New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1847-02-01

S,,xs,oa Cot-Er-Before Chief Justice Jones and
Judges Oakley and Nanderpool-be ISL . s.-Oh
the motion of Mr. Duer for the admission OF gentle
,ean under the new Constitution TO practice AS an Al
torney of the Court. The question afiser he oniei
Justice said as 10 the power OF the Court 10 grant ap
pications of the kind The 9Th section oth arhee' OF
~ ,y Consti,ion says that any male citizen who -
2 wears OF age and upward and who possesses he ne
cessAry qualifications as to learning ana aD.y' s1a ~
entitled 10 admission to practice IN our courts rHuei
the same section which prohibs Courts nance oi ~
,,g,, ,e,sons 10 public Office IL j. contended mat
Legislative enactment must be had before persons can
be admitted 20 practice, on the ground at attorney
councillors Sc are public officers Inc Court docs nor
,birL his ohiectiou euable Granting 10 persons u"
rght TO practice a. members OF the oar aoes 10. ase
them public officers They arc 20 n1shu ~ 'ne
nor receive any saloy hvii 80 -, ,
- . ,rer thsy have undertaken Tin This respect they
stand on the principle as many trades ana pursuits
authorized under law By the Mayor Inc Court con
.iders itsei at liberty therefore, 10 admit persons 10
nractice The next question il as 10 the mode The
new Constitution does not point any particular time as
recently has been the rule 10 serve IN lawyers ONCE
The only test that he BE- citizen 81 years OF age and
upward of good moral character and possess the nee
essary qualifications II he 10 this, the Court
has no option In the business, but must admit him In
order 20 ascertain this the Court considers set At Id
erty personally % examine the applicant examine him
in omen Court appoint examiners Tor that purpose
the only question being whether be possesses the quail
fcations pointed out by the Constitution, no matter
when OF how be obtained his knowledge. The apph.
cant in this case viii be admitted If found 10 the
Constitution and Messrs VIM. Bets and b. Robinson
are appointed examiners.
Judge Vsnderpoel gave written opinion coinciding
in the views and Judge Oakley also made remarks
upon the subject tie did not consider u necessary 10
REQUIRE person TO have served any particular time
clerk nor did be consider the principle good one 10
ascertain qualifcaton-he would rather depend upon
the recommendation Of the head Of Office as 70 the
ability of a clerk than Judge Of i from any particular
time that b. has served. Az 10 sscetaining he quAn
cafon he would have been satisfied T. leave with the
rule laid down By the Supreme Court still he willing
10 ion in with the views already expressed IN relation
10 the matter
q ~ Cl4rk & Co ". ~ NsreksRs Bagk.-suit 10 re
cover $1,000 sent by plaintiff 10 John II. smith Co.
and transferred By latter the bank The Court gave
Judgment for plaintiff but on the application OF Henry
f. Davies Esq counsel Of the bank judgment was sus
pended I'LL today.
YIN. UAHl0eE vs.. Ely Grisa, q Ito recover a
quantity Of gloves puroined some time since " the then
second mate Of the packet chip Albany from Havre and
80 10 Nessrs q ( Co. they not knowing how the
oves had been obtained They contend that the gloves
claimed were not the those they bought The
CONT considers from the evidence that they were the
same New trial denied ,.,,
Jgsas, T. SerrsH W. Rod1rick SedgEct.-Ihe plsnrn
sued in troyer to note OF $40 which he gave
Mr. sedgwick 10 discount or get discounted VINO 40
vsnced but 500 and passed then0te away Inc plan
ia rendered the 500 bsk but did not get the note sf
sedg,yick claiming commissions. Judgment iof Piln
M In amount Of the nots. e.,
GEO p Updise end 9fsas Va tiies T. L9ssyt--SeiH
orari-Jut gmeni for defendant Affirmed.
I'm sgsrrs e as IS OcezH ms. Co.-On lhsuIAhce
Of crockery ware IN the slp WliAm BOWL 4o' a. ga
New trial granted