking “illegal fees and to prevent frauds in the le ‘upon | steam- boats, steamships and other vessels. The es pecial designation of {these laws warrants the | Plaintiff, who obtainea @ temporary injunction, which on the hearing was made perpetual, Ju Dosohue holding that the two tustraments in materia must be construed together an: the intent be gathered from the context of the two mortgages and such interpretation given to them as would make the whole constituent with the law and intent of the parties. The decision is regarded as important in view of the large amount of litiga- tion in connection with chattel ment fu A. Marka for plamtut and George tus fur de- Tepdant, Deetst By Ju Barrett. Smith vs. The Mayor, &c.—Granted, Hall vs, Platt, Brown vs, Keys. Thompson, Kingsland ys. Brinckerbo! Empire Peat Company, Union Dime vs. eee, Chesterman vs. Purdy.—Motions ran . National Shoe and Leather Bank vs. Hill, Wood vs. Linsberger, In the matter oi Peterson vs. Bee- Mansell vs. Luxton vs, | be, Meyer vs. Heath.—Motions granted, with $10 costs, Fowler Mance, In the matter of Haviland and others, Duncan va, 'in.—Memorandams, Kiernan va, Abbott.—See opinion, By Judge Donohue. In the Matter of the Harmony Fire Insurance Campanys Damoruann vs. Butterficid.—Motions de- niea. Rivas va. Shell.—Motion denied without costs, Phillips vs. Melville.—Motion granted; $10 cosys, to abide event, Ruggles vs. Madden, Hull vs. Sprat and Other Bacon vs. Hammeken, Appleton, vg, Bowles ani gfhers, In the matter, c, Peekskill Plough orks. By Judge Sedgwick. Grant va. Hubbell.—Urder signed. Fraser ve. Doane.—Relerence ordered, Kimball vs. Mosrison.—Order for Judgment. ¥Scnermerhorn vs, Wheeler.—Motion dismissed, Boylan vs, Cooke et al.—Mot.on granted. Swut, Jr., ve, Sun Mutual Insurance Company.— Motion granted, with an allowance of $75. Swift vs. Same.—Oraer granted, with an allow- ance of $75, Raynor vs, Hoagland, Davis vs. Stover, Brown va. Doyle, Same vs. Henderson.—Orders granted. Lowell vs. Weigand,—See memorandum with Clerk at Special Term. Judge Curtis. lieve va Boren Opinion With Clerk at Spe- ctal Term, COUNT OF COMMON PLEAS—SPECIAL TERM. Decisions. Judge Robinson. oses, |, Harris va, nari Motion dented, Kelly vs. Kelly, Dobby vs. Dobby.—Decrees of divorce granted plaintit, MARINE COURT—PART 1, Important to Users ef Croton Water. ° Before Judge Gross, John C. Stockwell va. Ira Perego.—Plaintiff is a paper dealer, and occupies the premises im- Mediately beneath the defendant's store for the storage of paper stock. On the night of the 6th of last September the Oroton water waa accidentally left turned on in defendant's store and ran over the floor and down into the premises of the plain- uff, who brings this action to recover $133 for in- jury done to his paper stock. For the defence it was claimed that it is customary among the users of Croton water in the lower part of this city, who have a supply pipe running through their premises to those above, to have @ stop-cock in the supply pipe and shut of the water at night, and as the pipe supplying defendant’s store passed through the premises of tne plaintim® it. was contended that he was guilty of negligence in not having @ stop-cock to shat off the water at night. The Court charged the jury that a custom, thoagh established by consent, must, when estab- lished, be compalsory and not left to the option of every man whether he wiil follow itor not. Mf the jury found that there is a custom by which people occupying offices and stores in the lower part of this city are to sbut off the water in the evening, and that the plaintid in this case neglected to comply with that custom, they would find a ver- dict ior the defendant. If, however, they found that there Was no such estabiished custom, and that the tnjury sustained by the plaintiff was the result of negligence or omission on the part of de« fendant or his employés, their verdict would be for the plaintiff. The jury rendered a verdict for the plainti ior $75. COURT OF GENERAL SESSIONS. Alleged Arson in the First Degree—Trial of August Reinhart—The Case To Be Concluded To-Day. Before Recorder Hackett. ‘The trial of August Reinhart, indicted for arson in the first degree, was commenced in this Court yesterday. Assistant District Attorney Rollins conducted the prosecution. Mr. Abe Hummel, in the absence of Mr. Howe (who will be in attend- ance to-day), cross-examined tne witnesses with skill andcourtesy. Mr. Rollins, in his opening, pre- sented a cardboard model of the apartments of the prisoner, prepared by Fire Marshal Sheldon, through whose efficiency and thoroughness the prosecuting officers have been enabled to secure so many con- vicuions for the crime of arson in the last twelve months. Reinhart is a respectaole-looking German, and his wife occupied a seat by his side, From the testimony of the witnesses for the prosecution it appeared that the prisoner occupied two rooms in a Tanatory topemans house at No. 124 Stanton street; that on the night of the 19tn of September, about ten minutes past ten, he was seen by Mrs. Kiliza- beth Lovell, Wuo was sitting at her window on the opposite side of the street, to leave his apartments and go down the street, and that her attention was particularly attracted to bim from the tact that a lavorite dog of his was not with him; that about hali-past ten o’glock Mrs. Stemmler smelied smoke, whereupon she and some of the tenants broke into Reinhart’s apartments and discovered the door of a small closet burning, which was speedily extinguished by throwing water upon it; that subsequently Sremen came and they discovere another and a distinct fire in the adjoining bedroom, which could not by any possibility have been com- municated trom the closet. This fire was not seri- ous, having only burned some of the clothing hanging on the wall. Tne following day kerosene or some other kind of oil was discovered on the floor. August Engler, the Superinvendent of the German American Insurance Company, testified to making a thorough examination of ‘Reinhart’s Tooms & day or two after the fire, and presented an inventory of the snings found and of tne débris of the fire, consisting of a few cigar boxes and old clothing. He did not find any remnants of silk dresses, which the accused claimed were destroyed. Keinhart was insured in the company’s office for $1,000, and _he told Mr. Engler that his loss would be about $1,400. The case tor the prosecution is nearly closed, and the trial will be conciuded to-day. COURT OF SPECIAL SESSIONS. A Desperate Sootbiack. Before Judges Ovterbourg, Murray and Simmons, Emilio Broecke is & young Italian bootbiack about eleven years of age, very impulsive and hot tempered, Emilio became engaged in @ quarrel ‘with one John Schrade, a Loy of fifteen years, and stabbed him in the side with a penknife. arraigned yesterday, and the Court, after hearing the evidence, sentenced him to three months in the City Prison. Another Bateh of Cock Fighters. James Wilson, the alleged proprietor of the Har- Jem cockpit, and twenty-six spectators were ar- raigned for trial yesterday morning. The court room was crowded with the friends of the prison- ers. Mr. Hummet appeared for the cock dghters, sng asked for an adjournment on the ground that his associate, Mr. John KR, Fellows, was at present engaged at White Plains in the masked robbers case. OD consent of Mr. Eldridge Gerry, counsel for the prosecution, the case was adjourned until Saturday. TOMBS POLICE COURT. More Cotton Thieves. Before Justice Morgan. Daniel McGuire and John Flaherty, who were ar- rested on Tuesday for being concerned in tne cot~ ton sample thievery, were arraigned at the Tombs esterday, On the 16th of the present month odie, Darrow & Co., of No, 130 Pearl street, sent Daniel McGuire to the warehouse, Nos, 390 and 392 Greenwich street, to sampie ninety- three bales of cotton. It ts leged that McGuire sampled the bales so extensively that he left twenty pounds of cotton on ihe side- waik, Which a man named John Flanerty carried away. The cotton was brought to the junk store of Flaherty, corner of Washington and Beach streets, where it was founa by the detectives, McGuire was held in $500 and Flaherty in $1,000 bail to answer, A Dishonest Employe. Ayoung man, named Benjamin Stansbury, was arrested by OMicer Terhune yesterday, on the pier of the Fall River tine, with a quantity of towelling and biangeta in his possession. He was searched, and some Afty-ive pawn tickets, Tepreseating bedclothing, &c., taken from the steamer Old Colony, were found on his person. He was va dl before Justice Morgan and Held in $2,900 bail to swer. Stansbury had been em- ployed on the Fall River line of steamers for some time, and what the aggregate of hia peculations ‘Was bas not as yet been discovered. ESSEX MARKET POLICE COURT. Clever Capture of Thieves. Before Justice Utterbourg. George Burns, E.G. Hopps and Thomas Devine ‘were brought into court by Detective Dyer, of the Tenth precinct, yesterday, who preferred three separate charges against each. it appears thas vings Bank | He was | 207 | about a week ago s case of champagne was stolen | from am express wagon while the owner was walung to cross the Grand street ferry. | On Wednesday night the detective, who ; had been 7 the robbers, made a descent on No, 12 Essex street, a “dive” kept by Hopps. He was rewarded by dropping on @ “bouquet” of scoundrels, in addition to finding the stolen champagne, carefully hidden away beneath @ back counter. In the place he lound Buras, Devine and Hoppa, the proprietor. Detec- tive Dyer at once recognized Burns as being an escaped convict, whom he had had sent to the Penitentiary some six months ago to serve a term jh . Barns, while sor ving cs ae nme, i Opportunity, and, jumping into Eaotamen produced & revolver and drove the ack J Hoppe, the Proprietor of the Easex street charged wi receiving stolen goods, while Devine was Oxed upon as veing the original wine thiel, Justice Otterbo: after listening to the male ure, story of the thett and the sabsequent ci committed the three prisoners in default 01 $2,500 Stabbed 1 5 Thomas Scully, of No. 92 Columbia street, was comiitted in default of $1,000 bail, on a charge of stabbing aud bs igi, Thomas Monson in the face with @ penknife, The parties had been quas- relling and words endea in blows; hence both the and the charge. A Dear Suit of Clothes. Christian Suzmann and Jacob Hoenner were Were fully committed to answer a charge of steal- ing a sult of clothes trom Walter Stembecher, of No, 1,207 Third avenue. He states they were living in bia house, and shortly aiter they departed on Tuesday moi he missed the chief part of his wardrobe, The San Tequired ig $1,000, hs Lawyers Refunding Their Fees, George Repper and George Anderson, two law- yers who were summoued to answer @ charge bre- ferred against them of obtaining money under false pretences, by @ poor woman named Mary Bindewald, of No, 126 Kust Houston street, were discharged on their own parole yesterday, in con- sideration of their reiunding the money ($16). SEFFERSON MARKET POLICE COURT. An Emberzier at the Bar. Before Justice Sherwood. John Danner, of No. 30 East Houston street, has been in the employ of J. E, Selman & Orin Parker for several years, during which time he has imbibed the hilarious cocktail to a fearful extent, His. appetite in this direction was far in excess of bis Soancial ability, so he had recourse to his em- ployers’ money drawer. His visits were frequent, and in @ few months he appropriated $586, He feil at last beneath the inquisitive giances of @ private detective, whom Selman and Parker have had in their employ. ‘This is very untortunate for the (estive Jolin, who was ar- raigned at the Jefferson Market Police Court yes- terday, where he Perera guilty to the charge of eeohesniamant adding that “drinking liquor dia Yet Another, Frederick W. Adams, unlike the naughty Jobn, had no occasion to tap his employer's till to get Money wherewith to procure “something wet,” for was he not himself superintendent of the in- vigorative department of Mr. Charles Rohe’s sa- loon, at No. 268 West Thirty-third street? Mr. Rohe says he was, and further declares that he has made away with $446 of nis (Rohe’s) money. Frederick denies the “soft impeachment,” but nevertheless the occupant of a felon’s cell in the City Prison, to which he was consigned by order of Justice Sherwood, YORKVILLE POLICE COURT. Violation of the Steam Soiler Law. Before Justice Murray. Peter Ahies, @ brewer, at No. 883 Second avenue, ‘was charged by Sergeant Taft, of the Sanitary Squad, witha violation of the steam boiler law. The officer testified that the defendant is the owner of a steam boiler, which has been run by his gon, who has not a certificate of qualification from the Police Commissioners, The defendant the Face. ‘was held in $300 bail to answer. William mer and James Davis, sausage makers, at 821 First avenue, were arraigned on & similar charge to the foregoing. They denied hav- ing intentionally violated the law, but admitted that they did not require their engineer, Joseph Hunt, to produce his certificate. Wagner and Davis were also held in $300 bail each to answer, Warrants have been issued sor other violators me the law, and they will probably be arraigned to- ay. Attempt to Shoot a Citizen and Police- man. J. J, Cammisky, of No, 553 First avenue, prefer- Ted a complaint of felonious assault against Hugh McOlosxy, alias ‘‘Olugie,”» who snapped a pistol at him, and failing to discharge the same struck him with the butt end in the lace, McClosky then fled. While he waa in Daly’s liquor store, corner of Thirty-first street and First avenue, OMcer Smith endeavored to arreat him. He drew his revolver and aimed it at the offfcer, but before he couid fire it he was knocked down by the officer. The revol- ver was loaded. He was committed for trial in de- fault of $2,000 ball on each charge. HARLEM POLICE COURT. An Ex-Assemblyman Threatened with @ Sword Cane, Before Judge Kasmire. Alexander Shrymer, a native of Russia, aged thirty-three years, and late an officer in the De- partment of Public Works, was yesterday com- mitted in $500 bail for trial at the Court of General | Sessions on a charge of carrying concealed ‘weapons. Hon, James A. Deering, late Assemplyman from the Seventeenth district, 1s «the complainant He alleges that on Wednesday, while in the anhattanville ratiroad depot, he was cpproacted tn a threatening manner by Shrymer, who carried & sword cane, The sole provocation consisted in the fact that the complainant is the legal adviser of @ person with whom the accused has had trouble. Shrymer | gv the necessary bail, his father-in-law, Thomas | . Wingrove, becoming his bondsman, and he was | released. Mr. Deering’s testimony 1s corroborated | by Officer Smith, of the Thirtietn precinct, whe made the arrest, Supreme CourT—Cuampers—Held by Judge Bar- Paras a4 am Pag pr gt ger? A. M.—Nos. 27, 28, » 79, 81, 83, 108, 163 165, 169, 170, 473, 144, 175,176. Gail’176, adits; SUPREME COURT—SrEcIAL TERM—Held by Judge Van Brunt.—Issues 01 law and tact—Nos. 308, 314, | 842, 114, 357, 359, 12, 20, 53, 44, 67, 40, 68, 142, 152, 60, 99.1 137,168, 155, 158, 159,’ 161, 165, 188, 169, 170, 185, | 1 SuPREME CovrT—Crrcvit—Part 2—Held by Judge Lawrence.—Short causes—Nos, 217234, 2794, 2600, | 2330, 2166, 2010, 192, 2488, 173834, 2142, 2380, | 2732, 2752, 2790, 2952, 2055, 2050, 2878, 2920, 2774, 2522, 2246, 2490, 2840, 2, 2742, Part 3—Held ry Judge Van Vorst.—Snort causes—Nos, 1293, 2677, | 2003, 1188, 821, 2047, 2275, 2643, 2575, 1817, 2177, | 2529, 2791, 2263, 2593, '28u3, 2719, 2879, 2604, 2965, 2031, H SUPERIOR CouRT—Triat Tenm—Part 1—Held by ply Spier.—Same calendar. Oase on. Part 2— Heid by Judge Curtis.—Same calendar, Case on. COMMON PLEas—TRIAL TkEnM—Part 1—Held by Judge Nera reap: tata can otee he rt ready, December Term—Nos, 3244, |, 3564 3308, #380. ‘January issues—Nos, 3816, 3018, 3491, | 8923, 3012, 3628, 3449, 8914, 3694, 3026, 2786, 8808, 3814, 3709, 2603, 3939, 3617, 2442, 3529, 3818, 1328, 3784, 162%, 650. Down causes, December Term—Nos. 3497, 3427, 2902, 8555, 2602, Part | 2—Held by Judge J. F, Daly.—Court opens at 11 A. M.—Short causes, oi term, December—Nos. 3534, | 9329, 3811, 3574, 3894, 2613, 2841, 2842, 3515, 3368, 3394, 3825, 3567, February issues—Nos, 3902, 3789, 2275, 3930, 3696, 3703, 3004, 3954, 2681, 3970, 3069, 3995, 3065, 3982, 3477, 3957, 8921, 1237, MARINES CoURT—TRIAL TERM—Part 1—Held b Indge Shea.—Nos, 4310, 3785, 3326, 3264, 4368, 338: 4407, 283834, 2647, 3153, 3340, 3342, 3344, 3346, 3352. Part 2—Adjourned for the term. Part 3—Held by Judge McAdam.—Nos. 4171, 4344, 2674, 1520, 4419, | 4111, 3890, 3287,3205, 4994, 4466, 3725, 3726, 4167, 4168. | Court OF GENBRAL SEssi0Ns—Held by Recorder Hackett.—The Peopie, &c., vs. August Reinhart, arson. COURT OF APPEALS CALENDAR, ALBANY, Feb. 19, 1874. the Court of Appeals day calen- LL, 106, 241, The following dar for February 20:—Nos, 68, 57, 114, 83. BROOKLYN COURTS. tieulars on the part of the United States.—In com- Pliance witn an order isaued on your motu by the Hon. Chafies L. Benedict, District Judge for the Eastern District of New York, ox the 18th day of February, 1874, the following particulars are hereby furnished you on the charges alleged mi rina Alfred Vanderwerken, ia io p and. otuers, in ° fay it pa towne a fs 2 First—The estates upon which le; and suc- cession taxes re discovered and Collected, as stated in the said indictment, were the follow- ing: jamin D. Phillip, Abraham Wood, Martha Dorian, Henrietta Barnes, Jonn C. Bergen, Richard Elus, George W. Endicott, James Funck, Charies Hietkamp, Edward Downs, Jasper W.' Hughes. Robert Hutchinson, Henry Augur, samuel Woarburton, Jabez Williams, William Cabble,. George W. David, Thomas ©. Moore, Margaret F. Hobert, Joseph Petit and Daniel Mossman, and euch and ail other estates upot which tne said legacy and succession taxes were at any time dis- covered or collected by the said Auired Vanderwer- ken, within the First Internal Kevenue District of the State of New York, and by the said John D. Sanborn transmitied to the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, Second—That tue contract mentioned tn the sald indictment was an instrumené io writing, and | dated on or about the 13th aay of August, 1372, and amenaed or extended and enlarged oy another in- Strument in writing, dated on or about the s0tn day of October, 1872, That by. ialse and fraudu- lent papers, writings and appliances and represen- tations by which it was made to appear Jalsely ta the said Secretary of the freasury. That the gaia! John D, Sanborn had discovered and collected or assisted in discovering and collecting the alore- Said taxes on legacies aud successions, were a certain written statement, affidavit or certificate mentioned and referred to in saic amended con- tract as having been signed by tne said John D.- Sanborn under oatn, and as having been filed by him in the* office the of Secretary of the ‘ireasury of the said United States, and a certain schedule or letter containing, among other things, a list of the above men- tioned esta! presented on or about the month of October, 1872, by the said Joun D. Sanborn, to the said Secretary of the Treasury, and each and all. letters sent by the said Joun D. Sunvorn to the sald secretary of the Treasury, or sent for bim in his name to said Secretary of the Treasury, in which it was represented or claimed that the sald legacy and succession tax on either of the above mentioned estates had been paid to the said Joho D. Sanborn by the representative or representatives of said estate, and ailother payers and writings written or caused to be written by the accused or by either of them in and by waich tt has been gi or represented or made to appear to the said Secre- tary of the Treasury that the said Jonn D. San- born had discovered or cotlected or recovered, or assisted the proper revenue ofticers in the discov- ery, collection or recovery of the legacy and suc- cession taxes which were due to the United States: on either of the above mentioned estates, together with all verbai representations to the same effect which have at any time been made to the said Sec- retary of the lreasury, to the said accused or by either of them or by their commivance or authority or the connivance or authority of either of them. ‘That in pursuance of and to effect the ob- Ject of the conspiracy, collusion and agreement charged in the indictment, the said Alfred Vander- werken, Whose office and duties were as charged: in the said indictment, instead of causing the amount and amounts paid in discharge of sala taxes on the above mentioned estates, to be to the Collector of Internal Revenue of the First Collection district, as was his duty, trans- mitted the same and caused the same to bo transmitted to said Lucien Hawley; and that in. further pursuance of and to further effect the object’ of the said conspiracy, collusion and agreement,. the said Lucien Jey, whose office and duties were as charged in said indictments, did transmit the same and did cause the same to be transmitted to the said John D. Sanborn, and that, in pursu- ance of and to further effeet the object of the said, conspiracy, collusion and agreement, the said’ John D, Sanborn did transmit and cause the same to be transmitted to the said Secretary of the Treasury of the said United States, with repre- sentations to the said Secretary, both oral and written as aforesaid, made by him, the said John D. Sanborn, both before and at tne time o! so transmitting the same to the said Secretary, CITY COURT—TRIAL TERM—PART |. Perils of Street Car Passengers—Dam- ages Against a Railroad Company. Before Judge McCue. Thumas Ennis, by Guardian, vs. The Brooklyn and Coney Isiand Kailroad Company. This was a suit for $10,000 damages for personal injuries, The case for plaintiff was this:—On Sunday, the 13th of January, 1872, he started for the skating lake at Prospect Park, and was in the act of getting om the front platform of one of the company’s cars, at the corner of Jay and Sands streets, when the driver suddenly loosened the brake and started the horses, The rapidly revolving brake strack young: Ennis in the and knocked him into the street, While lying there, the wheels of the car passed over one of his hands, which was injured that it was subsequently iound neces- 24 amputate three of the fingers. At the time of the casualty the rear platform and the inside of the car were full, and there were several persons standing on the front platform. ‘The defence was that the platntiff got on the car with a number of other boys and was “‘skylarking’? On the front platform when he fell om, Tne driver swore that he was not struck at all by the brake. The company further claimed that the buy had no: right on the front platiorm, and that, therefore, they could not be held responsible. The Court charged that it was negligence for a party to geton the front platform of a car, even though ‘the rear platiorm end the inside were crowded; but if in this case the car was stopped atthe time the plaintiff tried to get on and the driver did not give him sufficient time and atarted,. then the company was responsible. t ate jury rendered a verdict in favor of plaintiat for $2,000. Morris and Pearsall for plaintif; Britton and Cul- len for defendants, CITY COURT—TRIAL TERM. The Spencer Divorce Suit—Di: lh Spee of the Third Jury—Proposition Sub- mit the Case to the Judge. . Before Judge Reynolds. The third trial of the suit for absolute divorce brought by Thomas T. Spencer against Caroline S.. Spencer, which was commenced on Monday, re- sulted yesterday in the disagreement of the jury,, who were discharged. The jury were locked up om Wednesday night and were brought into Court yesterday morning, when they announced that ic was impossible for them to agree upon a verdict. They were sent out again, and at'noon, being still» unable to agree, the foreman addressed the follow-' ing note to Judge Reynoids:— Hon. Jopan Rernoups:— Tee the sur desire to express to Your Honor that wo, have carelully Considered this case again in the light of your explanation to us this morning, and there has been; no change in our views whatever, e still continue to stand nine to three, the same as we stood at twelve, ere 18 NO Possible hope that we} can any of us change our opinions. ‘Two ot the minority) have stated that they will remain here a mouth i! neces sary, and will notchange then. In view, therefore, of the utter impossibility of an agreement, ‘we submit tol Your Honor that tt is of no use to keep us together longe: The majority are so firmly intrenched in our opin that no power on earth (or heaven) can shake them r nt. ota for @ single moment, ORG PARSONS, Foreman, Tavrspay—Noon. Judge Reynolds’ reply waa to give the jury their! ners The court room remained crowded throughout: the day, aithough it was generally thought thag the jury would not agree ff they were kept out, | twenty-iour hours longer; but the people wno had! sat through the trial wanted tosee the this through and be present when the jury was dis- chargea, They were gratified shortly beiore five: o’clock in the afternoon, for at that time the jury) were sent for and appeared in the court room,/ pale and haggard from loss of sleep and their close confinement, In reply to the usual questions of the Clerk, they foreman stated that they had not agreed upon te verdict, and when Ju Reynolds asked it ity that they Wee pts basal rage eh yt hatically replied, mately agree he empha: Judge Reynolds didnot feel” justified in keeping them together any longer, so alter thanking. TH case he " discharged, “they stood nine tor defendant ‘and: three for pli i aan dressing the Court, said that om benaif of t fe colon me he desired to say that this: cause, having been three times tried belore & ja H and the jury having each time failed to agree, ands, as the deience understood, 4 @ smail Pip jr SI this time and before; and ss these results showe the great dimoulty there was in obveining a ver dict, and ag it was extremely desirable + nis tigation should be ended in some form, he lainti@ to vacate the order settling: sues and to fone Court for decision, aad? ior counsel for plaintif, not Ex-Judge ny UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT. The Alleged Conspiracy of Sanborn, Hawley and Vanderwerken—“Bill of Particulars” of the Indictment—The Estates Upon Which Legacy and Succession Taxes Have Been Collected, Before Judge Benedict, On Friday leat, it may be remembered, the coun- sel for Jobn D, Sanborn, Lucien Hawley and Alired Vanderwerken, who are indicted om the charge of having conspired to defraud tne government in connection with the legacy and snocession taxes, applied to Judge Benedict ior am order requiring District Attorney Tenney to furnish @ “bill of par ticulars’ of the indictment. Judge Benedict sud Sequently granted the order appited for. Yesterday Mr. Tenney with eavoraer and furnished counsel with the folowing Dill: The United staves vs, Altred Vamderwerken, ‘Troy, senior resent, Birkett, the junior counsel, de- clined to ee the proposition without con- associate. *"Jadge Reynolds said that tf the parties agreed: q ‘such an order Shay. could have it entered. nor. Tracy sald that he had notified Judge Tro that morning that be intended to make such & ® Tadge Reynolds—You wil! have to submit that to him. you find that it can be agreed upon there: ‘will be 0 trouble, CITY COURT—SPECIAL TERM. The Cox Divorce Cace. Before Judge Reynolds. The Court yesterday renderea a decision im the notorious Cox divorce case, confirming the report of the referee, who reported in favor of granting An absolute divorce to the piaintif, James Cox, from Caroline Cox. The case has been vefore the Courts in diferent forms for the past two yeal One of the witnesses jor piaintim, a Uivorce dete: tive named Hatch, was sentenced to the State Prison for perjury, It 19 said that,edorss will now Lacien Hawicy, Jonn D, Sanbom et Gl.—Bill of pas: | be wake to secure Lim a pardon.