The New York Herald Newspaper, November 18, 1875, Page 5

THE COURTS Dilatory Motions Still the Order in the Tweed Suits. Seven Jurymen Obtained in the Scannell Trial. 4 CURIOUS COUNTERFEITING CASE ‘Notwithstanding the adverse decisions rendered by the Court of Appeals on the appeal taken by William M. Tweed from tne decisions of the General Term, his tounsel evince @ determination to leave no stone un- turned where thore is a possible glimpse of a chance of Yoing anything that may accrue to his benefit, It looks a little as though bis counsel were determined to continue pressing their original applications to vacate the order of arrest or to reduce bail In spite ot the ‘ction hitherto taken by the Courts in regard to his epplications three new motions have been made betore Yadge Donohue, in Supreme Court, Chambers— the first to vacate the order of arrest in the $1,000,000; the second to reduce the bail in case the motion tp vacate the order of arrest is denied, and the third for Mr, Peckham to serve re- plies to defences set up in the amended answer in the $6,000,000 suit and the answer in the $1,000,000 suit, he argument on the motion to reduce bail will pe Fiawer or Tourver.—when filled up will be signed. Hebbern vs, Kolle.—Motion to discontinue, without costs granted, Memoranduin, By Judge Lawrence. Gokey vs. Ulster County Ice Company. —Granted. Barber vs. Hoff—Motion to compel plaintiff to file security for costs denied, without costs. SUPREME COURT—SPECIAL TERM. By Judge Van Vorst. Fletchér vs. Clark et al.—Findings signed; motion for new trial on merits denied, Marsbail et al. vs, Macy et al—Order settled and signed, SUPERIOR COURT—SPECIAL TERM, By Judge Curtis, Clegg vs. Hamel et al. —Findings filed and judgment for foreclosure and sale. By Judge Spetr. Bowere vs, ©’Brien, &c,—Amendments settled. COMMON PLEAS—SPECIAL TERM. By Judge Larremore. Knapp vs. Campbell —Report of referee confirmed and judgment to be entered, Masters vs, The Eclectic Life Insurance Compiny,— Application on behalf of Attorney General granted. Matter of Pressinger,—Commission de lunatico inqui- rendo ordered. Wheelock vs. Walker; Kelly vs. Dyeg Sweeny vs. Aruell; Spofford vs, Northrup. —Motions granted, ~ Louie vs, Stratton; Costello vs, The Mayor, &.—Mo- tions denied, Hunter vs, Hunter,—Reference ordered. Coswell, Jr., vs. Genet.—Memerandum, Murphy vs. Kaile.—Default opened, SUMMARY OF LAW CASES, ‘Tho will of Margaretta Knetter, bequeathing about $1,700, was admitted to probate yesterday by Surro- gate Hutchings, the contest as to the will having been withdrawn, The matter of the settlement of the estate of the lat Nicholas Siegrist was called up before Surrogate Hutch- ings yesterday, but was postponed by consent of both parties until November 24. seard to-morrow. When the other two motions were called yesterday Mr. Peckham said that he was ready to reply to the wnswer in each suit, but as to the $1,000,000 suit, in which an amended answer had not been served by Tweed, he desired the order to be accompanied with the stipulation that no amended ‘answer should be werved by the defendant. He insisted upon this, not that he cared in the least how many amended answers were served, but he was anxious to avoid any delay o bringing the sujts to trial. Mr. Dudley Field said that he was unwilling to make any such stipulation, but be disclaimed any desire to telay the suits, Judge Donohue took the papers for examination, Meantime tn the $1,000,0008uit Messrs. Field and Deyo, Cweed’s counsel, served on counsel for the people yesterday an amended auswer, ‘This amended answer @ in all respects the same us its predecessor, alread Us comeneip in the Hmraxp, with the exception of an ad. tional clause, which 1s as follows:—‘And for a further and separate defence this defendant alleges on informa- Mon and belief that there was at the commencement of this action and still is another action pending in tho Bupreme Court ot the State of New York between the yame parties and for the same cause of action as in the tomplaint herein. ’? The decision of the Court of Appeals that there was but one cause of action im the suits before them has been the ground for serving the foregoing amended answer in the second suit, the claim being that the frst suit must of necessity include the cause of action the second and be a bar to its prosecution, An prder was made subsequently, by Judge Donohue, that the plaintiff serve a reply in ‘the first case, but for the motion for areply in the second suit he took the pa- ‘ers, reserving his decision, THE RETRIAL OF SCANNELL. The further efforts to obtain a jury for the retrial of John Scannell for shooting Thomas J. Donohue were renewed yesterday in the Court of Oyer and Terminer defore Judge Barrett. There was the same crowded tourt room, the same fastidiousness of dress and calm (ndifference of manner on the part of Scannell; the same goat at his side was occupied by his wife, who seems by far the more concerned of the two, and the brisoner’s counsel, Messrs, William A. Beach, William. F, Howe, Charles S. Spencer and Peter Mitchell, showed the same promptness in their attgndance, while the prosecuting lawyers, District Attorney Phelps and rede 2s District Attorneys Rollins and Lyons, were also 6n band with like promptitude, Directly upon the opening of the Court the work of obtaining a jury was resumed. The previous formula of questioning was only slightly deviated from, the ob- lect being to discover among the large panel waiting examination some additional persons whose scope of gewspaper reading 1s of a limited order, and’ if not altogether the most intelligent gentlemoa that could be selected for such duty, at least meeting that essential requisite—absolute ignorance of the facts regarding the homicide, and consequent capacity to sit in judginent upon the’ case without prejudice or bias. In capital cases Jurors having a disposition to shirk jury duty can always fall back securely upon “conscientious scru- ples.” A good many were excused yesterday for this reason. In eliciting this fact, however, occasion- ally rather ludicrous responses were given to the interrogating cou: One person was ‘asked, for instance, if he had any conscientious scruples, and he answered very prompily, “Yes, against men carry- ing pistols.” Another one said, “I have no conscien- tious scruples on any subject.’? Quite a number sadly foundered upon the word conscientious to the great amusement of all present. In the course of the day Mr. Beach got into quite a racy rencontre with a juror upon abstruse theological questions, Among the per- sons examined was one named Spratt. Mr. Howe sug- gested that if they wanted to catch him they bad better send for Assistant District Attorney Herring. Thus, though the proceedings were, on the whole, of rather @monotonous order, there were occasional episodes that served to somewhat relieve the tedium. The re- suit of the day’s labors was obtaining three additional jurors. The following is the list thus far:— John Ginshbush, No. 505 Worth street, wool mer- chant, . David J, Dannet, No, 8 Tompkins street, lumber er. John J. Hicks, No, 111 South street, wrecker. Samuei Booth, No. 645 West Thirty-iith street, voiler maker. John 8. Neill, No. 50 Beekman street, printing roll- ers. Sherman P. Colt, No. 47 Beekman street, hardware. John H. Oberteutfer, No. 199 Grand’ street, dry goods, An extra panel of 200 was ordered for to-day. Tho | counsel for the prisoner have, up to the present time, used ten peremptory challenges, and the prosecution seven. An effurt will be made to complete the jury to-day, but it will not be at all surprising if it takes two days more to fill the jury box. A COUNTERFEITER’S FAMILY. On Tuesday night Captain Kennock, of the United States secret service, Captain Ulman, of the Tenth po- lice precinct, and Detective Mullen arrested Mary Mc- | Cartney, aged about fifty-five years; Mrs. Ellen De Mott, about thirty-five years old; Ella Kenney, aged thirteen years, and Francis and Catherine Kenney, aged respectively eleven and nine years, charged with uttering counterfeit five cent nickel pieces. The pris- oners were yesterday taken before United States Com- missioner Shields, and, after a brief examination, com- mitted for further examination and sent to Ludlow Street Jail in default of $1,000 bail each. From the evidence in the case it appears that Henry Volkesteia, a beer shop keeper, of No, 08 Hester strect, | ‘Was arrested last week for giving two counterfeit five cent nickels toa tradesman. Volkestein said that he got them from a little girl in payment for beer. omplaints were made to Captain Ulman that other shopkeepers were passing the counterfeits, The same story was repeated by ail, that little children came into their shops, purchased a penny toy and received four coppers in change. The officers obtained accurate de- acriptions of the children and traced them to No. 77 Eldridge street, a double tenement house, containing about twenty-two families, On an upper "door the oili- vers found ila and Catherine Kenney and their grand. mother, Mary McCartney. They stoutly denied any knowledge of the bad money, but a search of the room revealed a tin pail halt full of the counterfeit coin trom which tho rough edges had not yet been filed away. 4n iron ekillet that bad been used as a melting po some plaster moulds with dross in them, a pair of meval | shears, a file and a small quantity of unused meta! were found, Scattered around the room were handfuls of nny toys and candies. Tho mother of the childron, | jien De Mott, was not at home, and the officers waited for ber at the street door. About eleven o’clock P. M. she returned, bringing her voy Francis, who had his arms full of little toys and candies, while bis mother had her pockets full of-copper cents. The fatnily were taken to the Tenth precinct station and locked up tor the night. Some time ago the mother of the children married Emanuel De Mott, and it is alleged that he taught them bow to make dud pass the bogus coin, |p, Some three months since De Mott was caught in Brook. jyn with little Ella Kenney passing the bad money, ‘hey made pleas of guilty. De Mott was sentenced to thirteen months’ imprisonment, but Ella was discharged on account of her youth, During last Tuesday night Ella told Captain Kennock that be didn’t catch her thia time ng badly a8 they caught her papa. The mother esterday attempted to exculpate the children, but the nites States Commissioner refused to allow her to make any statement. When she and her mother, Mrs, McCartney, were ordered to Ludiow Street Jail to await examination she burst into tears and begged piteousiy shat her children might be alowed to go to the jail with | her, and her petition was granted, The examination | {the case was set dowa for to-day. DECISIONS. SUPREME COURT—CHAMDERS. By Judge Donohue, La Fond vs, Deems; Blake vs. denied, Bright, —Motion Strong vs. Bedell; Clark ys. O'Conner; Oakley vs Greves; Wannemaker vs. Wannemaker;' Everton vs, Everton; Wolf vs, May; Stewart vs. Bramball,— | Granted, Cook ve, Careidy,—Order granted. In the Court of Common Pleas yesterday, Jehoiachin Davis filed a schedule of his liabilities and assets, The linbilities are placed at $92,958 48, the nominal assets at $52,286 63 and the real assets at $15,440. The United States Trust Company is the largest creditor, its claim being for $30,000, J. P. O'Sullivan, the plaintiff in the suit against Mar- shall 0. Roberts now being tried in the Superior Court, reported as mysteriously missing, turned up in the case yesterday, much, evidently, to the astonishment of his counsel. It turned out that he bad left the court in quest ofa witness, but without having notified his counsel of the fact, A petition was sent yesterday to Judge Donohue in Supreme Court, Chambers, signed by the President and amajority of the trustees of the Metropolitan Collar Company, asking a dissolution of the company. Mr. Frederick Smyth was appointed referee to examine all the claims and to hear objections, if any, against the company’s dissolution, Judge Donohue yesterday granted an order to show cause Why a mandamus should not issue against the Board of Estimate and Apportionment directing it to insert in the tax levy for next year the sum appro- priated by the Board of Aldermen for the erection of an armory for the Seveath regiment. Tne order was made returnable to-day, and the case will come up for argu- ment, Some time since judgments were obtained in the Supreme Court by Cottman & Keclesine; plaintiffs’ attorneys, in*eight suits brought against the city by armorers of various regiments of the National Guard for their salaries, The judgments were paid yesterday by the Comptroller, the verdict in each suit being $588 97. The city made no defence and the judgments were taken by deiault, A further hearing in the John L, Brown contested will case was had yesterday before Surrogate Hutch- ings Various additional witnesses testified that they had known the testator during his lifetime, and to the best of their knowledge he was of sound Inmd. The case is still on. Surrogate Hutchings admitted the will of the late William 'T, Blodgett yesterday to probate. The will, which is dated January 26, 1875, names Mrs. Abby B. Blodgett executrix and Josiah M, Fiske and Henry H. ‘Anderson as executors, and William T, Blodgett, Jr., to be associated with them after be shall have reached his iwenty-fifth year. After leaving a few minor bequests to his sisters and sister-in-law, the will provides that the remainder of the estate, excepting the plate, furnt- ture and jewelry, which are given to the widow, shail be divided equally between the widow and his son and daughter. In June last the Father Mathew Society, Branch No} 1, expelled Michael Foley on the ground that he was in atrears for dues. A motion was made yesterday before Judge Donohue, in Supreme Court, Chambers, for a mandamus to compel the society to reinstate him. Mr, Matthew P. Breen argued in favor of the motion, and said that, even assuming the position the society had taken to be true in regard to the dues, still the relator’s expulsion was in violation of Jaw, on'the principle that the accused should havea hearing brought on by the service of a proper notice, and that he could not be legally deprived of hig interests in the funds to which he had contributed without at least an opportunity for defence, Coionel Spencer opposed the motion in be- half of the society, maintaining that there was no ex- pulsion, but simply an erasure of the relator’s nawe from the rolls; that the relator had drawn as benetits the sum of $405 from the society; that he was likely to be @ perpetual drawer, and that the action of the society was proper. Mr. Breen defended his client with Some earnestness and said tne society should have brought these charges against the relator before the society and not belore the court, but in- stead of which they attempted to set a trap for a feeble old man, an act quite unworthy of an association which bears upon {tg banners the emblems of charity and benevolence, In regard to the question of expulsion, he insisted that this question was easily settled by adecision of Judge Barrett holding that an erasure from the rolls of membership was an expulsion, The Court reserves its decision. There was called to trial in the Marine Court _yester- day, before Judge Spaulding, the suit of Jacob Woeliler, administrator of the estate of Sigismund Woelfler | against the Grand Lodge of the United States of the In- dependent Urder of the Fmendly Sons of Israel, and | against Zion Lodge of this city of the same | Order. It is claimed that, © according to the by-laws of Zion Lodge, of — which the deceased was a member, ‘his represent- atives were entitled to receive {rom the lodge at his death the sum of $1,000. Thissum the lodge refused to pay, on the ground that the right thereto had been forfeited by the deceased being in default in bis dues | at the time of nis death. An appeal was taken to the Grand Lodge of the United States, where the refusal to pay was sustained, and now appeal is made to tlie civil courts. When a jury had been sworn in the case, it was found that there was a defect in the pleadings, and with leave of the Court a juror was withdrawn, and the trial postponed until some future day. In the Marine Court yesterday, before Chief Justice Shea and a jury, @ suit Was tried, in which C, H. Bauer, editor of the Morrisania Tagbiatt, sought to recover from Julius Heberline and Edward Fritsch $1,000 damages for assault and battery. It appeared by ‘the testimony that in August ag bout the time of the | assault, the defendant Heberlince, who keeps a lager beer saloon, was running for a position in Company G of ‘the Twenty-sevonth regiment against a man mamed Ozar, A few days ‘ollowing the, election there appeared in plaintiff’s paper an article in relation to Heberline’s defeat, which, it was claimed on the part of defendants, contained a covert meaning vo Germans, which indicated some unclean act on tne ay of the person to whom it applied. When Heber- ine read the article he called at plaintiff's office, and not finding him in left bis card, In response to tho card plaintiff called on Heberline at his saloon, who de- manded to know of him who wrote the article, Plain- tiff refused to disclose the name of the author, and Heberline then assaulted him with a whip, the other defendant assisting, and both following him into the | street, where they assatlted him with both a whip and their fists, and kicked and knocked him down, The case being submitted to the j on the question of fact and amount of damages they found in favor of the plaintiff for $750. COURT OF GENERAL SESSIONS. Before Recorder Hackett. DULLY FOUND GUILTY AND SENTENCED FOR TEN | YEARS TO STATE PRISON. Immediately on the convening of the court, Ro- corder Hackett delivered a characteristically clear and | concise charge to the jury before whom had been given | on the previous day the testimony in the case of Thomas Dully, indicted for shooting Oilicer McAveoty, of | the Nineteenth precinct,on the morning of Sunday, Juno 20, in Third avenue, near Forty-second street. His Honor charged them that if the prisoner fired the pis- | tol with the intention of killing anybody, it mattered tot whom, be should be found guilty of a felonious as- Sault with intent to kill; bus tuatif he fired with the intention of merely wounding the officer tn order to free himself from arrest be should be found guilty of @n assault with intent to do bodily harm. Counsellor Mott took exception Lo several points in | @ charge, They were all overruled, with the excep. | tion of the request that the Court would charge the Jury that they might find thé prisonor guilty of a sim- le assault and battery, This was charged. The jury Fetirod for five minutes, and returned with a verdict of “Gunlty of felonious assault, with Intent to kill.” The prisoner, when askecbwacther he had anything to say why sentence should not be pronounced, replied that he had not veen gri@ited a fair trial, ax witnesses had | been permitted to come into court and contradict the | testimony they had given on'the former trial. Recorder Hackett—Is Prisoner—That’s all, Oe dias Hackett—Ten years in State Prison at hard PENALTY OF PICKING A FRIEND'S POCKETS. About four o’clock on the morning of Sunday, Octo- bor 24, James Henry and Patrick J. Walsh were making their way home after having spent the night together. When they reached the corncr of Third avenue and | that all you have to say, sir? | Twenty-fourth street Henry picked the pockets of his | cdmpanion of the sum of $60, Walsh procured an in- | dictmont against him for larceny from the person in the night time, and yesterday he pleaded guilty and was seutenced to State Prison for £ve years, FOUND NOT GUILTY, Poillipps vs. Vaughan.—Motion denied and order ‘vacated. Matthow Ryap was arraigned for trial on a charge of | Same vs. Thomas Harrington, burglary in the third degree, in having, on the after- noon of October 9, broken into the barber shop of Mor- ris Stone, at No. 145 Chatham street, and stolen prop- erty to the value of $150, Officer Musgrove, of the Fourth precinct, arrested the accused in Water street in an intoxicated condition. Ex-Judge Curtis defended the prisoner, A number of other witnesses were ex- amined, and the trial resulted in the discharge of the accused, ESSEX MARKET POLICE COURT. Before Judge Otterbourg. THE DIVISION STREET ‘‘ROBBERY.” The case of Dr. David Dundas, who was accused of complicity in the robbery of Lewis Clark, of No. 211 Division street, came up at the above court yesterday for examination, The court room was crowded with people interested in the case, consisting mostly of residents of Ludlow and Essex streets. Nearly all of them manifested great sympathy with the accused, When the facts were sified by Judge Otterbourg the case resolved itself thus:—Clark had not been robbed, ana had not seen Dundas on the day of the alleged rob- bery, nor for weeks before. One of the first witnesses called was the sister of the complainant, Mrs. Dora Korn, of No. 489 Canal street, who testified that she heard her brother say he would get Dr. Dundas into trouble, as he had failed to cure bis leg. Maggie Levy, of No, 20 Ludiow street, swore that she called on Dr. Dundas at a quarter to five o’clock on last Sunday morning to ask bim to visit her*mother; that he accompanied her to her house and remained there ull eight o’clock in the morning. Rosa Dundas, a child about twelve years of age, cor- roborated the story of Miss Levy. When Clark himself was called up and asked to Swear-to the original complaint he said, “No, Judge, I cannot swear, It would be a sin for me to swear.’ Judge Otterbourg at once replied;—‘It isa sin for you to swear? Whatdo you think ought to be your punishment for having a man locked up tor four days ona false charge? I wish I had the power and I would lock you up.’ Clark--Oh, Judge, 'm an old man and acripple. You ought not to talk that way to me. Judge Otterbourg—Dr. Dundas, you are discharged, and Imust say lam thoroughly disgusted with the people who brought this charge against you, POLICE COURT NOTES. At the Tombs Police Court yesterday, before Justice Flammer, Patrick Gleason and Patrick Ryan were held to answer on a charge of stealing 100 yards of carpet, of the value of $50, from the hallway of the house No. 68 West Broadway. Bail was fixed at $1,000, Mary Williams, of No, 71 Thompson street, was ar- raigned before Judge Kilbreth yesterday on a charge of robbing John Ryan, of Providence, R. L, of $52 She ‘was committed in default of $1,000 bail to answer, and John Ryan was sent to the House of Detention. Officer Cuff, of the Seventeenth precinct, on Tuesday night arrested three men, named John Dorcey, James Driscoll and James McKay, whom he noticed acting in a suspicious manner in front of No. 233 First avenue, They were brought to the Fifth street station house, and a complete set of burglars’ tools was found in their possession. Judge Otterbourg,’ at the Essex Market Police Court, yesterday committed them in $2,000 bail each to answ Jobn Hill and John Tobin were arr&igned before Judge Otterbourg at the Essex Market Police Court esterday, on a charge of robbing John Zehne, of No, 67 Willett street, of $22. while he was lying asleep i a hallway in Rivington street, They were both com- mitted in $1,000 bail to answer, ‘On Monday night two men, named John Connelly and John McAten, sneaked into the house of Mr. Jonn Neely, of No. 47 Mangin street, and stole about $80 worth of clothing. They were arrested by an oificer of the Thirteenth precinct on Tuesday, and were com- mitted by Judge Otterbourg in default of $1,000 bail each to answer, COURT CALENDARS—THIS DAY. Surreae Covrt—Cnawpers—Held by Judge Dono- hue,—Nos. 27, 64, 75, 76, 78, 79, 80, 81, 86, 87, 90, 91, 92, 93, 96, 97, 108,111, 113, 116, 121, '128, 144, 161,'153, 160, 189, 199, 205, 217, 223,'225, 226, '228, 220, 230, 231, Svrreux ‘Covrt—Uectrr—Part 1.—Adjourned for theterm. Part 2,—Adjourned until Friday. Part 3— Held by Judge Van Vorst,—Case on, No, 629, No day calendar, Scurneme CocrtT—Geverat Term.—Adjourned for the term, Supreme Court—Srecta, Term—Held by Judge Lawrence.—Law and fact—Nos. 421, 445, 484, 153, 8, $25, 887, O11, 616, 615%, O42, 42 135, 183, 590, 604, 622) 644, 121, 488, 9, 440, 608, 634. Surerion CourtT—GENneraL TERM. —. the term. Surgrior Court—Triat Term—Part 1—Held by Judge eir.—Nos, 297, 1419, 765, 823, 761, 827, 843, 575, 745, 1, 715, 863, 787, 879, 689, bart’ 2—Held by Judge Curtis. —Nos. ' 1532, 938, 696, 898, 80034, 866, 1420, 722, 778, 454, 932, 936, 744, 664, 348. 5 Surerion Couxt—sruciaL Terw—Held by Judge Freedman,—Demurrer—No, 6. Law and tact—Nos. 4, 14, 27, 23, 40, 143, 6 ComMox’ Preas—GeNerat Term—Held by Judges Daly, Loew and Daly. Nos. 8 95, 100, 102, 118, 107, 251; 70, 104, 98, 233, Rieke b ComMoy PLras—IniaL TerM—Part 1—Held by Judge Robinson.—Nos. 1569, 1434, 1577, 2798, 2505, 1656, 401%, 2287, 1269, 2776, 1093, 1274, 1069, 403, 2463, Maine Covrt—TriaL Tenu—Part 1—Held by Judge Spaulding. —No: 6 5803, 5664, 5703, 6662, 6804,’ 5036, 5146, 3188, 3548, Part 2—Held by Judge McAdam.—Nos. 2458, 5624, 3575, 3488, 3492, 3688. Part 3—Held by Judge Shea — Nos. 5647, 1918, 4295, 4474, 5510, 6280, 4844, 5591, 5692, 5101, 663, 6554, 5511," 5127, b74a. Court ov GxsyeRAL Sxssions—Held by Recorder Hackett.—The People vs. Richard Cogan, robbery; Same vs. William Rogers and Thomas Maher, robbery; Same vs, John S, Smith and Mary Clark, robbery; Same vs. Timothy McCarthy, robbery; Same vs. Matthew Costello and Francis McGuire, burglary ; Same vs. James Gibbs, burglary; Same vs.’ Patrick’ Henry, burglary; Same vs. James Burns, burgiary; Same v3. Patrick Welsh, burglary; Same ys. Gertrude Schneller, gtand larceny; Same vs. Richard Brocken, grand lar- ceny ; Same Vs. Charles Drausser, grand larceny; Same ys. James Burke, Frank Hamilton and Fred. Bessamer, grand larceny; Same vs. Solomon Manheim, grand lar: ceny; Same vs. James Wright, grand larceny ; Same vs, Wm. Spohr, petit larceny; Same vs. Karl Kreusing, | petit larceny; Same vs. Edward Degaw, gambling; Same ys. James Dowherty, violation of election laws; violation of election laws; Same vs. Henry Moulton, violation of election laws; Same vs. Henry Reechle and Robert Isaacs, rob- ber: Covet ov OvER ANB TerMINER—Before Justice Bar- rett.—The People vg. John Scannell, homicide. THE SCANDAL ECHOES. LIBEL SUITS OF H. ©, BOWEN AGAINST THE BROOKLYN EAGLE—THE ABSENCE OF Mh. TILTON CAUSES A POSTPONEMENT, The suit of Henry C, Bowen against the Brooklyn Eagle for the publication of alleged libels reflecting djournea for in Part 1 of the City Court, before Judge McCue, yester- day morning. The offensive articles were three in ‘number, and damages are claimed in each of two of the causes in the sum of $100,000 each, and in the third cause $50,000 are demanded. Ex-Juadge Fullerton appeared for Mr. Bowen. Mr. W. G De Witt, Corporation Counsel, and Henry Hagnor represented the interests of tho defendants When the case was called Mr. DeWitt said that they would not be ready to go on then as their main witness, Mr. Tilton, was not in town, but would be in Brooklyn during the holiday week, when they would be ready to ~g0 to trial. Mr. Beach, who is senior counsel for tho defence, was also absent, engaged in court in New York, which was another obstacle in their way. An affidayis to this effect was then read, Judge McCue said that there were reasons why he the connsel understood. The application for a post- ponement had, therefore, better be made before either Judge Neilson or Judge Reynolds, Mr, DeWitt said theit motion was to put the case of for the term. Judge MeCue sa'd that the motion had better be made before Judge Neilson and that the hear- ing of the motion here retarded the business of the Court. The party then proceeded to Part 2 of the City Court, where the motion to postpone was renewed. Ex-Judge Fullerton said that on their side they oc- cupied a very embarrassing position, as they were imstructed by their client, and for good reasons, to urge an immediate trial of this cause, Mr, Bowen had been a great sufferer by these pubitcations, and he has sought his remedy if a proper piace—in a@ court of jus- tice. For the second time they were ready with coun- sel and witne: to try the case, The absence of a material witness or the absence of the senior counsel wes not sufficient reason for sustaining the motion to let the case go ever, Mr. De Witt contended that, asa matter of law, the Court had not the power to press them to trial without the attendance of Theodore Tilton, who was then ab- seut ou his lecturing tour in the State of Nebraska, and would not return until the holidays) As a matter of fairuess they ought not to be asked to go to trial wi out bis presence, because his testimony describes whole Justification for the publication. After some further discussion the case was put off till the lirst Monday in the December term, and the party jeft the court room, COURT OF APPEALS. Aunany, Nov. 17, 1875. No. 32 Geery ve. Geery.—Argument resumed and concluded, No, 5, The People, &e., defendants in error ys. Gus- tavus Raw, plaintiff in error.—argued by W. H, Bow- man, of counsel for plaintiff in error, and by Angus McDonald tor the People. Ashbel H. Barney, respondent.—Argued’ by Waiter W. Holt, of counsel lor appellant, and by 8. J, Rogers for respondent, Adjourned, DAY CALENDAR, Day calendar for Thursday, November 18, 1875:—Nos. 89, 40, 42, 43, 2, 25, 18, 22, UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. Wasnvaroy, Noy. 17, 1875. In the United States Supreme Court the following cases were argued yesterday :— No, 46, Jackson va Jackson—Appeal from tho Su- No. 94, LouaSia Cordot, executor, &c., appellant vs. , 2009, 3580, 3534, 8587, 8598, | upon the plaintiff during the Beecher trial was’ called | preme Court of the District of Columbia —This was a suit for divorce by the appellant (the w:fe) on the ground of habitual drunkenness. The answer deniea the charge, and a cross bill alleged adultery, and set forth that she held in her name real estate which, with the improvements, was acquired with the money and economy of the husband since their marriage, ‘The wife, by her answer to the cross bill, denied the allegations of adultery and set up that the wife pur- chased the land with money derived from her father and made the improvements with her own means. The decree gave wife her divorce on the ground alleged, finding the charge of adultery not proven, but found that the wife bela the property in trust for both par- ties, and directing an equal distribution between them. From this decree she appeala, maintaining that the Court erred in finding her husband entitled to any of the property. The appellee insists thas the Court did paehave tne power on the cross.bill to make the de- cree rendered, and that, if it did, there was still no evi- dence upon which to base it. A G Riddle for appel- lant; Meloz & Miller for appellee. No. 47. Baltimore and Potomac Railroad Company vs. Trustees of the Sixth Presbyterian church of Wash- ington—Error to the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia,—This is the case involving the inquisition as to damages suffered by the church by reason of tho operation of the road of the company. The appeal from the inquisition was heard in the first instance at the General Term, where the award was confirmed, judg- ment rendered thereon and execution issued. It is here urged that the appeal from the inquisition should have been heard at first at Special Term, and that the General Term had no jurisdiction and should have stricken the cause from the calendar, On the merits of the award it !s urged that it was made on improper evidence, and that the testimony showing that the devotional exercises of the church were disturbed by the noise of the cars and the smoke of the engines should have been excluded; that all the rights of the company were granted and guaranteed by acts of Congress, and the site having been selected and the road operated under those acts the “inquisition could not question title or privilege. Daniel Clarke for plaintiff in error, R. D, Massey and J. C. Gartield for deiendants, OIL ON STEAMSHIPS. THE STEAMSHIP CITY OF HAVANA DETAINED FOR A TIME—CAUSE OF HER DETENTION. No little excitement was created in the Custom House yesterday when it became known that the steamship City of Havana, bound for Havana, Vera Cruz gnd New Orleans, had been detained in port with forty pas- sengers, the United States mail and a full cargo, on ac- count of having petroleum on board. ‘The vessel was detained by order of Collector Arthur, He sent a de- spatch to the Secretary of the Treasury, at Washing- ton, asking for instructions, and it was only shortly be- fore the closing of the Custom House that he received an answer directing him to allow the vessel to proceed on her voyage with’the ofl on board, Subsequently a HeRaup reporter called on the Collector, who made the following statement:— . WHAT COLLECTOR ARTHUR SAYS. The great trouble in this matter is as to the con- struction of the words ‘‘practicable route’’ in the law. The defect is that there is no department or official directed to define what isa practicable route. In my opinion this question ought to be settled by the Super- vising Inspector of Stcamships of this port or the local board of the same service, and one or both should be instructed by the Secretary of the Treasury to report on the subject Asthe matter stands at present the ruling is ill-defined. Messrs, Alexandre, the owners of the steamship in question, state that they are cor- rect in assuming that it is by means of their vessels that the only “practicable route” is reached, for the reason that not one sailing vessel bas left for Vera Cruz, with oil on board, {or the past four and a half months. I am only speaking now of the law, not as to the expediency of allowing petroleum in any shape to be carried in passenger vessets. I do not think that I, on my own responsibility, should pro- nounce as to what are practicable routes. The license to carry petroleum, given by the Local Board of Steam- ship Inspectors, does not mean anything. All the responsibility that Board assumes in allowing petro- Jeum to be shipped is to designate where it shall be placed on board the vessel, I have no doubt that Secretary Brystow will give the matter bis early atten- tion and pl the responsibility where it belongs, WHAT MR. ALEXANDRE SAYS. In conversation with Mr, Alexandre, one of the owners of the steamship City of Havana, he stated:— “We ciaim that our vessel is at present on tho only practicable route to Vera Cruz Our steamships are not fully insured, and we would not risk their safety by carrying what we considered dangerous goods. The oil we are shipping is ‘brilliant oil,’ for lighting the streets of Vera Cruz It will not ignite at a temper- ature of less than 140 degrees Fahrenheit, The law preseribes 110 degrees. n addition to this, we have fullilled the requirements of the law in having it put up in good metallic cans, carefully packed in boxes. It is stowed away far from any fires. To show you bow little apprehension the captain of the steamship has of any danger resulting from this shipment, he has taken bis wife with him. If Engiish steamships carry oil why should not we? I have seen this oil thrown ona fire and putitou,” WHAT INSPEOTOR LOW SAYS. Captain Addison Low, United States Supervising In- spector of Steam Vessels, says that at the last annual meeting of the Board at Washington ho tried to havo this question of a practicable route decided, and that he intends to bring it up again at the next meeting of tho B He believed that the delayed steamer had about 2,400 cases of petroleum on board. He further added that he bad beard that one of the Custom House officials of the Fourth division had been suspended by Collector Arthur for allowing the Aspinwall steamship Acapulco to clear, having oil on board. THE CITY OF WACO DISASTER, Messrs. Matthews and Simonson, composing the United States Local Board of Steamship Inspectors, ascertained yesterday who were the shippers at Cleve- land, Ohio, of the ‘oil’ which was on.the deck of tho ill-fated steamship City of Waco, To-day they will send their report on the subject to the Supervising Inspector of Steamships, Addison Low, who will, apon its receipt, write to the Local Board at Cleveland, Ohio, to find out what kind of oil it was, REAL ESTATE SALES, A large number of sales took place yesterday at the Exchange, most of which were foreclosures, and by order of the Court. Richard V, Harnett sold the two three story brick houses, with lots. each 25x92, known as Nos. 127 and 129 Kast Soventeenth street, north side, 107.3 fect east of Irving place, to Owen Murphy, for $32,000, said property being valued at $40,000, James M. Miller sold, under Supreme Court, the lot, 25x100.4, on the south side of Soventy-first street, 175 feet east of Second avenue, to Catherine M. Jones for $2,400; said lot being valued at $5,000, Also four lots, each 25x102, on the north side of Seventy-second street, 200 feet east of Second avenue, to Catherine M. Jones, for $2,300 a lot, in all $9,200; said lots being valued at $20,000. Also one lot, 32.4x69.5x32x63, on Hopper’s lano, south side, 220.8 feet west of Eleventh avenue, subject to a mortgage of $2,100, for $2,000 over said mortgage, in all $3,100, to Samuel L, Phillips; said property being valued at $6,000, A. E. Lawrence & Co. sold the three story brown stone house, 20 by 40, and lot 20 by 100.2, on Fighty- fourth street, south side, 375 feet west of Eighth ave- ought to decline to act in that case which he Imagined | BU 0 Harriet Oberheisen for $11,000. Also the ad | joining building, three story brown stone, tho same di- mensions as the above, lot 20 by 100.2, to W. A. Caul- well for $8,000; said property bemg valued in all at $30,000, Also plot of land 635 by 1,092.6 by 25 188.4 by 900, by 458.6 by 129.1 by 25. by avenue, west side, fronting also on Beach, Westerly, Bay and Coster avenues (West Farms), Twenty-fourth ward, to George M. Miller for $1,000 over a mortgage of, 256, tn all $14,356; said property being valued at by 262.3 by , on Bayetto A. J. Bleecker sold the house and lot, 25 by 100.5, on West Forty-iourth street, north side, 150 foet east of Tenth avenue, subject to & mortgage ‘of $7,000 and in- terest from January 1, 1875, and $20, in all $7,160, for $3,600, to J. 0. Miller, over said morigage and Interest, total $10,660; said property being valued at $18,000 Also the house and lot, 245 by 900, on Ninth ave- nue, east side, 74 feet ‘north of 'wenty-second Sirect, known ag lot No. 185 on map of ©. O. Moore property, to Jeremiah Pangborn for $12,475, said prop- erty being valued at $17,000, KE. H. Ludlow & Co, sold, under foreclosure, by order of the Supreme Court, one plot of land, 60 by 150, on Johnson avenue, north side, corner of ‘Samucl street, Tromont, Twenty-fourth ward, to M. Schafer tor $8,250, said property being valued at $5,000, Stecle & Carter sold, by order of the Supreme Court, under foreclosure, two four story brown stone houses, with lots, each 20 by 100.5; on West Fifty-eighth street, south sido, 245 feet west of Eighth avenue, subject to a mortgage of $46,000 on both, to Isaac Bunhetmer for $8.00 over tho “said morigayo, in all $65,000; aid buildings and lots cost $65,000 three years ago, ahd aro Valued at $05,000, ile & Riker sold by order of the Supreme Court, ander foreclosure, the house, with lot, 35 by 144.4, on Rast Kighiy-tifth street, north side, 100 feet east of Third avenua, to J. B. Odell for $4,000, said property being valued at $9,000. Some half a dozen adjournments were made on advertised sales. BROOKLYN'S TREASURER, Corporation Counsel DeWitt, of Brooklyn, yesterday served the summonses and complaints tm the actions against the bondsmen of ex-City Treasurer Sprague, to recover the amountsof the notes given by them to secure the city against all defictencies that may remain after the sale of Sprague’s assets, Mr. Henry Sawyer, one of the bondsmen, gave two notes, one for $23,303 82, and the other for $7,797 94 ‘The other bondsmen are Edward Harvey, $7,707 04; James W. Nash, $797 84; W. C, Kingsley, ‘$23,303 82; James Oiwell, $23,393" 82: Josiah 0, Low, $7,707 84; Robert L. Mulford, $23,208 82, The bondsinen will now baye to pay up Lhe amounts set opposite their namas, NEW YORK HERALD, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1875--TRIPLE SHEET. THE SINGER WILL. Yesterday's Revelations Be- fore Surrogate Coffin. A CURIOUS LEGAL ° DOCUMENT. A Coachman’s Memoir of the Dead Inventor. The proceedings in the Singer will case were con- tinued before Surrogate Coffin, at White Plains, yester- day. Owing to the notoriety of this xtraordinary single handed contest, coupled with the somewhat astounaing revelations which it has evolved and the millions which depend upon the issue, the number of spectators in attendance has been visibly increasing. While the hearing was im progress yesterday citizens from the most remote portions of Westchester county, aswell as from New York and vicinity, might have been seen among the auditory, some of them stopping only long enough to take @ good look at the leading parties to the sult, while others listened attentively to the proceedings until an adjournment was announced, Mrs. Mary Ann Foster, the contestant, who has deported herself, throughout in a dignified manner, was accompanied by two grown daughters—children of herself aud the testator, Tho impression among members of the legal fraternity at White Plains who have watched the case thus far is that Mr. Van Pelt, counsel for the contestant, has over- turned the most material portion of the testamentary document im question, Even Surrogate Coffin, in Suggesting that it was not necessary to imtroduce cumulative testimony to establish she marriage relationship existing between the testator and the contestant, has admitted that the latter had already made out afair case. In view of this state of the case it is not surprising that those in- terested in sustaining the will! have, as is understood from excellent authority, within the past week in- timated their willingness to increase the sun of $2,000,000 to $8,000,000 in order to effect a compromise with the contestant, It is almost unnecessary to state that the offer was not accepted, Mrs. Mary Ann Foster, having been again called to the witness stand by counsel for the executor, was further cross-examined as follows:—Mr. Singer in 1836 was performing as an actor m New York; I played as an actress with him in New York and other States; we travelled together and played under the names of Mr. and Mrs, Merritt, the middle name of Singer; we were in Baltimore when he procared a divorce from Catherine Maria Haley; he handed it to me; asked him then if he would not fulfil the promise he had often made if he secured this divorce and bave the ceremony of marriage performed between us; he refused, saying if he did so I would have him in my power; have lived constantly with Foster since our marriage; my youngest child was born eighteen years ago; have had no child since then, 4 COACHMAN’S STORY, Edward De Longue, a coachman, formerly in the employ of the deceased Isaac M. Singer, testified that he frequently drove the carriage containing the testa- tor and the contestant; Mr, Singer always introduced the latter as his wife; witness frequently heard him tatroduce the coutestant as his wile; de- ceased sometimes would drive out aving nine horses attached to a vehicle capable of carrying twenty-five persous; has known ot his driving out with other females; sometimes he would drive to No. 225 West Twenty-seventh street and there take up a young woman, and at other times he would take up one at No. 70 Christopher street; he often used to take up. females who would be in waiting for him on the corners of streets, with school books in their hands; he would nearly always give me some change for myself on these occasions; Was at these times ordered to drive to the Central Park and back again, Charles A. Spensler, on being sworn, testified:—I am a brotuer of Mrs. Foster, the contestant; first saw Singer in Baltimore in 1836; at that time I think he was an advance agent for a theatrical company; he re- mained in our family a few weeks; it was known to us that he was paying his addrestes to my sister; be be- came very intimate with our family; after their return from New York they were received by our family as Man and wife, and were so regarded by us down to 1860; havo travelled with Singer as a mu- sician, ‘and assisting him in his dra- mac performances, gencrally; — he_—_—ihas made statements to me as to iny ter being his wife; on more than one occasion he said, “By the gods! { dof’t know what I should do ‘se road at other times he has said to me, “‘She is a gi yoman ané a faithful wife;” Singer was very poor in those days; and his wife used to help him out of money scrapes. After some further unimportant testimony had been offered an adjournment was agreed upon to Tuesday, ‘the 30th inst. The following ts a copy of the complaint filed by the contestant ip her suit for divorce from the testator in 1861, and which has never before been published. It was admitted as evidence and is now a part of the case. A CURIOUS DOCUMENT. New York Supreme Court—Mary Ann Singer vs. Isaac Merritt Singer.—City and County of New York, ss. : Mary Ano Singer, she plaintiif, complains and al- jeges :-— Shrst—That on or abont the 26th day of September, in the year 1836, at the city of New York, she was mar- ried to the defendant; that she and the defendant thence- forward continued to live together as man and wife, within this State (with frequent absences when accom: panying her husband in his professional tours through- out the country asa strolling actor, under the assumed name of Isaac Merritt), until the time of the com- mission of the offences hereinafter alleged, and that ever since the said marriage (save as above stated, and from a@ period from July, 1837 to March, 1839, when she returned to her nts because of the desertion of ber husband; and for two years prior to September, 1848 (when he manufactured typo at Piusburg, Pa), they have both been, and sull are inhabitants of tlie State of New York. Se ‘hat she has borne her husband ten chil- dren, the issue of said marriage, ofght of whom are now living, viz. :—Isaac Augustus Singer, born July 27 1837; Vouletti Theresa Singer, born January 4, 1840; John Albert Singer, born January 29, 1842; Fanny Elizabeth Singer, born January 1, 1844;’ Jasper Harvet Singer, born July 16, 1846; Mary Olive Singer, born October 7, 1848; Julia Ann Singer, born June 14, 1854, and Caroline Virginta Singer, born June 10, 1857, Third—That, during her whole married life, s! reccived from her husband the most crue: man treatment, and that his conduct toward her bas beer such as to render it unsafe and Improper for her any longer to cohabit with him; that he has repeatedly beaten and choked her to ingensibility, frequently forcing the blood to flow tn streams from her nose, mouth, fuce, head and neck, and tho recital, to her family and friends, of his unparalleled atrocity and savage barbarity toward herself and children finally forced her to make a criminal complaint against him and to cause hisarrest for A BRUTAL AND BLOODY ASSAULT, committed on her August 7, 1560, at_her residence, No, | 14 Fifth avenue, in the city of New York; that, there- | fore, out of regard to her children and family, she had | borne his brutal treatment silently and uncompiain- | ingly, altbough his very presence in the bouse was a | perpetual terror to all its inmates, tamily and servants, | and his conduct was almost insupportable and beyond human endurance; that about a year prior to his ar- rest, above mentioned, at her said residence in Futh avenue, her husband beat her almost to death, mercly assigning aS a reason there- for that she had placed in their bedroom a box of matches without a cover, and when her oldest daugh- ter, Vouletta, then a woman grown, remonstrated with him, he also beat her in the same fiendish manner, so that they both lay insensible together for many hours, and her husband, becoming alarmed, was obliged 10 | call in the aid of two physicians, Dr. William EH. Max- woll and Dr, ——, who, with great difficulty, restored them to consciousness, and they were confined to their beds for several days thereafter. Fourth—That, as the plaintiff is informed and be- Neves, during the month following his aid in company with a common prostitute named | Kate Mctionnegal, then nineteen years of age, taking | passage together in the steamer from Boston, under the assumed names of J. W. Simmons and lady, with whom, at divers places and at various times in the city of New York and elsewhere, and more especially | at the house No. 70 Christopher ‘streot, aid city, during the months of August and September, 1860, Le | committed adultery. Fifth—That, as the plaintiff is informed and believes, prior thereto, and during the years 1865-6-7-8-9 and | 160, he kept as his mistress, at ‘the said house, No. 70 | Christopher street, Mary McGonnegal (sister of the sald Kate MeGonnogal), with whom he then and thero tre- quently committed adultery, and by whom he bad four bastard children, Sizth—That, as the plamtiff ts informed and believes, he also kept a3 his mistress Mary Mathews, with whom, at various times from 1852 to 1860, and at divers places in the cities of New York and Philadelphia and elso- whore, bo frequently committed adultery, and by whom he had SEVERAL ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN, Seventh—That, ag the plaintiif is mtormed and be- Heves, he also kept as his mistress one Mrs. Judson, with whom, at various times from 1857 to 1860, and at divers places in the cities of New York, Chicago and elsewhere, he frequently committed adultery; that the said Mrs. Judson was then one of the operatives in the | establishment of the defendant in the city of New York, and for the past two years has been an attendant in the Chicago business office of L, M. Singer & Co, Bighth—That, as the piaintif’ is informed and be- lieves, he bas also kept as mistresses Mary Walters, Kilen Brazee and Ellen Livingston, with each of whom, ‘at various times and at divers places in the city of New York and elsewhere, he has frequently commitsed | adultery and by whom he has had i!legitimate chiidren, | Ninth—That, as the plainut! isinformed and believes, he now keeps as his mistress one Lucy ——, a young Enchsb girl, Whom he seduced im England, and who 5 emai followed him hither, shortly after his return to this city, in July, 1861, with whom he now lives in adultery at No. 110 West Thirty-seventh seveah; Mor York, where he has a furnished house, at which ‘place and with whom, at werioes times oe me month of July last, he has frequently commi 3 Tenth that, the plaintuf is informed and Velleves, the defendant is t notorious profligate and and that a more jute man nover lived {n a civitized country; that he isin the constant habit of seducing all his femaje operators who will submit themselves to his base desires, and whom he employs in his estab- Itshments in this country and in Europe with — reference to making them the victims of his tal lust; and that at divers places in the city of New York and elsewhere, and at various times within the last ten years, but at what particular times and places tho Jaiutiff is now unable to state more specifically than is erein set forth, he has constantly committed adultery with the said persons herein named and with other persons now unknown to this plaintiff, Eleventh—That the defendant bas threatened this plaintiff and her lawyer, to bis face, with the “God damnedest beating any one ever had in this world”? if any legal proceedings for a divorce should be com- menced against him by ber, Tweifth—Thut the pla twenty-five years, for the sake of her children and the good opinion of the world, she has patiently submitted to her husband’s treatinent, yet was ignorant of “his! adulterous habits at any time until the month of July, 1860, since which date sue has not cohabited with the defendant. Thirteenth—That said adultery was committed with- out the procurement, connivance, privity or consent of the plainti’; that there had been no condonation by the plaintiff with the defendant; that five years have not elapsed since she discovered the commission of said adultery, and that the plaintiff herseif has not been guilty of adultery, Therefore the plaintiff demands judgment of divorce from the defendant, and that the marriage aforesaid may be dissolved, with suck turther and other relief aa the Court may direct. ABBETT & FULLER, Plaintiffs Attorneys. City and County of New York, s.—Mary Ann Singer, the plaintiff, being sworn, saith that the foregoing com: plaint is true of pepe knowledge, excopt as to the matters therein stated to be on her information and be lief, and that as to those matters she believes it to be true. MARY ANN SINGER. Sworn December 7, 1861, before me, Cuxistian Vow Hass, Notary Public, New York city, A SOCIAL EPISODE. THY WILL OF THE LATE HENRY SHIELDS, EXe PRESIDENT OF THE PRODUCE EXCHANGE, CONTESTED BY TWO WIDOWS—AN INTEREST- ING PROCEEDING IN LAW—A TALE OF TWO CITIES. The time of the Supreme Court, Circuit, Judge Tappen presiding, in the Kings County Court House, has been taken up during the past two days in the trial of an in- teresting suit, involving the right of dower in an estate worth $200,000, the property being that of the late Henry Shields, a former President of the Produce Ex- change, New York. The plaintiff who contests the wil, is Jane Shields, who was born in 1820, and was married. to the deceased, according to the Quaker rites, in 1835, She gave birth to several children while they lived t gether as man and wife in Williamsburg. In 1843 he deserted the plaintiff and ber children, and married an estimable and cultivated lady, a Miss Catherine Lawler, who, together with eight children, surviveshim, Both: widows were present in court, Mr, W. F. Robinson testified that he had known Mrs. Jane Shields thirty years; she was living at No, 16 North Second street, in 1847, with Henry Shields; in 1848 witness got money {rom Mr. Shields for Mrs. Jano Shields; he then asked how his wifeand children were, for four or five years he had taken money to Mrs. Shields from her husband; deceased spoke about buying a place for her, and gave witness a check for $600 to pay for a house he had selected; the price was $1,200, and $600 was to remain on mortgage; the deed was made out in the name of Jane Valentine; that was her maiden name; the house was on the corner of Wyckoif street and Graham avenue; deceased said he was not in a po- sition to do anything for the children, but tho time would come when they would be substantially acknowledged; his son (Henry Shields) went to the war and was killed there; witness saw at a later period two children, whom they’called Brown, at Mrs. Shields? house; did not go to the house while she lived with John James Brown; witness’ wife was the nieco of Mrs, Jane Shields; never told deceased about Brown. Rachel Robinson, wife of the preceeding witness, testified to the fact of Jane Shields, her aunt, and the deceased living as husband and wife; Kato Shields, their daughter, learned the trade of dressmaking, and de- ceased was in the habit of calling to see his child, “My little Katy,” as he called On the cross-examina- tion witness said she never said “Jane Valentine needn't hold her head so high, as she had lived with two men and been married to neither.” Mrs. Sarah P. Lockwood testified that Henry Shields visited her house frequently in Williamsburg and dined with her there; witness frequently heard him call Jane Shields “wife.’” Stephen Valentine, a Quaker, seventy-nine years of age, testified to having been a flour merchant for fifly- three years in the city of New York; the Friends? marriage ceremony was merely @ declaration of the persons in the presence of witnesses—they promised to be husband and wife, and through Divine assistance to be faithful; he knew Shielas when a baker and subse- quently while a carman for Rowland, Birdsall & Jon a Quaker firm; witness helped him into the Board ol Flour Inspectors; he never knew any Mrs, Shields other than the rich widow; he never heard of mar- riage certificates being signed by less than fifteen wit- nesses; he had forty-nine names on his certificate; there Was no specified number of witnesses, Mr. Bonner, hasband of Mrs, Shields’ daughter Kate, twstitied that he had seen ental gi before his uiarriage in 1869, and frequently ot years; had called on him in Dey street and obtained bsrigy de- ceased had asked about his daughter Kate; Mr. Shtelds once asked Lim “If be had said anything to his Second avenue family about the folks in Williamsburg,” wit- ness said “No,” aud Mr, Shields said, “That's right; itis better for’@ person to mind bis own business.’” Catharine J. Bonner, a pretty and stylish matron ot thirty-uve years, testified that she was the daughter of Heury aud Jaue Shields; her father left her mother when she (witness) was eight or nine years old; he al- ways called her mother “wife”? and’ spoke to witness 4s his “daughter;” after he left she did not see him for six years; her mother cried and fretted very much aiver ho left his home; six years after his departure sho heard he was at 83 Dey sireet, and went there to see lia 1a company with a young lady friend; on meeting him she said, “My father," he said, “My daaghter,”? | aud tarew his arms about her; he asked if her mother Was dead; she asked him if ho had left her mother; he said, ‘Don't fret, she did not worry;”” she asked him ii he had married again; he said, “No, who says I am?” after this he visited her in Williamsburg and holped er along until she was married; he irequently used Quaker expressions; witness was baptized by Father Malone, at her father’s request and im his name, William Shields, brother ‘of Mrs, Bonner, testified that be first saw his futher in Jauuary, 1874, in his offico at No. 138 Broad street; deceased knew hith as his aon ; wituess asked him for $200, but his father tokt him bo was under great expense anil could not let him have its | tm tbe March following nis father died, and he tollowed the remains to the grave; the body was interred in Cal- | vary Cemetery, Brooklyn." ‘The trial will be restimod to-day, ABUSES AT CENTRAL PARK, To tae Eprror or THE HeraLp:— To say that your admirable articles upon the Central Parkhave met with favor from the thousands inter- ested in that pleasure ground would be indeed mild language. I know not afew who have felt that at last something was going to be done to give pleasure to pleasure soekers, rich and poor, as they read the Heranps qditorial comments. Hspecially arrest—viz,, September 19, 1860—he went to Europe | happy was your satire of placing the Central Park under a glass case, as well it might be under the present absurdly stringent regulations, instance:-— “People alighting trom yehiclos,’’ “the grass,’ “‘ab- sence of saddle paths bordering the carriage roads,’ &c. Yes, Mr. Editor, [ have reason to believe your potent articles are twlling. Keep up the stinging blows and success will be ours, Now, allow me a few more | indulgent tines {nm your valuable journal of relevant | objections; the construction of the Central Park roads, whieh alterations can be attended to and altered with trifling expense; the “bridle paths’ are improperly constructed, so much 80 as to show the grossest ig- horanca, the paths being covered with small stones, pro- ducing an irritating and {njurious friction and heat upon the hoofs of the horse—the stones are just large enough to get wedged in between the frog and the shoo and cause seriogs injury. If they were intended to produce this result the constructors must feel grati- fied at their success, Words utterly fail to describe the thoroughly contemptuous expressions of eques- trians ab this nuisance. The remedy | would suggest would be simple English close-cut turf, The eques- trians Aro not by any means so numerous as to cut it up. The raim would be readily absorbed, the dust kept. down, there would be far less mud then, after a rain, than is now the case; and, to go a step further, what possible onjection could there be in directing here and there picturesque brooks of four or five feet, and bedyes, so appointed as to leave it optional with horsemen or horsewomen (of which there are not a few, Lam happy to say, im this city, with all their disadvantages tor practice in this ‘Lieular) to leap over, It would most assuredly not Ue the most neglected spot in the Central Park ‘by either observers or performers, It does seem, Mr, Editor, as if the most emasculated Parisian ideas had taken hold of the wheel of the Central Park ship and feared to sail along with the most ordinary progressive ideas of the day. If the landscape gardeners would copy more of Engiish views and ideas the attrac. | tions of the Park would certainly be enhanced; and, free | Imay point in another lewer certain othe: cheap but desirable improvements, I will, growl only | once more, and that is about the heaps of lumber, the two-horse rollers and the confounded construction carta that make a perpotual thoroughfare of the bridle patha and are left “iqgse’’ around all over the road when tha workmen are™through their day's work, Why, tor “goodness sake,’’ do ney heap up all the annoyances upon us? W! crimes have we committed that owt roads shall be ruined and a workshop made of our ure ground? THE BRIDLE Pale,