The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1851-03-01
Cryder and Mckay and the Milwcukis
ROuds.

Before Recorder Telmadge, at Chambers
Yesterday morning, the writ Of cert0rari, made
turDahe 81 10 o'clock before his Honor the Recorder
noticed In the Herald eff yesterday in the matter
pending against James Mckay and John p Cryder, to
stow cause why, and By what authority OF Law the
raid parties thus restrained Of their liberty By
the police magistrate was heard.
The counsel for the accused parties present at
the appointed hour, and Mr. Blunt the District At
tornsy, accompanied by Justice Lothrop, like
have the return made TO the cotoror served on tho
magistrate the day previous Mr. Blunt then pro-
dueed the following return, m sde by the ssuate
hErrRS.
In pursuance of the susexed writ Of eertiorart, /,
jeremiah Lothrop, one Of III, Police Justices Of the
city Of New York, certify and return to Frederick A
Tallmsdge. Recorder OF the city OF New York that
James hcksy and John p Cryder. the persons namsd
In raid writ Of c.rtors were, on tbs 25th day Of Feb
ruary, instant brought before upon duly
issued under my hand copy Of which warrant 10
hereto annexed marked (A that the OF the i'm
sufficiently forth In said ~srrant aud that 1t the
time q the receipt Of the ~r. Of cetiora in this
anime the PLEASANT and other witnesses In por,
Of the prossc ution on oath In the presence n the
pr'oners in regard to the offence charged and such
j. I0raRo?, Police Justic.
Erw YonK, February 20. 1851.
On the reading OF the above &g Sanford stated 10
believed that this was not such return as the witt
required and no prepared 90 show that the papers
In the esse already before the magistrate should BE-
produced
The Recorder replied that 10 reference to this mat
ter appears IL IL st pending before the magistrate
and he doubted much the propriety Of Interfering
with the investigation sntn come adj adication lad
be made By the Justice.
"a messenger here anne into toe ofho &C. and stated
tina. Mr. san1fore Va, wanted Immediately in the Cir
cult Court
Lees to hear oounse en- either side; Rad ss Mr. sand
ford vas complied 20 leave he would d5oern any
further proceedings until clock that afternoon.
krKEKsooS HxaRtso.
At4 o'clock, the appointed hour, the case
suned Mt sanford said In reerenees 10 the return
made that II does not set forth the authority al all
There IL jet We allege the fscts forth
the sonplssot do not In Law show enough TO war.
rant The d't~nten OF these srtses The Justice has
right 10 restrain the liberty OF the defsudants
when the fact does not sxh,bt enough to chow that
several Au boriti.s In the supp1rt Of his argument
Mr. Blunt the District Attorney cohtee1ed The. the
return made ves ell that nscesssry he d~aisd
the right oir concurrent Jurisdiction 70 interfere
Here r Blunt cited from Ieopi- Bssack. 18th lar
bonr, 81 The question vas, teen the power q iu-
also. .rtm the second Revised etatut.. D. 60 as
bret fslbour $40 sec % aud aith Hil. leS: Peo-
pie asssn,t heOloud , .eoc third uill, geo aud
.vera' otterauthofi,iss vete given In order 10
tain %. Argument set forth.
Mr. Gsndiord IN reply. .atd that oil Judicial on GERS
have powers andtbe kecorcsr has the to
Gaze from the magistrate tsias bot he dsnisd tae
po,,.ssson OF pcssr By Police justice TO re-
move case pending before the Rsosrd.r; therefore
the ut Grisdction net applicable In this
cass. X. ssndi0ri whose Argument cas- vsry forc.-
BIZ, sEain cited from ond Aevis.d statutsc $40
sec az. 1in,t-.n W-ndle. sol: alec tssrty. thire
Wendls.slT We ask raid be tss ths rate sued
b, s ssii.., duly = no. ssS Justly We Seu; ID.
here annsEei not sufficient; IL IL necessary - sho~
according 20 ne stat1te, the authority shish the
emplsint y founded
nr Van B1r.n on the part Of the d.fsroe Addressed
ID. Rscord-c IN ~, usual clos usnt manner the
pending mastsr, adding q little sarcasu, vklsi he
soiisbed on s,ry neatly as he proceeded along Hs
said 70 reg-stssft TO ind that u,tc Lothrss
what unfavorss = u esfrsrr and instead OF wishing
10 be relieved .! ID. hearing and troubls ~ ~ould CO.
casion him, By continuing the case b. .esmsGo bold
% tee Lat'er and don't sisn 70 LEI i g. froS his jr
fi.dictiop. Mr. Fsn Barsr then coetinued kis srsa-
mint Al some length In substance. and 10 the effect
tbst The writ OF ccorar hal not besa fully eemplied
With In the return made By the masis,rAte: and a.
tle conclusion 81 Mr. Van Barren remarks Mr. Rlu,f
aSsn briefly snudee 20 the case and X vas thee sab.
nstftof
The Recorder raid that the ease va. one Of inror.
tanes ssa Trseed-nt would reesibly be established
~ his tscisiou lie therefore weud take short tine
% make NJ bic mind OF the sshsct. An application
vac tier made 20 tail the defendants Mr. Van Bu.
ssii that hs clients could give bail IN the sum Of
$1,000; with the ptovi.ion hovsvar that In 80 doing
they uoSld not Ne declared from the cros. ,xamias.
Hon o. the complaints. The district attorney con-
sdsfsd that the bail uple 20 insure their steni-
suce and guaranteed the rgttg ~ the defendants u
the examination required. TO day the required bail
will to entered into before JEstics Lotktop and the
accrued parties liberated from custody.