Morning herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1837-1840, 1837-07-27

costs mall b recoverable by the party prosecuting,
shall Be such a. would ente the plaintiff to costs,
were ne Judgment sgainsta natural persons and every
issue OF law and Of fact joined in such suit shall be
brought 10 lria according TO the rules apply
to oiher issues joined in the court where the suit ID
pending, Notwithstanding the provisions of section IL
OF title a. OF chapter OF the Sd part OF the Revised
Statutes; and the provisions Of section g. and 10 of
title a, chaps OF the Sd part of the Revised Statutes
shall not be applicable to such suits
He then called the following witnesses:
Daniel +. Tylee examlned-I am a Director in the
Chambers street Bank Of Savings the notes present.
ed are genuine notes of the Commercial Bank; am
often in the habit of receiving and examining the notes
of the said institution they have not the APP
pearance of being forgeries the signatures have no
doubt are genuine.
Alderman Brady examned-I am acquainted with.
the hand writing Of George d. Strong; have often
seen him write; have no doubt but that the sigma
| ture on those notes is in his own hand writing
Saml. Mccoy, examined am in the employ of
Mr. Windt; by his direction took those notes 10 the
| Commercial Bank; presented them for payment;
| the Cashier offered me other notes in exchange;
told him wanted specie; he said the bank does not
pay specie; ne refused to give me specie for them;
therefore brought them back and returned them to
Mr. Wlndt.
| Cross examned-I refused the notes the cashier
of the bank offered me- having been told to receive
nothing but specie for the notes presented; am
certain the notes are the same notes marked them;
marked one in particular; will not be quite positive
that marked the others; believe Mr. Hunt mark
| ed th:m
Mr.. SANFORD, of the firm of Graham, Sanford &
| Martin, appeared for the defence His argument to
the jury was-frst, there was proof of the bills
| being genuine; secondly, it was not made out that
the bills now claimed were the bills originally present.
ed for payment; thirdly, the jury had no EVIDENCE
fourthly the bank had made legal tender under the
suspension act when its cashier offered toredeeT.G
bills presented by the boy Mccoy with current
Specie and refusing the aforesaid bank bills
| the debt due by The bank virtually cancelled;
sixthy, that the bank was borne out by the suspen
SION act in refusing to redeem its notes in specie.
| Mr.. Soue briefly replied, and read the Revised
Statutes title A, sections 8, 8, TO- IL, IL under which
he contended this action could be properly maintained
Judge Irving charged the jury. His honor said:--
The questions for the jury to decide upon were chief
ly-f under the suspension act the banks were JUST
fed in their refusal pay spece-if net, such refusal
would evidently be forfeiture of their charter. By
this must be clear that any bank refusing to pay
specie could be Immediately wound up. There was
rule of law that an action brought against bank,
matter whatever were its numerical order, should
| have precedence of all others the calendar. The
legislature had, however, passed law, by which the
| operation OF this rule was suspended for year.
The cause had however come before them in s
proper turn-nl equlvocaon, therefore, this point,
| was put an end TO.
His honor then commented on the evidence re-
spectpg the proof of the genuineness of the blsof
the signatures &C., which he said chad been incon-
cuded by pemarking-dThe jury must decide whe-
:her the refusal of the plaintiffs agent TO receive
current bank bills for the presented valid
defence for the bank against the claim set up by
| the plaintiff. If the suspension act comprehended
this, and contemplated that tender of the promsso-
ry notes Of other banks shosld be equivalent to
the offer of specie, then the Commercial Bank was
entitled TO verdict. twas not expressed !; the
jury, therefore, Were to decide if such its intent
and meaning. The jury could do this with the great
| err safety, since there doubt the question
would be brought before the supreme court for ult
| mate decision"
The jury, after five minutes elaboration, returned
verdict for the plaintiff against the bank of 1884,
with the interest accrung ON the same SINCE the day
of presentation, the 9Th Of June last which by the IL
sec. title 4, Rev. Statutes, is ten per cent
MARINE Coynr, July 2sth.-Tho Commissioners
of the Aims House of the city Of New York rersas
Rawson g. McMurray. This was suit arising out
ofbreach of the alien importation laws
Mr.. Blunt opened the case to the Jury He stated
that the action was brought to compel the defendants
pay for the support of Margaret Mcclure an aleu-
brought to this country in the British ship Francis
This vessel arrived at Perth Ameoy on the gath Of
sengers The captain on his arriaal, after having
gone thirty miles out of his course, in order TO siude
laws, hired small craft in which his unfortunate
passengers compelled to embark with their bag
gage, and they were landed at Hackensack bridge
The captain of the soop from feeling of humanity
advanced to two individuals the Of Transporting
themselves New York. Both of these persons one
whom is female are now chargeable on the public,
being both in the aims house. The female who was
extremely sick, has brother-in law this city, but
not beng enabled TO support her himself, he applied TO
Rawson a. McMurray to procure assistance from
them. ply ican had been TO see her, and written
prescription, and recommended The patient to take
little wine and porter occasionally. The brother in
law carried this to the agents, Rawson Il McMuray,
who replied they would have nothing to do with her
and one of them tore the prescription into pieces
The brother n-aw therefore applied 10 Mr. Mann,
the Director ofthc Aims House. who has had the wo-
man properly taken care Of and the Commissioners,
through the Corporation Attorney, have brought
their action to obhee these humane agents to furnish
something towards the support Of the beings they
have imported and fastened upon us.
Robert Johnston, examined-I am one Of the firm
Onward Johnston q Burroughs; l know the ship
Francs she is a British vessel she landed nj Perth
Amboy in April last over 100 passengers the vessel
not consigned TO us; the captain brought let
ter of recommendation TO finn did not see the
manifest the defendants in this suit did not take
charge of the vessel; the captain paid the commute
ton tax after the vessel had been in New York I
think three days.
Bath Mcclure, examined remember the landing
Of the passengers &c at Hackepsack bridge; my
sister was on board the Francis she had been sick
oftyphus fever THE witness then went on 10 prove
the facts rs stated by Mr. Blunt in his opening speech
Two or three other witnesses were called 10 prove
the facts as stated. Therevidence clearly established
| them.
The jury returned verdict against McMurray.--
y.