New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-02-07
CITY ITEMS.

RAPACITY ROUGH-SHoD.-Our meek and
self-denying Aldermen who were the very perfec
ton of dsintere sickness last October playing
the game of Retrenchment and Reform bravely.
The moment they settled into their seats, there
came perfect shower Of resolutions calling for all
sorts of information, and putting all the heads o.
Departments to as much difficulty as possible.
Then they attempted to outlaw the dongs of their
predecessors for the purpose of seizng upon seye-
raj large contracts for their hungry partisans.
They next instituted rigid inquiry into tenure of
slerSshpS, SC, so as to grab all that could be
reached in that direction and so ferocious were
they for power OF appointment, that they quaTeled
with their own friend the Commissioner of Sheets
and Lamps, because he had the temerity to appoint
lamplighters without asking the permission of GER
tain Aldermen and Assistants, whose own right to
seats in the Hall and at the table svery doubtful
Afesolution offered 10 turn Harry out OF ONCE
on the ground Of non.fesd nces but 1t did not pre-
vail, because there was law which covered the
case.
They next laid violent hands upon the City In
spectors business altering the organic law of the
Department - suit their own purposes, turning out
the Deputy Inspector and sezing upon the appoint
ment OF night scavengers so We presume these noe
turnal visitors will hereafter be of the pure Loco
zeal at primary election rows.
But on Wednesday night, while sitting as Snperyi-
sors the Aldermen thle enc smeasure ofusurpation
whchs OF the mos: serious nature, and ought open
ewes of the people 10 the characte. OF these the
pretended champions OF Economy. This proposed
measure is nothing less than the seizure of all The
school money Of the County, that 1.-The party" shall
have the sole benefit Of It's distribution. Finding
State law in the way, they direct the Counsel OF the
Corporation to ask the Legislature for act author
iziDg the Supervisors to examine revise, alter d.
minish froS, or add 10 the mOnev asked for by the
Board Of Education in any Of the items in their es,i
mate. Such an out ageous pfonOSltiun needs no
comment. The idea OF making our schools subject
10 the control Of body always violently partisan,
usually corrupt, and never tnan ordinarily in-
telhgent. Is worthy the party jugglsrs from whom 1t
comes. We have 40 fears of their succeeding but
the people might well make a note of this, and
await further developments.
IMPORTANT DECISIONS UNDER THE CoDE.
In the case Of Hugh Kelly against John b. Overton,
ned before Judge DAILY IN the New York Common
Pleas, the action was on promssory note of
$sss IS, plaintiff claiming $500 and interest.
II appeared that Tanner. Wa.ney & Co, Jane
McMnimeS Thompson, gave their note Endorsed by
defendant Oyerion for $685. for bill of furniture,
receiving, fact. only s297 90 thereof When that
note became due OseTton took il up by giving the
note in suit, which was auerwaYd transferred by
Nickname Thompson 10 the plaintiff.
The defense was usury. the rate set Up being 10
per cent. The interest included in the last note,
~ % LOT hirsy days amounted 10 about IL per cent.
MI J. Nelson, counsel for plaintiff, called Thomp-
son. one oil the payees and ndorsers OF the note to
explain the mistake in the calculation of the inter-
est. Thereupon Mr. ]. II. Eager, defendants coun-
sci, called his own Client the defendant 10 contra
dict Thompson, and though objection was made,
the Judge held that he was coupe.en, under \ pro.
vision OF the case which provides that ,phea The a.
sgnte Of claim brings and calls "a. asssuor ne
utess fhe defendant may be ,citnsss TO tesfy m
his behalf
The objection seemed TO be that Thompson was
not an assignOr, but the Judge seemed DESTROYS to
give the Code, on that point, liberal construction
II Was objected by plaintiffs counsel TIA, as de-
PENDANT had defense set up usary at the rate of
bpeT cent that must be proved aSIaid, aud that
though a larger amount or rate was taken or agreed
upon, the defense must falkland the Judge 50 ia
sfrretsd the Jury.
Af,er argument, pro aud con, the testimony being
conflicting, plaintiff had verdict for the amour!
claimed
The decision on the former point shows progress"
shat on the latter adheres 10 the old aw strictly; but
'nis appeared to be because Of the peculiar aud
psnsi nature OF the defense the law 10 usury be-
W not favored, but fairly and strictly construed.
~ The sunken specie has been re-
covered with the exception OF about $3.50.