New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-06-28
Superior Court

superior court r iuAfl SA"' 70"
SPECIAL TERN
Before Judge SandfOr1-Judges Duer and Campoel
being also present
Smlh C0ddmgt0n and wlte agt. Jas. Wat
son Webb-The decision OF tins case came up yestef-
day Asto the motion open default on account Of De-
ing aware Of the nature Of the order and injunction
not served although the Court, where party aware
that an Injunction has been ordered a0d he VOL ates
Il even before being served with the order me IOurI
Will hold HIM IN contempt-it IS necessary, however
M serving the copy Of the order 10 exhibit the org
NAL or certified copy which was not done IN lhlS
case as 10 the motion for attachment for violating
the Injunction by Col w abiding % the letters IN
his paper next morning. he merely stated tne pufpOf
OF the letter which was IN ms ahdavN-"hereis the
Injunction prohibited the publishing me letters OF
parts hteraly-the Court considered thdt tOl w re-
ceyed the letters a depository on behalf OF PLAIN
tf-whether the package was sealed or not before
Mr. Willis brought 70 10 the oflce VIII depend upon
the testimony Of Mr. Buckham-ongnal order ap-
pointing receiver confirmed, and molon for attach
merit denied. Judge ;. made some remarks upon
the case A.. HI.
JupeE DUER said he though, proper 10 add fen
words | assent entirely 70 all the remarks OF my
ASSOCIATE but have 20 express my regret that u not
IN the power Of the Court 10 alter the order am
much dissatisfied with The terms Of ne onghA4 Or
der
OPENED for inspection not only BY Mrs Codclngton or
her counsel bat by Col. Webb and hls counsel Inc
propreyy Of giving Mrs C. access TO The letters can
not be doubted II has been suggested oy deiehedht
that IT'S possible these not her levers, Dut "lch
were handed a. her etterS-ln other "Orusi thAt M
Wills fraudu!ently substituted some oiher levers
and The same principle stated by hls cOun-el IN
the argument. Il Is proper mat hfs C0ttulsIOh
should have the opportunity " examine "hslhsI y,
not the letters are the safne-and, II contrary 70 al
urobsbtv they are not her letters sic vail aTe an
onportunlty 20 discontinue the proceedings. but
csnnot zee The prOprety Of permitting Col "eD0'
and more especially ms counsel 70 examine '; les
trrs a, al--and must repeat me Expression o. ny
strongest regret that the matter j. Aoi no" oeioie "
"a authorize u 20 liter The cfUef
n bas oeen said that a knowledge Of me contents
OF the letters may BE necessary 70 snaOle the eodn
sel Of defendant 10 dis harge hs duty toward MN
and that their use NAV be material 70 defendant 70
1sbi nm 10 defend himself In the present or some
other suit that may be brought against him alu ua'
H. counsel therefore, may nghifntT Ied0 NC e.
rs Prom both Of these positions iSsent- iQeAy
that h. cen use the letters IN this SUIT % any o'
and must state Dy strongest nnpfess.yn - - 80,
II IN his power. he cannot, "Ithout DIeG s "a -
fdence and a sacrifice Of character aho b'h"'' NSe
them n defending any sun Whatever i, ..
In the first place these letters canft Dc o. 'eI lcs
On trial II u true the allegation IN the c0ihp.ahe
- tfsf lie Is innocent. and Il ) said, Oh the O'hei
- tbst sesendaut when be comes I'd pui IN MS an
sxer NAV teny the allegation ana usist mat snet
/ cou,ain evidence Of guilt But such an asssleht
would b. wholly iInmaieral II has 10 co..ns I'm
18th me relief she seeks she does not ae u~l
80 sr,r Inc restoraton OF the letters and the only
! $50 We can make-it she establishes they IRE
hers that they shall be restored 70 neE 80 that
I n sefendani. even his answer Hhch' /
trust vii not be- put m-sAOuM lnsiSt upon
fhe evidence Of guilt which the letltrs inrnlsh ne
tIs iss,e VIII be nmaterIal, and Will be struck nom
~ rcra he does not need them, therefore, IN MS
Sefeuse IN The present case and am sure ~ cOuh-
- v5u tell HIM he cannot ia any SUIT Jro1sht ~ III
Mills 50 far as hr. Wills - cOncerheds as 70 I4e
rtbhe aiiOn OF a Incl. Mr. Wills VII! Pfooaoy N