Morning herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1837-1840, 1838-05-03

yawa-the tomb to ops its poadsrsss jaws. The
O0adsman 10 dsad-the subscribing witness is dead
all are dead; and because they are dead vel expose
you 10 nne eqaal 70 the value of Harlem bridgs-a
J fns of $4,000. Ny adversary says he'll try this
cause on its merts. I'm glad to meet him on the
threshold to fight with the setto and not the broad
sword Fortunately the sovereign people Of this state
are not like the soveregns Of Turkey, clothed with
lmmuntes; know of no privileges they have, that
are not possessed by the humblest individual.
MI Z. went on 10 cite authorities The State YER
bus epicott, proptieors 10 Massachusetts, Reports,
l55 it was decided that resolution of the Legislature
n1nE certain landmarks to patent ilght precluded
ne people of the state frsm estoppe He also aaoted
Coke on Littleton, 10 b. where it stated that the re-
for TRUTH because it be supposed hut statute
MADE with the authority Of the whole realm, the COM
mons, the lords spiritual and temporal and the king,
VIII state fasehood. The act of 1903, already men.
uoned, was made by an authority equally high; and
we give more than the preambe-we give the section
ne also referred te Dwarris Statutes, p 40 and
OF Law Label, where il is decided that statute though
repealed may be as evidence TO explain an
other statute or law to which il had any reference.
The Judge said he understood that Mr.. Lord had
contend that the act of 1908 must be considered
ether as grant or as an estoppe: it could not be
gram, because II was not accepted il could not be
atty.
Mr.. Griffin said that he offered it as cumulative
evidence.
Mr.. Lord said thar all the gentleman had spoken
4
sode to the argument and he ready to fight him
with those weapons or with guns and pistols but it
was intended to provoke fight elsewhere than the
weak place, to make appear that the weak spot
IN the bond we should see when got TO the
bridge whether the weak spot in the bond or in
the bridge The act Of 1903 was no evidence that the
bend ever existed they MAJ also give evidence Of
search for the bond If they show that the bond
existed. An unaceeped deed cannot be given as
evidence of recital in that deed. He did intend
TO nick name IT. butt was an estoppel-a recitain
statute cannot be evidence unless it is estoppel
and this IS not estoppel, because is not mutual
That unaccepted charter is evidence Of any things
1t cannot be used fer purpose and not for ano-
Their 1.-The gentleman avoids the ground that it is
estoPpe but he must 60 that, or if not is nullty
The Judge said that 1t was conceded 1t not to be
considered as an esnppel, and also that proving
the loss OF the bond secondary evidence could be in
troduced The question was whether an instrument
not binding as a contract, could be received as owl
denee OF the ADMISSIONS OF one OF the contracting par
ties. He considered that the fact Of its intending to
be delivered and not having been delivered, did not
vary tine concession in the act-thcre was broad
anqgallhed admission by the Legislature that the
bond had been made the Legislature of the state
recognised all the rights and franchises conferred by
the act OF 1875, as possessed by John b. Coles and
all precedent acts of his contingent the enjoyment
OF those rights, must be considered done. I he law
sometimes pressmes things a great extent; some
times acts OF parliament were presumed 10 have been
passed, although they could net be proved Under
The view OF the ease as II now Stood he considered i,
as admissible evidence.
Mr.. Lord excepted.
The last session of the act of March 18th, 1909,
was then read, fslows:-
THAT nothing in this act shall be considered 10 re
lease John b. Coles and Nathaniel Coles, Jun. from a
certain bond entered into by them pursuant to the act
OF 1875, or from every forfeiture incurred by the said
Coles and for which they are now liable, but all the
rights OF this state BY of the said bond or to
the said forfetures to remain in full force as
if his act had not passed"
Mr.. Griffin said that he had disposed of all the is
sues but two One of these was, had Coles kept the
brldgeln repair since II was hniltf He called
Townsend-Knows the bridge since lSll-been
kept in good repair-ampe provision has been made
forit-pank and timber plenty was provided.
Cross examned.-Is a clerk-been agent for nav.
| ment OF dividends to Proprietors.
Lord.-Name the dividends, sir, that YOU have paid,
| and TO whom.
Judge-Is 1t one of the questions atissue, whether
this company has paid these dividends or not? Let's
| look TO HE record.
Lord-The record Gays they had undisturbed en-
joymsnt Of franchise by the receipt of the dividends
Let them show the receipts.
j Witness-Part of the dividends pnd with nv own
hand-and part know from the book-divdends
were paid half.yearly to IL or Is stockhoders-here
may have been occasional lntermisslons. There was
a constitution of the Harlem Bridge Company made
by John Il. Coles-it was in writing. There were 400
shares.
Lord-If these four de rendants are to be punished
to the extent Of $4,000 how much is the whole
/ bridge worth.
| Objected TO.
| Ellen Nudge examined known Harlem Bridge
since l79S-resided there-her father toll gatherer
succeeded Willis the LIST toll gatherer-my father
was toll-gathcrer5 or 6years-his name was Weeks
| my husband succeeded my father-and remained
toll -gat herer till l625-John b. Coles appointed my
husband and my father-bridee was kept all that time
in COED repair-knows this from observation al all
! times.
| Peter Hanneberg examned-Was toll gatherer at
Harlem bridge-succeeded Mrs Mudge-remaned
months put there by the defenhants-wen over il
every day TO see boards not displaced large
enough to adnit horses foot.
Peter Randall examlned-Was tell-gaherer-ap-
pointed by defendants-remancd there I'LL June 1923
had plenty of panks &c. 10 keep il in repar-fur-
nished by Coles Thomson and heir associates am
46 years od-knewn the bridge from n boy-it al
ways carried me over safe.
Lord-Do you know Of vessels being stopped by
| the drawer there7
/ Objected TO.
Gnfin-Ask if the drawer was IL feet wide-they
might have had Noah's ark down there-not our
| fault If Noahs ark couldn't get through.
Witness-Don't know the width of the drawer or
the arch underneath-never measured IT,
Lord-Has not stone been thrown into the channel
under the drawer7
Objected to.
Mr. butler said il this had been done il could not
vitate the charsr-those who did so might be lndct-
ed for nuisance. II the counsel will show that stone