New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1850-12-19
LAW COURTS.

surREmE CouRr-Generd Term-Be tore
Judges Edmonds. Edwards aud Mitchell
Decisious-Lout Mitchell Henry Seorf aHd
4lofs Sckiwssfn ads. The People-Appeals on
judgment as 70 forfeited recoSniEances Ihe
question was the same as that IN G1ilderseeye,
some time since-whether Judgment could BE- en-
tered from the Sessions. Decided in the atirma-
tive as before.
SUPERIOR CouRr.-Before Judge Oakley
John Bronrcq, Rfcctrsr Of TIE Pelican Hatnal IL.
sisrancc Co VS. John II and Wm II. Harbcck-
1t is alleged that in December, lS47, Messrs h.
received from the Company $4,000 IN notes, being
assets of the Company, in payment OF loans by
them and Messrs. Belden to the Company and IN
Guiding loss OF S3,0le on the brig Georgo-thaE,
in February following, petition was presented to
the Supreme Court, by John Peck and William
Britton, declaring the said Pelican Co 70 be nsol
vent, and asking for the appointment Of a receiver
which was granted, and Mr. Brouwer, the plain
titi in this suit, appointed.
The action is to compel Messrs H. to pay to the
receiver the money collected on the said notes
given to them as collateral. and also those given
to Messrs. Beldcu and transferred by latter TO
them, and also the value OF those not C0lected-lt
being couteDded that the Company comes under
the statute as to moneyed corporations that the
transfer to them Of the notes was illegal ami void
not having been done by the previous vote of the
Trustees, and We're so transferred preference,
The various points are denied 1t being con-
tended that the notes were handed to Messrs H.
by the competent officers of the company for dis
couut-that they did SO discount Them when their
claim and that of Messrs Belden were paid-that
the company at the time solvent, and they
were not aware, or had any notice OF oontempa.
ton of bankruptcy, that the previous sanction,
if such were the case, Of the Trustees had not
been obtained 1t is also denied that the compa
nv came within the statute of m0neyed corpora
tions. The case is on.
L. s. DISTRICT CoURr-Before Judge Iudson.-
In the suit brought by the purchaser of the Brit.
ish bark Clarence, to vacate the sale, aud get
back the sum paid by agreement, as deposit At
the sale; already referred to. The Court cousld
cred that what was said by the auctonesr, who
remarked after the party in interest stated her 70
be copper fastened you hear, gentlomen what
Mr. P SAYS" &c. was not such warrantee as 70
rescind the sale. Motion denied
The Grand Jury returned into Court with two
bills against Geo Athertonfo larceny and assault
with dangerous weapon,
The Court did not render decision in the eN-
tradition case of the parties alleged to have com
mitted a robbery in Paris and ordered to be given
The L. S. Circuit Court opened before Judge
.Iudsou, and adjourned to Monday.
CoGRr or COMMON PLEAs-Betore Judge in.
graham - FDe Department Of The CITY Of Ne0-
York vs. Edmond l. Gdle.-This is al important
suit for Infringement of an act tor the more ct
fectual prevention of fire IN the City OF New
York" and the amendment of $40
The law saws that in all buildings exceeding 30
feet in hight from the level of the sidewalk to the
peak or highest point thereof, the party walls
shall not be less than - inches thick and the ends
of the beams which enter the party wall shall not
be less than inches from the ends OF the beams
~, ~ 10 nf oil nd
be solid masonry of said four inches between them
Mr. Gale erected block Of eleven buildings on
the south side of East Fifteenth st near trst-av
The Trustees of the benevolent fund OF the Fire
Department whose duty it IS by law to prosecute
for infrngemcnts and to which the penalty
enures) come in claiming penalty OF 8 600 IN
der the act, on each house so erected by MI u,
and in addition penalty of 800 on each house
for every "a hours since the 10th OF August, 1t
being contended that the buildings OF MIR. Gale
were over 80 teethgh, did not have l2-lnch party
walls, nor are there four inches between the ends
OF the beams the two sides OF the walls, but
only two and three inches, Sc-that he was notl'
ned on the <oth Juty thus irts b,tiIi.5- IA
infringement Of the law, and that he must take
measures to remedy the matter, and that he should
have taken such measures, according to law, by
the 9th OF August but that he wholly omitted to
do so-and the penalty OF Sll,090, with Sl,l00
for every "a hours after said 10Th OF August, nc.
cording to law. on the said eleven Buildings, IS
therefore claimed.
1t was shown that the latter portion of the pen.
atty was deducted or omitted by compromise, aud
Judgment was ordered in favor OF the department
for Sll,00o and costs.
Frederjca G. Bauer vs. Lopis Bauer.-orderof
TriaI Tam-Beiore Judge Woodruff-Josepb
B. HeaSaav vs. Hhn. Leacennoh Action for
alleged SANDER, in calling plaintiff thief and
various other names at store No. l21 Fultonst.
The parties had some difficulty about books which
had been kept by Mr. H. and hard terms, it ap,,
pears, were used By both Of them. 1t was denied
that the term thief was applied 80 as to charge
Mr. H. with being one. The Jury found for de-
fendant.
FIRST DISTRICT CoCRr-Before Judge Green.
Important Spit as 10 refQtUe jirTsaictoH Of Doc@
Masters and Ha16or Masters The Aayor, Se
of Neag- York VS. Eldr5dge a satior an board the
schooner Brill,ani-Thls action was brought to
recover the penalty OF $50 for refusing to obey an
osJ.- Of Cpo Of ha Dock Masters OF the First