New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1853-02-07

ssrsrded with these aatcipa,ions On
he sth OF December tho order oi rHiuneton tohfI
Nth cory Ct the summons and complaint were u~y
s.rved upon the Mayor, AMI upon t1e sahS ~.
- f,IIoxjnr dsT. the IN unctisn, WIKI coy o.
he summons was served upon each msnDe- o. ~
p0.-d ri Aldermen On the evening Oi the I'm q De-
cerbsr the Board Of Aernen met and the resoiliion
rsskipg tie grant 70 S1rp and his sssociGes oelnS
L-o,- fo-vvsr 1r eratsn twas a-aln pAs-e-
the Alderman nov before u and twelve Of ala s.Socs
vot.ng for is adoption. Aud IN order Il w0uii seem,
tb.t no doubt might rssn ss 70 the nature aud norFr
f.beir s.ior the rao-v OF TIE Board upon The same
evening and upon the notion Of Alderman surrey o-
adortsa certain resolutions. which are 80 o-tl A. Ai-e
in the pspers before e. but " lch we deem u aanec
co. nov - -ete Il i suScisut % sly that one 81
these resolutions declared that was ne daty Oh we
Common Council 70 pr0ects own dlgaiy ana ne nm.
OF IL constituents, the people OF It's cry ~ usEy
ciSrernrdi-- TIE Injunction upon ls lesi-lVe aca45u'
,ns fecsrrr Ii or sense Of the same snt tlst pre-
srnhle tn the resolutions which was adoptei IN aei
declared their sense Of the injunction % denoanc
inc t. IN no measured terms a. an snenpI w1taoa'
color OF law Justification. 20 direct AMI csniroi tae
rnvp.,ual legislation a the Cry ~ bearing u2on -
face character Of ndiseretcn not less unlltnaoe AMI
rot les unworthy the judiciary than ~ usurpafl1n
OF auihorrv and jurisdiction and a. precedenI Oh az
rrsrreuied and unwarruntable interference WIN the
-irhful functions powers and duiis o. ieglsia5Te
body The original resolution OF grant, ana tle adl.
tcral resolutions vindcafing the rights AMI dTnhY OF
.Ie Ccrnr,rp Council were sm-te1 70 the Bolr1 OF
Assistant Aldermen and on the evening OF M J1th o.
pecru Der the original resolution was ad1pted oy Ast
h,iv acton tle0 ilt- e.Cc 'u
tsken on the additional resolutions does not appear On
rhesarne evening tee associates named in the original
rcsciu-.cn By a writing signed BY them al, ana aled
with the Clerk Of the Common Council. sl1nined their
acceptance Of the resolution and their agreement to
conform thereto and thus Il these proceedings were
valid the grant which The order OF nuncton pron6ef
the defendants from making became absolute snd tne
grantee acquired the very right liberty ana prve OF
iavirg track for railway IN Broadway, when me ~
junction, BY express words, bad strictly commandei
/ should not be given. -
made thar minority Of the members OF the presen;
Board Of Aldermen have deliberately chosen TO place
thcuseIvcs toward This Court and - proceedings (or
the set OF the Judge who suei he injunction mat OF
the Ccurt-Codc t2Ic ~ relation o. direct and open
hostility Admitting Oh air own knowledge OK TIE order
/ OF iuurctun and Of the reasons upon wnicn Y was
/ f0urlci-reasors which they have declared 70 ne
unicrshle N aT and uniOunded IN lict-c 1etru'hS
the order rs commanding them 70 desist AID refrain
| from the performance Of the act which they were
determined perform ant have perform 't-tney nave
chosen % trcct Il o. "a Illegal assumption Of authority,
an exercise Cf power without right, wIcl their iuy 20
themselves end 90 their cous tuen's required hen 70
disregard ard 80 Relying on their own Nnowl 'i5e
nrd convict not only 3fthe own duties lud powers
ivt q the duties ard pos of the Judiciary Of the
STATE tley have pu,Gciy raised an issue which his
Court = PEELED % r. Get and bound % dc-erul-nc
Tlst Issue L. whether ts Court ~ IN unprecHient'd
stretch O. Judicial authority. hs lnvaded me province
/ End violated the rights 81 the Common Council n
legislative tCiv, those members 90 tlTt body WAC
c-eylv den ell and boldly isrsrardel the authority II
tbs Court guilty Of the criminal DIS oedeace wifn
/ which they are charged, and We ere now called
urcn 20 pur-sh. The qucstiJus therefore winch TINS
motion involves. posses no ordinary interest II 2,
fst Is all thst they ln ne ordinary degree grave ana
irichte With Just sense Cf their iulpc rance, they
have been ClabCrucly argued By the counsel of the par
toe and have been carefully and suNi0u-y considered
hv ourselves For obvious reasons y would 'e desr
tble were h pCshls that the questions should be te
tcruued rs another tribunal; bat a. no suca transfer
could be made OF our jurisdiction, we must not sal ""
! not shrink from the responsibility which the law I'M
poes u the nunc ti0n that has been issued was IN
deed an uniUslfabe excess Cf jurisdiction an unprcce
deu'ed sct Of Judicial power, 10 viii be our duty ~ con-
fees and with IN possible expedition correct tie error
but II The lawful mandate OF The art, issued N the eN
crc..c Of ia known ursiicton has been publicly de
nounccd and wholly disregarded by those p whom u
directed, ADD VINO were from the4r otciI position
under peculiar Obligation 20 respect and obey TO- We
should indeed be unworthy Of our station could We heat
tate to naintain nrmy the righ's OF the Judiciary AMI
viudicetc efcctualy tie EsUited hut trust s-i par
amount authority Of the law.
We proceed 20 the ium Hate consideration of tne
questions thtthayc been DISCUSSED.
II has been cortcndcd tina, Alderman Stnrteyan, s
not able attachment for the contempt with which
BE- j. charged Tor the following reasons:
Frst-Bccbuse he is not party TO the suit. and the
law il settled that il is only party against whom teet
is sought and may be given, who IS bound by an nuac'
ton.
sccond-Becsuse the service of the Injunction upon
him irregular and void not being accompanied by
The service 81 copy 81 tee AFFIDAVIT, the verified CON
plaipt upon which IL was founded.
ThTlBecause The only breach OF the injunction with
which be charged consists in the act OF Voting Tor the
resolution 10 which 10 refers an act 20 whch tue terms
Of the iGr ction do not apply and which they were
not intended 70 restrain.
And lastly bccau,e II the M Junction must be constr
Cd as intended re-tl the reconsideration and adop
Il Nv the Common Council OF the resolution IN ques
ton the Prohibition, a. Illegal snd void properly
disrcgoTLed no Court OF law or equity having any
jurisdiction 10 control In any case or for any reaons
the legislative action OF corporate ana more especially
OF municipal body.
These objections viii be considered in the order in
which they have been ss'ei The first that dr Stdrte
vait j. not party 70 the tult, and therefore, not
bound 10 ob,y tie Injunction all OF opinion can
not be sustained. Il Is unneces arr now - determine
tie question Whether under the provisions OF the Cole
(ccfion 2l9) peTsou 10 whom uunconis directed
is wholly excused from obedience unless ne Il party
O. the suit and OF those .ainEt wlOm relief de-
maudcd IL VIII be time enough b consior and decide
THE question, (Which s peIhep-, more doubtful than IL
% have been reggried) when II shall properly
arre IN case before IL does arise in the
before ", for the PLATA reason that Mr. Stueyant
If IN judgment OF party 20 the suit He Is no, n.
deed parry m L- proper name or rs mere in1v!ig
al but he IN his Official character aud u hs per
sCual action N that character La the Injunction not
only By IL legal construction but by is express words
seeks 10 restrain. Il + not aG lresscd 70 the Mayor, Al
cTmL and COMMONLY OF the Ci,y ahstr ct net
EILyECcl beiI but u Is addressed 20 each individual
member Of the whole corporate body, and controls
perorG action Of every Of them whose consent or
cooperation might be necessary 20 tie completion OftGe
ocIpOTae &C. which it,fic'ly prohibits I, imposes
commend and duty upon eyerg Of them 70 refrain
absolutely from pertaining or cOncgrrng IN the peror
OF the prohibited aci for tie very purpose aud
tie neceseafy means ofpfey1niing from becoming
/ act Of the Corporation.
Ii "a Lot true. the objection we are considering
plainly assumes, that when judicial command Ia rela.
ton 10 q corporate act-a mandamus or Injunction l.
directed % corporation solely by u corporate nans-
the members and officers through whom alone the
porltion may disregard with entire impanity
AID by their dlscledsnce render the process Of the
Court wholly Intellectual. Tie law, we apprehea1 .s
oJherwise settled Tnat the mandGtc Of the Court In
these may with entire prOprety be directed
cusvey 70 the corporate body by ~ corporate
has not been deLed and there decisions
that show that wi such i the form OF the order or
wri' % / operative AID binding not only upon t4e cor
po4sion ifiei but upon every person wacse personal
scti0n member or officer OF the corporate body il
seeks 70 RESTRAIN control Every such persOn l. a.
fully bound y persaLal obedcnce % h nersoh ntnel