The New York Herald Newspaper, December 11, 1875, Page 8

8 THE COURTS. The Injunction Against the Panama Railroad Company. Theatrical Trials and Trib- ulations. “THE NEW LEAH” IN COURT. Conviction for Mailing Obscene Literature. A few days ago Mr. Freeman, one of the stockhold- ers of the Panama Railroad Company, applied to Judge Donobue, ia Supreme Court, Chambers, for an injuno- tion against the company, restraining it {rom running or purchasing for that purpose any steamers or other vessels in connection with the Panama Railroad, either from New York to Aspinwall or from Panama to San Francisco, The subject was then, as it is now, one of special interest to the railroad company, and the result was a very long and exhaustive argument on both tides, the leading points of which were fully published im the Heraxp at the time, Judge Donohue having ex- amined the mass of papers submitted to his scrutiny and examined poth the statutes and the decisions in the courts applicable to the case, gave yesterday his de- sision, embodying the same in a lengthy and elaborate opinion. The following is the opinion:— In this case the complaint ip substance alleges that the plaintiff isa stockholder iu the defendant com- pany, that the company’s officers are about to charter or buy steamers and en, in the business of running steamers between New York and their railroad depot at Aspiuwall, and from their depot at Panama to San Francisco, The plaintiff further claims that this is be- yond any power given them in their charter and that they have no such right, and he asks that they may be restrained. The answer sets up a claim of the right to do as the complaint ch: the defendants are doing this under the charter of the company, and that the company have used the power under the charter to do similar transportation, One point taken in the argu- ment of the plaintiff was that under act 3, section 16 of the constitution of this State, it is pro- vided ‘that no private or jocal bill which may de passed by the Legislature ehall embrace more than one subject, and that shall be expressed in the ttle.” To this the defendant answers in part that the complaint is not predicated on the unconstituuionality of the act. That is undoubtedly true, but the com- plaint is predicated on the construction of the charter, | which confines the power of the company to merely the use of vessels, not ay passenger and freight lines, Dut ay assistants in the work of the railroad on the ‘Isthwue, and to carry out its designs; and tt is only when the defendants s to use the words in the char- ter in purchasing and navigating euch steamers or said vessels as may be proper or convenient to be used in connection with the said road for the purposes com- plained of, that the comstitutionality of the act, as construed ‘by the defendant, is important. The con- testation between the parties is, the plaintiff says, the words as to ‘vessels’ in the charter, which, it is claimed, ai contined to vessels necessary not in any distant lines of travel, but in aiding the defendants in the use of the road they are asin; The defendants say that the words are to enable it to run steam lines in connection with the road. The plaintiff contends that if this is so the con- stitutional question arises and the charter is void) The apers in this caso have been in my hands but a short ime and the pressure of other dutics prevents as ex- tended an examination aud discussion of the case in | The complaint claims NEW YORK HERALD, SATURDAY, DECEMBER UI, 1875.—WITH SUPPLEMENT. charter the very object of the constitution bas been violated. Again, to show what the be eysy ~~: posed they were they put the title im the bill as the constatution required, and that title was to cover the subject of the and shat a si) subject, and that was acharter of the Panama Railroad Company. Turn the case as I can in my mind, in view the words of the act, in view of the intention of the consti- tution, in view of the title of the act and the enacting clause | iteelf, bat one | view presents itself The enactment was but one subject— railroad, with such powers ag it needed to perform its buns work, aud pot to add steam lines far beyond the scope of the railroad, Hos the charter been to cor- porate a company to transport re or freight between New York and San Francisco Then all that is | claimed by defendants might bave been included. But, | by any fair construction, was such company intended? Is it not fair, with the act before you, to say that the ob- | ject ot the act was to make the link that includes the | United States Mail Steamsbip Company and the Pacific | Mail Steamship Company which had been left open with the companies already chartered, a complete (rane por tation toSan Francisco? Take the legislation coutempo- rancous with it, and the subject is clear; and no lapse of time or chango of circumstances can incresse the power. I think the construction contended for by the defendants would render the act unconstitu- | tional, That this certainly is uot desired and it is | not for the benefit of other litigants that this should be done, Having arrived at this conclusion it is unneces- sary to discuss the other question raised, except as to | plaintit hyngell It is argued that he fails to | show what he nolds, that it is but a small | amount, and tl he is buta cat’s paw here used to | procure some one clse’s end. There is no evidence of | the fact, How much stock he owns is @ matter the defendants’ books ought to show. It is in their power to place these before the Court. What is the object in the directors of this company, afler nearly thirty years acquiescence ina different ‘construction of the act, now attempting to put on this line the steamers they intend, or what 48 the object of the plainti! in keeping them to the course that for nearly thirty years they have followed Thave not the means defore mo to decide, I must as- sume that both act upon what they think their rights. There is nothing im the ease tending to show improper motives ov the partof the platntit, and must assume he is entitled to the right, if he has it, that he asks. [ did not understand the defendants on the argument as denying the rights of the plaintiff to this injunction it the act complained of was with my finding it so. I have not discussed that right’ Ou the whole | think the injunction should be granted, THE NEW LEAH. A motion was made yesterday before Judge Davis, in Supreme Court, Chambers, for an injunction against the performance by Augustin Daly, at the Fifth Avenue Theatre, of the play “The New Leah.’ The complaint and the affidavits of the plaintiff's attorney stated that Mr, Daly had written a drama entitled “Leah, the Forsaken,” which was an adaptation of the German play of ‘Devora,” and had assigned his rights as author to the plaintiff, Mrs. Crowe, who was then Kate J. Bateman; that Miss Bateman, who then be- came the sole owner of the play, acted it very fre- quently and made it of great value; that the defendant had performed, at the Fifth Avenue Theatre, # color- able adaptation of the play, entitled “The New Leab.’” 1,000 damages and asks for an injunetion, Mr, Bateman, for the plaintiff, claimed that this action | was brought to enforce the common law mghts of the | assignee of the author, and that an injunction must be | | granted under the authorities, Mr, Olin, in reply, read an affidavit of Mr. Daly set- ting forth that he never sold to Miss Bateman the sole proprietorship ip the play of “Leah, the Forsaken,” but reserved to himself the right of its performance in the United States in her absence. It further avers that Miss Bateman 1s not coming to this country and can suffer no loss by the production of the piay here. It is not ad- mitted the plays are similar. It is alleged in addition | that tite new play is withdrawn and that before it was | performed permission was asked of Miss Bateman’s | | “seas. ance with the points raised by Mr. D. M. Porter, the | | the game laws. The jury found a verdict in | counsel to produce the play, solely on account of de- | fendant’s recent unfortunate cxperience in theatrical | litigations, which were decided against him, though he | Delieved "right to be on his side.’ Following | j the reading of this affdavit Mr. Olin insisted | that all the equities were denied by the answer this opinion ag} would desire; but as the question is | of importance to the parties and an early disposition is more important than an extended opinion, I shall in as | It will be seen | brief a space ag possible dispose of it, that it 1s only in the defendants’ theory of power ¢laimed {rom the charter that the question first stated | and to that subject attention must be first di- | n this inquiry it is first necessary to ask what | the clause in the constitution in question means, be- | can ari: recteul. cause it is a newone, and one not familiar to us in such instruments. It would be useful to usin such in- quiry to go on the discussion of the convention that | formed the constitution on the subject, and to inquire what faults of prior legislation it was intended to reach | by the provision, but it can be ouly shortly stated in sub- siance, It had been found thet good measures had been saddied with bad riders, and that bills drawn and considered by members had ‘intentional additions put to them that made bad law and gave power not in- | the sole right to play it, She was, he said, an actress that the defendant bad always retained the right to per- form the play during Miss Bateman’s absence from the | United States and bad assigned to her only certain | limited rights, and that in any event the plamti bad | sustained and could sustain no damage us she had no | intention of returning to this Country and as the de- | fondant had no present intention of reproducing the | play. Mr, Bateman stated that Mr. Daly sold to tho plain- | ti his right In the play “Leah, the Forsaken.” Plain. | uff had since been the sole owner of the drama and had by profession and bad performed the principai charac- | | ter im the play and it had been a source of profit to her. | The defendant applied to her t for permission to | produce the play in this city and it was retused, and | thereupon he produced the play under another name, “The New Leah,” the two plays identical. being substantially | tended to be givgn, and the Legislature were by this provision to be compelled to legislate only on one sub- | ject atatime and put thut in the title, that the evil | might thus be remedied and that persous reading the | title would have their attention Galled to what they were legislating on, As & Gurious instance of the class of legislation spoken of, two very striking instances may be found in the federal laws. The law that to-day prevents flogging in the national or mercantile service Was passed as a proviso to one clause in an appropria- tion bill, and one of the acts extending the laws of the State to the admissibility of testimony in federal courts was attached (0 reconstruction — provi- sions, Whatever may have been the disadvantage of this kind of legislation {nm particular in this State, at least it had succeeded in passing bad jaws, and the Legislature was to be curbed in two others 1m private and local legislation. First, but one subject was to be included in one act, and, sec: ond, it should be stated in the bill, Now, as to this | case, construing the power as the defendants do, is | their action constitational’ The only two cascs cited | by the defendant on this point are People vs. McCan (6 N.Y.), 61, in whieh the Court says the character of it (the act) iz to be determined by its’ provisions, not its | title. If this meant that you could pass anact to re- Heve John Smith, and on it granta donation to the | Hlind Asyium, no one will pretend that it is correct, because the words of the constitution, that the subject shall be cmbraced in the title, would be literally ig- nored, although quite as important as the rest of the provision, but as applied to that case the expression used by tho Court is highly proper. The reasoning in tbat case simply meant to tae effect that gencral pro- visions as to general laws about which there was no re- striction in the constitution were not void if contained jn a local act, Here that question does not arise. Conuer vs. The Mayor (6 N. Y., 202-93) the Court held that many — persons’ or things may bi embraced within the same subject, but the Court expressly heki that the object of the pro- vision was to prevent the uniting of various subjects having no necessary connection with each other, for the purpose of combining those interests in support of the whole. Without stopping to inquire whether this act does not meet condemuation in their own words, it is only necessary to say that that case emphatically nh one subject matter, dis- condemns the uniting of more th in addition to those cases, this clause has been an early day atter its passage. Int (3 Barb., 162) the title of an lation to ceriain courts in the city of New York was held constitu because its title covered the sul jet learly showing that at that early cats, rovision was fresh, the title was looked to as the act, Im the case of n (15 Barb., 654) the ttle of U {g agnin held to be important, and that act was ouly upheld because its tile covered the subject, and that was the reliet of creditors, It seems to me that under the prov Unat act there was ws relick In The of Fish! title of the act, again, was held necessary to cover the in the act, and that in that all the provis. re of a character to be covered by the title, In DeCamp. v8. Overseers of the Poor (19 Barb., $1) it seems to me the various subjects embraced in the act were all necessarily embraced, Jn an act to ercet the Court House of Sebuyler county all the gubjects treated of were to though a well reasoned dissenting op did hot agree to the judgmeat. In Mayor, already referred’ to, the title of the bill was, “An act in Relation to Fees,’ which provided that fees should belong to the county, and salaries to be paid in piace of thein come within the scope of the title, In Brewster vs, The City of Syracuse (19 N. Y., 119) the title of the act was again treated as of the same Sm- portance ag the act, and that the title ex- presved the sabject; and that brings us to the question, What is’ the subject matter of th wet’ if the plaintiff, in his construction of Mt, is correct, then it is clear that it contains only one subject matter. Itebarters a railroad, and gives that road the power to charter, &c., such ‘steamboats, d&e., as may be necessary for that road. If its charter, a8 the defendant claims, vests the company with a power to run steamers ail over the world, then it seems to me no one Will say there ‘s but one subject matter in,it, and that subject is expressed i the title, If the con- struction of the intent of (he act contended for by the dant is correct it is hardiy necessary to cite hing in it inconsistent with such vs. Fishkill, &c., the ‘arry out and complete its erection, al- mn in that case thorities to show that the directors may establish lines | with Europe wnd all parts of it, Africa and all parts of it, Awia and all parts of it, This } and I might ask, Is company that ,would jiko to have invested in that company, eubject to the power of the directors tor the time being to establish any line | tha@ (heir inclination might suggest? There is nothing im the argument that at this time the company is ouly | joing to run a line to New York and San Francisco. | ‘hat is only a question of the present. If the power | exists as claimed there is no place that this company | ‘bas pot authority under its charter to runaline to, It will be seen that unless tho restricted use of the words contained in the chartor as shown bad boen adhered to when this company was chartered, the legislation must have for all (uture time ceased 'to charter other wteam lines, The subject in the constitution had an in terest, and certainly did not mean that in an act to charter a railroad company the Legislature could add ab insurance company or & savings bank. [t will be geen that the provisious of the act are not to chor nor does it profess to company. lt charters tho Pan ad Company to take the grant made to defendants, To this it adds os a favor to tuat railroad company, giving them power to use by purchase ot e@therwise such vessels ag that company might need, It is not to be suy that the members who paseed that act sup; they were voting to charter a co) pany whose power would be to cover all oceans with steamers. would be a mere incidental powor evi. dently added, as euch was to be construed into the added to the l’igmy charter, It seems tg me Uf this view is eontended for a the nature af the there a stockbolder in the | | the same drama as “Leah, the Forsaken " the clear resuit of defendant's construction, | his property | charter, | Judge Daly inquired of plaintiffs counsel if he had | -~ wnitten assigument. | ir. Bateman answered :—‘‘No, sir; but we can sub- mit any number cf facts, affidavits and proots, it necessary.” Mr. Olin said that Mr. Daly prepared tht “Leah, the Forsaken,” and thirteen years ago | plaintil’s father, giving him permiecion to play it in | Great Britam and 5 great portion of America, with the | reservation to perform it in the United States when Miss Bateman was not playing ‘As Miss | Bateman is not in this country he H in it here. insisted again that | no damage could accrae to her from its production here. ‘After six nights’ performance the play was witharawn | on account of Miss Morris’ tliness. Mr. Daly asked | of the agent of Miss Bateman permission to produce “The New Leah,’ not because of any doubt in his mind Of his rigbt to produce it, but because of bis un- | fortunate experience in many litigations of similar | character, and which were decided agaiust him, al | though he was as confident as in this case that justice ‘was on hig side. He wished to avoid all chances of litt- gation. He-did not admit that ‘The New Leah’ was The play | has been withdrawn and there was no indication of again producing it. Mr. Bateman said they had already bad enough expe- rience of Mr. Daly’s good faith, The counsel on the other side might sneer, but they would make good their case on the trial. They say that the play was with- drawn on account of the illness of Miss Morris. This, be alleged, was as untrue as any other allegation in the answer, , Mr. Olin—Your Honor, the illness of Miss Morris was certified to by her physician, and that is all that Mr. Daly knows about it, . . Judge Davis—Well, well, an affidavit has been sub- mitted stating that the play has been withdrawn, and that there is no intention of producing it again. { will deny the present application, but in case the play 1s again put on the stage, I will grant permigsion to re- new the application for an injunction. H MAILING OBSCENE LITERATURE. The case of The United States vs. Jobn A. Lant, charged with sending obscene literature through the mails, was called for trial yesterday im the United | States Circuit Court, before Judge Benedict. Lant, for a time, was the publisher of a paper called the Toledo Sun, which, it is alleged by the government, trom time to time contained very improper matter. The arrest was made by Anthony J. Comstock, Special Agent of the Post Office Department, who was the only witness examined. He testified’ that Lant called upon him in relation to sending the paper through the mail, and permission was refused nim; the witness afterward went to Green Farms, Connecticu’ and, under the assumed name of E. Semmiler, ha copies of the paper sent to Lim. A day or two after- ward he made the arrest, Colonel A. H. H. Dawson who appeared for the prisoner, moved for the d: missal of the indictment, on the ground that no case had been inade out by the government; but this was lenied by Judge Benedict. The jury returned a ver- of guilty as charged, but recommended the pr! er to the merey on account of his youth, and the further fact that this was bis first of- fence. He wae remanded for sentence, Colonel Daw- gon gave notice that he should move for a new trial to-day. | | DECISIONS. SUPREME COURT—CHAMBERS. } By Judge Davis, | aoe vs, Brown.—Security objected to; is not suffl- | cien Walsh vs, Clancy.—Order refused ; plaintiff may have | receiver, | Matter of . Christopher.—Motion denied, without costs, Memorandum, rwood vs. Zink, and in the matter of Field. —Or- cers ted. | Manufacturers and Builders’ Bank vs. Aston.—Leave should be given to file the supplemental answer on the following terms :—First, the iseue to remain of the same date, answer to be served in ten days; second, on bay ment of $10 corte of opposing motion; third, plaintiff to | have leave to discontinue without costs within ten days | after service of the answer if he go clect; fourth, if de- fondant succeeds in the supplemental matter on the ction he shall have no costs of the action prior to such | answer, but only subsequent costs, from which plain. tiff’'s costs to the said answer shall be deducted, i 4 Judge Dovobue, Nelly Young ve. Henry 3. Young. —Report of referee confirmed and decree of divoree granted to plaintiff. Freeman va. Panama Railroad Company. —Optnion. By Judge Weetbrook. Life Association of America va. Rhodes, —Opinion, SUPREME COURT--8PECIAL TERM. By Judge Van Vorst. | Karle vs, Johnson et al,—Case and amendments | sottled. | Anderson ve, The Mayor, &c,--Findings settled and | signed. | | SUPERIOR’ COURT-——SPECIAL TERM. By Judge Freed) York va, Fuller.—Findings settle: By Judge Van Vorst. | Glenney va. World Mutual Life Insurance Company } et al. —See memorandum tor counsel. By Judge Sedgwick. Cochran vs. Gottwald et al,—Motion denied. | memorandum, | COMMON PLEAS--SPECIAL TEBM, | By Chief Justice Daly. | Yolhamus vs. Bogert. —See opinion. | _ Gitrard ys, Lesire,—Application denied, See memo- randum, ' SUMMARY OF LAW CASES. | | he trial of the indictment against David Lauson, See | ship for Bremen. | ehareing bim with romning @way with # vessel, was further continued yesterday in the United States Cir- cuit Court till the 15th inst. Suit was brought yesterday in the United States District Court against thirty-seven cases of laces, al- leged to have been smuggled into this port on the steamship City of Chester, There have been no claim- ants to the goods. In the trial of the suit before Judge Loew of William Norton against Reddington & Co., to recover $16,000 claimed to be due, with interest, for drugs sold twenty Years ago in Sau Francisco, a compromise was yes- terday effected between the parties, and thus ends an old suit of twenty years’ standing. Io tho suit of John Polbamus vs, William Bogert a decision was rendered yesterday by Chief Justice Daly, holding that when a party dies intervening the argu- ment and the decision, aud the Court decides in favor of the plaintiff, the Court will allow the judgment to be entered upon nune pro tunc, that is of the day when the cause was submitted for decision. The United States Grand Jury, empanelled yesterday | in the United States Cireuit Court, criminal branch, be- | gan their labors with Oliver Harriman, of No. 14 West Twenty-tifth street, as foreman, Judge Benedict male the usual charge before they were sent out. ‘The suit of the Government vs, Allen Dodworth, in the United States District Court, to recover $6,600, alleged due a8 a succession tax, resulted in a verdict yesterday for the defendants, the point being decided in the affirmative that the government had failed to fea Out 4 case under the succession laws of the United ates, Wilham A, Ross and wife took passage at Havana, in 1858, on the steamer Isabel, bound for Charleston, and while on the passage bad stolen from their trunk some valuable jewelry, They brought suits in the Supreme Court, Circuit, to recover $3,000, the alleged value of the lost jewelry. In the case, which has been on trial for three day, before Judge Lawrence, and the facts | have been published in the Hrmap, the jury yesterday returned a verdict for $2,000 in favor of the plaintiffs. ‘The tral of the case of Antonio Cordona, charged with attempting to pass counterfeit ten-dollar bills on the Poughkeepsie Bank, took place yesterday in the United States Circuit Court, criminal branch, before Juage Benedict, Cordona and John Guielleitta were arrested last September at the Grand Central depot by Captain Kennock, of the Secret Service Division, and Detective McMahon, each having quite a large sum of counterfeit money in his possession. Guielleita was acquitted at the last term of Conary, i Benjamin F. Russell appearing as his counsel, @ same counsel appeared yesterday for Cordona, who likewise was acquitted. A case of interest to stock operators came on for trial yesterday before Judge Lawrence, Circuit, William Jetkajan u Saloman three ‘straddles’? in e Shore and Pacific Mail stock at sixty days. Before the sixty days ex- pired defendant failed, Plaintiff sued for the loss. The defence interposed by Mr. John E, Develin was tl case came under the Gambling act, because not fide sale, but a sale of property the party did not pos- The Court ruled otherwise, holding, in accord- plaintitf’s counsel, that the case was covered by the act of 1858 relating to the sale of stocks, and directed a verdict for plaintiff for $5,676, but gave sixty days’ stay to allow the cuse to go to General Term. Francis Macholt had a daughter and Henry Lucas a son. The son ot Lucas paid attentions to the daughter of Macholt, and on the strength of those attentions obtained a loan of $225 from the girl’s father, giving as security a mortgage on the fixtures of @ hairdressing saloon in Barclay street. This mortgage had a guarantee attached by the father of the young man, and a balance | thereon remaining unpaid, Macholt brought suit against the guarantor for the amount, This suit was tried in the Marine Court, before Judye McAdam and a jury, yes- ter, when the defendant claimed his guarantee was ob- — Fs him by fraud. The jury found in favor of jaintitt. 3 Royal Phelps, President of the Society for the Preser- vation of Game, brought suit to recover from John A. Curner a penalty of $60 for having venison for sale in his saloon on the 2d of February last, in violation of vor of plaintiff, with a recommondation of defendant to the mercy of the Court. Judge Alker said he had no pre- rogative of mercy in the matter. One juror, on bein, jolied, said he “vos not so sure about dot verdict.’ Finally, atter being questioned by Judge Alker, the doubtful juror reluctantly assented to an agreement in | the verdict of his associates, and a verdict was there- | upon entered for $50 in favor of plaintiff. ‘A large number of suits were brought yesterday in the United States District Court to recover several amounts due on warehouse bonds, given as security for the payment of duties on imported merchandise. Twenty nine of these are againsi the firm of Wylie, Knevals & Co., to recover $19,000. These bonds were iven between May, 1871, and September, 1873, with tichard J, Godwin and Samuel Goiwin as sureties, who arealso made parties to the suit, Similar suits also | are brought against the followiug:—Sehneider & Heid- Jouff for Merritt, Price as surety; same firm f surety; same firm for with Robert Tibbests as surety, and Andreas Cassard & Son for $160 80, with W. B. Sickels as surety. A writ of habeas corpus was taken out yesterday in the United States Circuit Court, betoro Judge Blatch- with Adolphus Dinglestedt as surety ; (Co. for $1,784, with Thomas J. Irwin has been imprisoned as a debtor in Ludlow Street Jail since January 11, 1870, in default of the payment of a | number of judgments in the Supreme Court of the State against him, amounting in the aggregate to $15,900. After his arrest he was adjudged a bankrupt im the United States District Court. The course now taken was to secure his discharge in bankruptcy, it being argued that this course would secure his release from imprisonment. in denying the petition, trom the facts stated that ys:—It docs not appear @ arrest was founded on a ie Supreme Court, | he plainti, bought of Mr. | identified. for $3,196, with Henry Irwin as | $400 2, F } transacting some business. Edward Morris, of No. 62 was subsequently captured, and, on being arraigned be- fore Judge Sutherland this morning, ho pleaded guilt, and was sent to State Prison for two yearn ~ App viper ee of No. 37 Washington street, who was charged with picking the pocket of line Appeland, East Eighty-tifth street, of a pocketbook containing $892, on the 23d of last month, pleaded guilty ‘and was sent to the Penitentiary for two months, William T, McMahan admitted that hq broke into the paint shop of John Eagan, at No. 628 Second avenue, one night In November, and stole $6 worth of property therefrom. He was sent to State Prison for the term of two years and six months. Julia Manix, aged twenty-two, who was charged with stabbing Isaac Harris with a pocket knife, pleaded in extenuation that she was drunk at the time and had no recollection of what she was accused of, One year in the Penitentiary, John Hill, one of the men who stole $22 from the reon of John Zehner, of No. 67 Willett street, on the ‘7th of November, pleaded guilty and was sent’ to the State Prison for one yea WASHINGTON PLACE POLICE COURT. Before Judge Morgan. STEALING TO LIVE. George Smith, alias “Gill,” having no home, was charged with stealing a silk umbrella, valued at $4, from Miss Jane Hall, of No. 44 Horatio street, while that young lady was walking up West Ninth street to Broadway, Smith admitted the theft and said he took the umbrella to pawn it to obtain food. He bad been out of work for some months and lately slept in the station houses, A few days ago he told Captain Lowry, of the Sixth precinct, that ho would have to steal in order to be sent up to the Island for the winter. The Captain told him not to steal, but when he saw the umbrella under the ZACe, lady's arm he thought he would steal it. He was glad he was arrested, so that anyhow he would have some food and lodging. Judge Morgan held him in $1,000 bail for trial, HIGHWAY ROBBERY IN ELEVENTH AVENUE. William Kelly, of Tenth avenue and Thirty-ninth street, was held in $1,500 bail for stealing a memoran- dum book from James Kaufmann, of No. 347 West ‘Thirty-eighth street, a collector for the Metropolitan Gaslight Company, Kelly was fully identified as the thief, The complainant said he was walking through ‘Thirty-ninth street, when Kelly came Up and isaid he intended to rob him, When the thief found that the book was simply a memorandum book he threw it away and escaped, but was subsequently arrested and ARREST OF LIQUOR DEALERS. Tho following liquor dealers were required to furnish $100 bail each for violation of the Exeise law, in selling *. R. Murray, No, 88 Car- liquor without a license:—F, mine street; David Strain, No. 500 Seventh avenue; 0. P, Hew, No. 478 Seventh avenue; Henry Engleken, No, 125 Christopher street; Henry Feth, No, 16 Gansevoort street; James Maguire, No. 51 Carmine street, and Cor- | Belius Gaynor, No. 588 Greenwich street. ESSEX MARKET POLICE COURT. Before Judge Kasmire, A BURGLAR HELD. Frederick Brown, of No, 23 Bayard street, was held tn $2,000 ror burglariously entering the premises of Frederick Reiss, No, 18 Greenwich street, on the 6th of | November, and stealing therefrom one overcoat and 300 | cigars, in all valued at $19. FIFTY-SEVENTH STREET COURT. Before Judge Murra; THIEVES IN A CLUB HOUSE. Gustave Hirschkorn, an employé of the Harmony two of his fellow employés. Detective McGowan, of the Nineteenth precinct, arrested him on Thursday night inthe Pacific Garden, where he was drinking wine with his sweetheart. He admitted his guilt and ‘was held for trial. | day on charges of having violated the Excise law. WHERE A POLICEMAN WAS WANTED AND FOUND, Frank Vettle, of No, 285 avenue A, found a burglar natned Charles Moran in the act of robbing his apart- monte on Thursday evening and made an attempt to arrest him, Moran escaped into the street and Vettel raised an alarm by crying “Stop thief! Ward De- tective Mallon heard it and pursued Moran. The latter, on being arrested, struggled desperately to regain bis hiberty and called upon a friend, who was in the crowd that had quickly gathered, to shoot the officer, committed for trial. VIOLATIONS OF THE EXCISE LAW. Fourteen persons were brought to this Court yester- Two | were discharged, it having appeared that although they ford, to secure the release of Samuel Oppenheimer, who | In his decision Judge Blatchford, _ debt or claim from which discharge in bankruptcy | would release the petitioner.” In October, 1875, Andrew D. Campbell Thomas O'Reilly, the father of Charles H. O'Reilly, in the Marine Court, upon a note for 1,000. The note was given to Campbell by Charles , H. O'Reilly, who testified that he had paid the amount | by checks and moneys allowed him by Campbell for the | transfer by him to Campbell of contracts, all of which Campbell denied. The jury rendered a verdict for | Campbell as against Thomas 0’ Reilly, after which Charles | H. O'Reilly brought suit againgt A’ D. Campbell to re- cover $400 for the transfer of the above mentioned mtracts. This case having come up for trial yester- | day Court, defendant's counsel served a duces tecum upon Mr. Felix O'Dowd, one of the official stenographers of the Marine Court, to produce his minutes of the trialof Campbell ve. O'Reilly, taken in that Court. The sten- ographer appeared in'Court in answer to the writ and objected to read bis notes, on the ground that {t was the duty of counsel to procure a transcript of the min- utes instead of compelling him to appear and read from the original. Judge Ackert sustained the objec- tion and held that the minutes were the property of the Court where they were taken, but that the stenog- rapher had a lien upon them until paid his statutory | sued | before Justice Acuert, of the Seventh District | fees for transcribing them; that a stenographer can only be compelied by a duces tecum to compare a tran- script of bis notes which ls disputed with his original minutes, COURT OF GENERAL SESSIONS. Before Judge Sutherland, ‘The first case disposed of yesterday involved the con- viction of two well known confidence operators. The complainant was Christian Oelesen, a Danish sailor, who stated that on the 15th of last month he came to this city from Philadelphia for the purpose of taking While seated ina car of the Penn- Ivania Railroad Company on the way thither he was addressed by a man named Thomas Lewis, who so in- gratiated himself with the simple seaman that the lat- ter communicated his plans of going to Bremen. That gentleman at once declarod that he was on his way to Liverpool to take possession of a large property which had been willed to him by a deceased relative. When the train arrived in Je City Mr. Lewis escorted Oelesen to New York, where he took him into a lager beer saloon. A man’ namod George W. Loomis was found here and with bim Mr. Lewis threw dice for cigars. Then be threw for a five dollar note, which he won, and half of which he prof- fered to Oelesen, who promptly declined to receive it on the ground that he was not in any way concerned in the game. Loomis next proposed that Lewis should cast the dice with him fora $100 stake. Lewis said he This he exhibited to Vclesen, from whom he borrowed $90 to make up the $100, telling the dupe that he would be cortain to win, nd that even if he should losp he would immediately cash the check and repay the loan. Of course he did not win and he did not cash the check, but he did elyp out of a back door in company with his confederate Lopmis, and leave the pour sailor to report his loss to a policeman, by whom he was con- veyed to the house ofa friend in Washington street, The next day conductor Burke of the train on which Oclesen rode from Philadelphia heard of the robbery. He had noticed the actions of Lewis and concluded that he was the man who had weurnan. Two days later he saw Loomis seated together in the train coming from Philadelphia, and at once aphed that fact to the depot master at Jersey City. That genile- man made such arraugements that when the train came In Officers Boyd and C on band and took the two travellers into custody. They were searched, and on the person of Lewis was found a loaded revolver and a pack of monte cards, A lot of bogus $20 gold pleces and a roll of Confederate bills and brown paper, ingeniously veneered, with a single genuine five dollar greenback, were taken from the pockets of Loomis, ‘The men were taken to this eity and loc the Tombs to await trial. Messrs, William F. Kintaing and Jolin 0, Mott defended the prisoners and raiged the t that as the complainant had parted with bis oluntarily the prisoners could not be conyieted of larceny, which was the offence charged in the In dictment,' On that Leing adversely decided by the Court, they contended that the prisoners should be discharged because there was no evidence to show that the money obtained froin the complainant was genuine. ‘This was also overruled und the case was given to the jury. The prisoners were found guilty of grand larceny ‘and were each sent to State Prison for five years. ATTEMPTED BURGLARY, Joba Larichen and Jolin McDermott wero convicted of attempt at burglary in having, on the 26th of October Jast, entered the house No. 626 Sixth avenue and at- tempted to carry off $500 worth of clothing, the prop- erty of Andite out. They were sentenced to con- fincment ip State Prison for two years. PLEAS AND SENTENCES, Frederick Backus, of No. 417 Kighteenth street, | South Brooklyn, left his horse and wagon on the cor- “had only $10 in cash, but that he had a check for $600. * ner of Water and Roosevelt streets, in this city, at seven o'clock one morning Jast month, while bo wag } had no Hosnses they had receipts in full for license feos paid to the Excise Commissioners. The other prison- ers were held for trial, most of thom admitting their guilt very unconcernedly, ROBBERY IN A BARROOM. Patrick Halloran, implicated with Michael Culligan in the robbery of Patrick H. McGuire in‘ Craig’s liquor store on Wednesday evening, was arrested yesterday, and an examination took place in the afteraoon, The case was not concluded and the prisoners were commit- ted for a further hearing without bail. POLICE COURT NOTES. At Essex Market Police Court Mary Valkenberg, of No, 101 Forsyth street, was held in $500 vail to keep the peace for six months for keeping a disorderly house. Five other persons found in the house were repri- manded and discharged. The complainant was Jacob Smith, of No. 94 Forsyth street, At the No, 80 South Fifth avenue, was held in $1,000 bail for stealing $2 from the pocket of Patrick Moore, of Green- wich street. The complainant was sent to the House of Detention. COURT OF APPEALS. Axpaxy, Dec, 10, 1875. No. 55. Charles A. Hawkins, appellant, vs. the Mayor, ke., of New York, respondent —Argued by John F. Lawrence, of counsel for appellant, and by D. J. Dean administratrix, for respondent. No. 18. Martha Devize Roderigas, &c., respondent, v#. the East River Savings Institu: tion, appellant.—Argued by J. Joues, of counsel for appellant, and by §. P. Nash, for respondent, This was rgument ordered by the Court. No. 80, William Tiffany, appellant, vs. Adan Farr, respondent.—Submitted for appellant and argued by Albertus Perry for respondent, 84. Jeremiah Hackett, respondent, vs. Isaac , appellants.—Argued by Abel Crooke for nd by D. P. Barnard for respondent. Hante, Lucinda’ Burrows, respondent, vs. apy way Company, appeliants. man, of counsel for appellant, and by Arthur More, tor respondent. Adjourned, CALENDAR. The following {s the day calendar for Monday, Decem- ber 13:—Nos, 112, 113, 98, 99, 103, 114, 115, 117, UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. Waswrxatos, Dec, 10, 1875. On motion of Mr. George McCrary, Thomas J. Hen- dorson, of Princeton, Il., and A. J, Baker, of Centre- ville, Iowa, were admitted to practise as attorneys and counsellors of this Court. On motion of Mr. M. I, Southard, William C. Gaston, of Philadelphia, Pa,, was admitted to practise as an at- torney and counsellor of this Court. On motion of Mr. J. D, MePherson Mr, T. C. Sears, of Ottawa, Kansas, was admitted to practice ag an attor- ney and counsellor of this Court. No. 70. David H. Mitchell, plaintiff in error, vs. Board of County Commissioners of Leavenworth. Kansaz, et al.—This cause was submitted on printed argument by Messrs, RK. M. and Quinton Corwin and Mr. J. W. English, of counsel for the plaintiff in error, no counsel appearing for the defendants in error. 206 (substituted for No. 71). Ira J. Minn and George L. Scott, plaintiffs in error, vs. The People of the State of Illinois, —Set for argument immediately after | the cases assigned for the 11th of January next. No. 72 George A. Kibbee, plaintiff in error, vi Samuel Dattoe und Amos Duno.—This cause was mitted on printed arguments by Mr. W. C. Goudy, counsel for the pliintiff in error, and by Mr, 1. Frost, for the defendant in error. No. 78. John A, Wells ct al., plaintiffs in error, vs of 6. H. B. Claflin et al—This cause was sobmitted on | printed argument by Mr. W. C. Goudy, of counsel tor the plaintiffs in error, and by Mr. C. BenUey for the defendants in error. No. 74. Ann Kittredge, widow. vs. Olivia C. Roso and her husb jg by Mr. C. W. Harner, of counsel for tbe plain. tif in error, and su Mr. E. F. Merrick for defendant ip error. No, 75, James H. Woodford et al,, plaintiffs in error, ve. The Canastota Bank.—This cause was argued by George H. Williams, of counsel for the plaintiffs in error, and submitted by Mr. B. ¥. Chapman for the defendant &e., plaintiff in error, A | No, 76. John W. Butterfield, appellant, vs. George Usher, —fhis cause was submitted on printed argument by Mr. Enoch Totten, of counsel for the appellant, aud by Mr. KT. Merrick, for appellee, Adjourned until Monday, ‘The following case was argued in the United States | Supreme Court yesterday prin No. 69. The Twin Lick Oil Company vs, Morbury— Appeal from the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia.—The oil company in this case became in- solvent, and having borrowed money of Morbury, who was one of the directors, securing the loan by a’ deed trust on the company’s property, he was compelled to foreclose. Subsequently Morbury came into pos session of the property throngh the purchaser at the gaie, and went on to develop it, boring a new well which turned out a success, and’ discovering an old well within the s was not before known to belong to the cot The company now claims that Morbury, by the sale and subsequent arrangement, | became the trustee of all the other: allowed to share with him the value of the property. | The Court below held that as Morbury had made all the expenditures he was entitled to all the profits, | and that if the expenditures had proved a loss thoeo | now claiming woula have deniod any jnterest and re- | fused to share any part of the logs. Those facts ap- ring, & conriructive trust would not be sustained. e decree was Gor the defendant, and the case com Oliver street, Jumped into the wagon and drove off. He | Chub, No. 45 West Forty-second street, was arraigned | | ona charge of stealing $140 worth of property trom He was | ‘ashington Place Police Court Mary Mead, of | The Erie Rail. | Argued by Orlow W. Chap. | | the finest" and.—This cause was | mitted’ on printed arguments by | and avk to be | here on appeal from It, the same position veing con- | fended for’ Carlisle, McPherson end Beasten ior ap- pellants; Davidge and Cox for appellees, AN EXPLANATION. To rae Eviton oF THR HERALD: — In the tesue of the Henatp of the 6th inst. there appeared an account of the proceedings in the trial of Levi Aaron before the Court of General Sessions, some portions of which do me great injustice. In that ac- count the following statement occurred:—‘‘When the case bad been placed on the calendar his daughter, | . Mrs, Rachel Rauth, came to the District Attorney and tated that her father was dead and buried, and at the | | same time showing the burial certificate. The bonds | were therefore cancelled and the case expunged from | the calendar.” | — Will you please repair this injury to me as far as can | ve done at present by allowing me to state to the public | | throngh your columns that there is not a particle of | truth in that statement. I never made such a statement to the District Attorney nor any ono else. I never had any interview or conversation with him on that sub- ject; nor do 1 know of any one else doing so, and the | ‘whole report as it respects myself, or anybody belong- ing to me, is an entire fabrication. DECEMBER 10, 1875. Mrs. RACHEL RAUTH, THE BROOKLYN RING SUITS. PAPERS NOT YET READY—-WHERE THE DANGER OF FAILURE Is. The Taxpayers’ Association of Brooklyn has received | & sufficient amount of money, or the assurances | thereof, to feel confident of bemg able to sustain the litigation against the Ring, Mr. Parsons, who leads the legal van in the assault, is up to his eyes, and over, in the business of preparing the necessary papers to serve on the defendants. Mr, Parsons said yesterday to a Henao reporter that he did not think they could | possibly be ready before the middlo of | next week. ‘They involve a great deal of | labor, much that is of a statistical character and entails the examination of a great number of ac- count and other books Mr. Parsons is desiroug of being accurate. Mr, Parsons and the Taxpayers’ Asso- | elation, including ex-Mayor Booth, & B. Chittenden, | F. T, Backhouse, Harvey Farrington, Demas Barnes, David M. Stone and other less prominent members, are very sanguine of success, They argue, one and ail, that the frauds are too plain to be got over; that the reservoir job is as clear a case | of defrauding the taxpayers out of sever hundred thousand dollars as ever was known; that the paving of Atlantic avenue with Nicolson pavement at $4 50 a square yard, while the same was done else- | where for $3 50, furnishes (aerer god evidence against the men composing the Bing and who have had these several undertakings in charge, It {s not the first time in Brooklyn that steps haye been taken to secure re- | form in city expenditures and to get honeat govern- ment. Tho Brooklyn Ring is not like that of Tam- many, Which constantly broke and defied the law. ‘THE WELL DRESSED, WELL FED GENTLEMEN of the so-called Ring, who may be found of an after- noon taking things easy on the soft, leather-covered lounges of the Brooklyn Club, are reaily sincere in their indifference to the proccedings now being taken against. them in the name of the State and the ‘Taxpayers’ Association. ‘They sneer as they puff their fragrant | Hayanas | at the attempt to convict them, under the laws, of any fraud upon the treasury or the taxpayers. They sip their Chambertin or Roederer and laugh in scorn at the efforts of, as they say, “such f Chittenden, Farrington, Barnes a them any harm. It cannot bo called bravado. | rather a deep seated conviction they hold that the laws | under which they operated are of such a character as to justify their proceedings whether right or wrong, | ‘These laws were passed at Albany, with due and delib- erate preparation. If any one takes tho trouble to look carefully into the act by which the Wal- labout Improvement Commission was organized he will sco that though $1,000,000 might have been stolen everything was done in conformity with law. The same may be said of the Brooklyn Bridge, the Hompstead Reservolr, the Prospect Park and Fort Greene improvements and others not neces- sary to mention. Tigeed and his gang took the law as | it stood and trampled on it. The Brooklyn operators | had the thing properly worded to adapt ttseif to future | contingencies, and then it was soberly introduced at Albany and décorously advocated and passed. Thus it will be seen that the members of the Brooklyn Ring have some reason to feet comparatively safe. None of them have run away, and the amazing part of it is that in place of throwing obstacles in the way of the prose- cution they are clamoring for a speedy trial. BOARD OF POLICE. The full Board of Police Commissioners met yester- | | one Bernard had sometimes acted as clerk day, Mr. Matsoll in the chair. A communication was received from General Fitz | John Porter, of the Department of Public Works, re- questing Lbe putive authorities to enforce te ordi- nance relative to the opening of the fire hyurants by | persons not authorized. ‘This is rendered necessary by the coming cold weather. The matter was referred to | the Superintendent, | A document was received from Mayor Wickham, en- closing a complaint by two Germans, named Gerlach | and Halzell, of a house of il! fame in Eldridgo street, | They stated that they had complained to Captain | Ullman, of the Tenth precinct, but he toox no action in the matter, Inspector Dilks reported that a house of iN] fame did exist at the place named, but it was not dis- orderly, The case had never been reported to Captain | Ullman and no traces of the complainants could be | | found. ‘The matter was referred to the Superintendent | | and the facts were«rderetto be sent to the Mayor, | | Francis Galiagher, Fourth precinct; James B, Simp- | gon, Fifth, and Thomas Stapleton, 'hirty-frst, were dismissed from the force, Some litle debate between Messrs, Disbecker and » Voorhis was occasioned by a resolution introduced by the latter enlarging the P paee sen of the Superinten- | dent, | Disbecker wanted it referred to the Committee on Rules and Discipline, but Voorhis insisted on an | immediate vote. Matsell and Disbecker voted for the | reference, and Voorhis and Smith against. The resolu- | tion was subsequently adopted and ordered embodied | | in the police manual as rule No. 24, It requires that | | all orders to the force transmitted to the Superintendent by the Board of Police shall be by him alone given to | the force, It has frequently happened hitherto that | | Commissioners, overlooking the Superintendent, have | | given direct orders to the force, thus placing the Super- intendent in an embarrassing positi MUNICIPAL NOTES. One of the Aldermen complains that the petition of the bricklayers who ask for the expenditure of | | $6,000,000 in giving them and other mechamis em- | ployment, is entirely ‘too communistic” to deserve | | serious attention. | Sheriff Conner appointed all the Aldermen as deputy | sheriffs at the execution that did not come off. “They | do say’ that he intendea to use them as coroner's | jurors ag well. ‘The Commissioners of Charities and Correction are | vecoming generous and propose to feed the Island pop- ulation on poultry, They ask for bids for 7,800 pounds | of turkeys and 1,400 pounds of chickens, But then Christmas is coming. One per cent will be added to all taxes collected be- , fore next Wednesday and two per cent will be charged | after that date, The Superintendent of Repairs and Supplics adver- tises for bids to remodel old No. 7 Engine House, cor- nerof Centro and Chambers streets. The proposed | changes will involve an expenditure of about $4,000. | Tho Gas Commission met yesterday and resolved to advertise for bide to light the city lamps for the six months from Ist of January next. Tho bids will be | opened on the 28th inst. KILLED BY A KICK. j} On the 18th of last November John Holland and James Clooney, two men having an old gradge between them, met in a liquor saloon at No. 10 Washington street, and entered into a dispute which terminated in | one kicking the other in the stomach, and, therepy, in- | flicting a fatal injury, Holland (or Yank," as he was frequently called), the kicker, after his’ assault fled from justice, and has not yet been captured by lice,’’ &c., and Clooney, injured man, | died in the Chambers Street Hospital tour days alter he | received his wound. These are the principal facts of the story of the murder as told by the witnesses who testified at the coroner’s inquest yesterday. The jury | were of the opinion, also, that the authorities of the | hospital in which Clooney died were too tardy in notify. | ing the coroner of the approach of Clooney's death, and in the verdict which they rendered, after stating thecause | and time of the victim's demise, they added “and we recommend that the physicians attached to the House | of Relief of the New Yerk Hospital be more prompt in | future to report cases under their care suftering from criminal violence.” BOOKS RECEIVED, Law of Taxation. By Trancis Hilliard, Boston; Little, Brown & Co. Currency and Banking. By Benamy Price, New York: | itty | | Co. PF John Greenleat Whittier. | “Songs of Thre Boston ; James I. , } ¢ Abou Ben Adhem. By Petroleum V, Nasby. | New York: Leo, Shepard & Dillinghain. | | Farm Legends. By Will Carleton, Brothers. OM the Roll, By Katharine King. New York: Harper & Brothers, By Nathaniel ames K. Osgood & land Poarl. By Farjeon. Dg jew York: Harper & Mawihorne, Two vol- Now York: Brothers. jew York: Hurper & The Abbe Tigrane. | Whittaker. | The Loves Ww. From Ferdinand Fabre, = ring. Boston: From the German, New York. | Mr. | fora Cook & C ‘ By Non, Wit liam Strong. New York: Dodd & Mead Notes Upon the Incernasional Sunday School Lessons, By | A Parmer's Voeation, By George B. W | Jf Orgood & Co, |. Heb | Jewish Famil; hn jewish Fam New York: of a Lawyer. By Andrew Sherman, Chicago: 0. f Civil Law to Chareh Polity. Rey, Rufus New York: Dodd & Mend. brew Characteristics. | Amerienn Jew | York: Aun = jon ty. rs. Letters Mie a Missionary, New Publication Bociety, MUNICIPAL ABUSES, —_————— MOW THE CITY 18 MADE TO PAY MORE THAW 178 JUST SHARE OF THR STATE TAX—COMe PARISONS IN GAS—LIGHT ON THE METHODS) OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, ‘The Senate Committee of Investigation continued its, work yesterday at the Fifth Avenue Hotel. George H. Andrews, one of the Tax Commissioners, of the city of New York, was the first witness called, and testified that the proportion of the State tax paid) by the city was over fifty per cent, Mr, Davenport—Why is it that the city pays such » large portion of the State tax? Witness—Because the State Board of Equalization, has the power to exact it. Mr. Davenport—Is it an equitable proportion? Witness—No, sir. Mr. Davenport—What would bea fair and equitable portion for the city to pay? Witness—The amount allotted forthe year 1875 ex~! ceeds an equitable proportion by over $1,000,000; the! question of pergonal property has this year entered) into the equalization; the amount of personal property) ini the State assessed this year is over $217,000, 000. ba Mr. Davenport—How much of that !s collected ? Witness—The deficiencies are great; in 1874 it was $37,000,000; in 1878 it was $44,000,000; in 1872 it wam| $51,000,000; the rate of taxation for 1874 was 2.80; {f has Quctuated since 1870 from 2.25 to 2.91; the rule hi been to assess real estate at sixty per cent of the ap»; praised value; the appraisement is made by deputi under the direction of the Board; the B always passes upon them; I don’t think it! would be wise to have the collection of! taxes given to tho Financial Department, Iwas one of the committee appointed by the Mayor| to appear before the State Board of Equalization; thei effect on the Board was only moral; mo practical good! resulted, as over $50,000,000 was added to the already; high assessment made upon the city by the State, Board; I think the city should be represented in the; Board; this could be done by providing that there! should be one State assessor from each judicial district ;) at present the dumb city has imposed upon it onc half, of the State tax, so that virtually one half of the State) taxes the other half; the laws of the State relative to) taxation are most oppressive; 1 think the tax shoul bo on personal property alone; corporations should taxed on their gross receipts, so that from those to| whom much is given much should be required ; whereas, it now happens that by & strict construction of the lat the weaithiest corporations evade taxation and tho) lesser ones are subjected to it; wealthy gentlemen! threaten to move away from the city unless thetr taxem are reduced; wore® than that, they do moye away, W. A. W. Witkingon was thon éxaminod in relation} to the quality of gas supplied by the different city com-| panies. He is Assistant Professor of Chemistry in thé Collego of the City of New York; he has been employe in testing the gas made by the Mutual and Mani atta, companies; that of the Manhattan averaged tfteem! candle power; that of the Mutual about twenty candle! power; the difference arises from the mode of making, the gas; the Mutual works under a patent process, which involves the use of naphtha, a product of petro-, Jeum; the Manhattan uses coal only. The Mutual was) the least expensive process; the witness had no inter-! est in these patents, but was employed from day to day! by the engineer of the Mutual to test tho gas in order” to prevent their product from attaining too much powery ‘ag tho gas then would smoke. i Henry McCabe, Clerk of the Sixth District Court, wast recalled. He was examined generally relative to the! management of affairs in that court, He re Sata) el in. his aby) i sence, but only occasionally. Joseph Burke was next sworn. Burke is an employ@ of the Department of Public Works. He worked as @ laborer under foreman Corkery on ono of the Boule-: yards; saw Corkery drank on the 4th of October; ho ‘was not present on the work on the 5th, 6th, 7th and! 8th of October; one of his boarders called the roll for him; witness knew of his taking away oak logs andi sand, the property of the city; he also saw him give keg of powder to a contractor named Foley; Foley wi then at work digging a cgllar for himself, Abraham Bernard, the general factotum of the Sixth, District Court, then took the stand. He testified tha he was clerk to Marshal Boylan; kept no account, but divided the receipts daily; he somettines acted as clerk! in the absence of the regular clerk, McCabe. Nothing: mew was clicited from this witness beyond what wag already testified to by others, Matthew Brandon, an Inspector of Public Works, wast examined in regard to the mode of doing business im) the department. The object seemed to be to prove by, his testimony that officers on the works devoted a pore tion of the time which belonged to the public to pris vate employers. It was shown that he bad superin- tanded the shingling of a house for the widow of Sheriff Lynch, but had only devoted a tew hours altos gether WO (he busivess, Did wut kuow Juba Kelly wall neither asked nor received favors from him. Thomas Cummings, a witty and rather quaint son off the Emerald Isle, corroborated. Grandon’s testimony, and did not think the latter had in fact done justice ta himeelf. The witness amused the committee by, various discursory remarks of his own on things im general and the way in which laborers are generally weated, Richard O’Brien testified that he bad been a gencrak foreman in the employ of the Department ot Public Works since March 29 last; he had churge of the Kaste ern Boulevard, running along avenue A from Fifty seventh to Eighty-sixth street; the number of ander, foremen varied from eight to twelve; the force of la- from 300 to 400; foremen were inspected twice! if he found any absent without leave their time jocked,”’ and, on being reported, were liable ‘a dismissal; they were not excused, except for sicknes: or death of a near relative, or if subpoenaed to atten court, The witness produced his tine book, showing the manner in which workmen's time was noted. The committee adjourned until today at half-pastl ten o'clock. RECORD OF ORIME. Thieves entered the unoccupied house No, 20 Stuy ve sant street by forcing open the grating in the sidewalk connecting with the coal shde and stole a copper boiler valued at $25 and a quantity of lead pipe. One dozen of gold pens, valued at $50, was stolen by two unknown men, from the store of Francia M, Eppley, at No, 32 Liberty street, The premises occupied by Leopold Tilman, on the second floor of No, 60 South Fifth avenue, were entered by sneak thieves, who escaped, taking with themy twelve boxes of artificial lowers and several smaller ar- tcles—total value, $410. The candy store of Margaret Dodd, at No, 445 West Twonty-sixth strect, was robbod by two unknown boys of $3, which they took from the till. ‘Thieves entered the saloon kept by Johanna Itting,y at No, 198 Bleecker street, and stole billiard b valued at $111. Three thieves stole trom the clothes lin Downey, on the roof of her residence, No. Twenty-fourth street, $18 worth of clothing, The steam tug John Burbank, moored at pier a North River, was boarded by sneaks, who ca off, $60 worth of clothing and $12 in cash ‘A white lap robe, valued at $30, was stolen from th carriage of Mr. C, Thompson, of No. 297 Madisot avenue. ‘An unknown man entered the Inger beer saloon of ahgert at No. 269 avenue B and reque fifty.dollar bank pill, which was furo 4 After his leaving the ‘saloon Mr. Eahgert discovered? that besides his taking the change with him he ha® also walked off with the fitty-doliar bank bill. The regidence of Mr. Hendrack, No. 397 Henry street, Brooklyn, was entered by a burglar on Thursday night and robbed of $150 worth of property. Mr, Joseph Merwin’s dwelling, No. 108 Second place, Brooklyn, was teloniously enicred and robbed om! ‘Thursday night of $160 worth of jowelry. During an altercation last night between Thom George Roseberg, at No. 327 Water streel Mre, ) Fas of Fox an the latter was slightly stabbed in the forchead. Fo: was arrested and locked up in the Fourth precinct sta tion house. Moritz Mahler reported to Captain Van Dusen, of tha) Fifteenth precinct, that his store, No, 785 Broadway, had been entered by burglars on last Tuesday night am robbed of $1,800 worth of furs. The police have ao clew to the barglars, BUSINESS FAILURES, The schedule filed yesterday of Edward A. Haldi. man, dealer in optical goods at No. 66 Nassan street shows his liabilities to be $4,073 51; assets, $2, 65 actual value of assets, $1,371 38. G Joseph Pollak, who assigned to Fritz shetty, weeks ago, has liabilities of $4,427 54 and assets wor $1,482 77. Assignments have been made by Meyer & Kastroy | hardware dealers, of No. 120 Duane street, to Isai Meyer, and by William 1. & James C. Lewis, druggists, of No. James 27 Greenwich street, to James 1, Price. McEwan, commission merchant, of No, i] Whitchall street, has given notice of his inability to fulfil his contracts, and bis name bas been posted om tho bulletin of the Produce Exchange. Mr. Roberts, sole member of the firm of John Roberts? Son, flour and grain merchant, of No. 10 Front street. was yesterday charged in the Tombs Police Court with: having defrauded the firm of J, H. Reod & Co, out of about $6,000, He was released on bail, ‘ 8, Housman & Co,, importers.of woollens, of Nos. 7B and 78 Worth stroet, have suspended. Their liabititles are understood to be about $125,000, They artribute, their embarrassments to be tho hard times, their ine, ability to collect money dae them and the generat rink: in values. a meeting of the creditors of 8. B, Potter & Co. produce ‘jealers, of No, 13 Broad sircet, was hold yes terday before Rogister Fitch, at No, 345 Broadway, Claims amounting to $45,044 97 wero filed. The City® National Bank of Binghamton withdrew its claim of $14,011 25, after which Nehemiah P, Stanton, vf No, 2 Clift street, was glected assiguee, ‘The creditors of Bondy & Schwarzkop!, tobacco mers chants, No, 143 Water strect, held a meeting at the office of John Fitch, Rogister in Bankruptcy, No. 346 Broadway. Among the principal creditors who fle@ their claims are the following:—Joseph Scheiders $15,000; Havemeyer & Vigelius, $12,705; J Hamburgem, [CONTINUED ON NINTH PAGE.1