Morning herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1837-1840, 1838-07-19

ed down-the fences torn up-the venerable old man.
sion OF ten successive Dulch generations was TO be
demolished-a dock and pier were to be built water
nights were 10 be de6ned-parks and squares were 10
take the place of cow yards and duck ponds
church was TO be erected on the site of the old dorn
cil-and collegiate institute TO be raised from the ru
ms OF an antqsated goose pen. Streets and courts
and places, and avenues were TO n'ersee and cut up
the cabbage garden and pea patch-the salt meadow
was to be converted into an elegant parade ground
with splendid fountain in the centre for which par
pose there abundance of water in the immediate
vlcinty-the poat0e field was TO become the base OF
magnificent coonade- the devoted clam bank
which had nourished their Dutch ancestors, was to
become the support of postsrty by be-
ing transformed int banks of discount and deposlte
But there was one great difficulty IN the way. IL re-
qulred the sanction Of the legislature to do all this ef
fectuay and 10 induce the legislature OF New Jersey
TO vouchsafe great privilege it required the agen-
cy of powerful influence and powerful argument. SO
the majority of the above named individuals employ
ed Mr.. Abraham /. Hlyer, the plantff IN this SUIT,
to get the permission of the legislature to carry Their
plans into operation, which mission he executed with
infinite honor 10 himself and success to his employers
after legislative siege OF seven weeks and hall
The amount claimed by Mr.. Hillyer for this service
was o., 500, which Mr.. James C. Zabriskie OF New
Brunswick, swore was not an overcharge, bat was
for less than which he would not begin to lobby
for no how they could fix il.
The defendant, who is a remarkably modest man,
was very willing 10 pay the amount claimed, but was
rather conscientious about establishing so dangerous
precedent. He therefore entered upon his defence
by proving through the testimony of Mr.. b. +. Van
Cleve the following facts, which he coAended vita
ted the contract and rendered the obligation of the
defendant entirely null and void.
1t was proved that Mr.. Van Clcve was to have the
secretaryshp of the concern at salary OF $5O0
year, $500 year for editing democratic newspaper
that was to have been established in the new city,
and moreover the perquises 10 be derived from the
drafting of bonds and mortgages which altogether
would have made his salary amount TO $500 per an
mum.
But the city never was bgt although the law was
passed-the corn fields and potatoe patches remain
in the same position they were, save and except the
streets, and courts and avenues which had been run
through them; therefore no real benefit had accrued
TO the company. Not bit. Moreover it was con-
tended that the plaintiff had used undue means in OBJ
tanning This charter.
Ii was solemnly asseverated that the defendant
had Bought over majority Of the New Jersey Lee
gislature by treating hem to champagne and terra
pms, and taking advantage Of their nebrlaon dur
ing the said champagne reves by extoring from them
| promise TO vote Tor his bill.
Mr. Van Cleve however testified that champagne
was not the usual mode of operating and did not
1 think that any members were ever bought for cham
payne alone. Champagne, AT the same time was a
matter of course sort of article among lobby MEM
bers, and gentlemen ually resort 10 champagne on
| very special and interesting OCCASIONS.
| 1t was furthermore proved by the same witness
that $lC0 had been paid TO plaintiff on account OF
seven weeks lobby services, which was all he had
Il Il W q
for board during his soourn al Trenton. The amount
| of compensation claimed was $500 which, in his
bill was classified for work and labour" the bal
ance was for tavern and travelling expenses.
The property was proved TO be worth previous to
the passage of the law, Sl60 000 and afterwards
4 valued, in shares, at $500 900.
The deposition of Mr. Zabriskie also set forth that
the plaintiff wa capital lobby member, and opera
bers use great deal Of champagne that nothing
can be done well without it, and 1t would rsqulre an
outfit of $500 to begin 10 lobby with, in order TO fur
n,sh suppers, &c.
The testimony here closed
| The counsel for the defendant summed up very
briefly to the jury, by telling them that this acton
was based in bribery and corruption, and in short
| that the business Of lobby members to get men,
bers drunk upon champaign, and while in that state
| make them promise 10 vote for their bills
The counsel opposed was highly indignant at these
scandalous insnuatons, but advised the jury 10 pay
NO attention whatever 10 them, pathetcaly observing
that he had heard men have the hardhood 10 assert
that in our own state members had les islated
for banks in which they personally Interested
And concluded by remarkng that Mr.. Hillyers SER
vices bad been arduous in lobbying the bill through,
| and he ought TO be paid for them without any more
hambugging about II.
The court charged very sensibly. The first qucs-
ton be determined was, had the plaintiff been en-
poyed at ALL and SO, was the sum charged too much
| for his services. But the main question is, the
plaintiff employed for honest purposes, was heem-
poyed for the purpose of procuring dishonest legisa-
iion IL he were honestly employed, there would be
no difficulty in finding for the plaintlh-but il dishon-
estly, he was not entitled TO recover IL appeared
however IN this case that the parties stood upon
equal fooung-the one for employing, and the ether
for beng employed in a dishonest pursuit the agree
ment was void. The rule Of law was in such case,
to give to neither party the protection Of the law or
10 afford them opportunity Of coercng each other.
IL could not be said that every agreement Of this
ture would be void Fer instance, the agreement OF
an attorney other agent, who was employed to at
tend the legislature for the purpose of making certain
| explanations, would be good. But there wide
| difference between that and an open attempt TO use
private influence by means Of suppers and cham
paign the legislature; such course, If pursued,
would be corrupt and every contract under il would
be void. Ii this not decided the legislature
would be surrounded by men who would importsne
them continually upon different subjects Any man
who votes frsm private interest private friendship,
| Is corrupt; and votes imporuned by harassing MEM
bers privately. or by brbing them with suppers, &C.,
arc dishonest means, and those SO employed are
not entedto any compensation for their services
The Court instructed the jury that if they thought the
services Of the plaintiff had been honestly rendered
they would give him verdict for his claim bat il
they should think that they were dishonest services
| he was not 10 be allowed any thing. IL would be,
continued his honor, sanctoning legislative mpurity,
TO auhose legislators 10 hire out their for cham
pagn and suppers, in order TO further the views OF
pnvate individuals.
Verdict for the defendant