The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-12-18

contract was made with defendants by Hayward wtG
MnO were employee BY the paint for ~
nett cash. dutT 10 IN q gin q 81 2 sf s
on duty the gin to be transferred in bond custom house
susge and city vantage That defendants called spss
pantn the afternoon Of the day Of the SALE between
2k and o'clock with some papers (but no trsnsfer
Of the gin to the plaintiff the entry produced 81
the deendants and demanded payment for the GIN thsa
the plaintiff refused to pay them that time but re-
uested defendants TO leave the papers for few days.
transfer made the gin would be paid for. The defendan
took the paper. and ren away va and after
value from 81 12 to 81 3510O day suit
menced Defendants conended that they had BY the or
Of the papers, complied with the contract their part
that day. insisting that Il the plaintiffs duty 70 pay
or the gin on the day OF the SALE The Justice he4
ensmins me tbs va. G ensd Tue 70 % s
mand before r. NJ the day Of was unreasonah1
aud that TO ents the defendants to succeed in this
ZION, they should show that within reasonable time
they bad caused proper transfer to plaintiff be Uadss
ana the papers properly executed to be rendered 2.
plaintiff $500 and costs.
THE TAYLOR SALOON AFFAIR.
Birdsal rs. Taylor and others.-The following Il The
decision Of his Honor Judge Mccarthy in this case IL
ready reported
The Court in thi, held that the false imprisoo-
mitted Of dispute upon the evidence That the law
did not require that should BIO actually bound
oycrawed by manifest superior physical force. That
at their command to carry out design to restrain ths
plaintiff Illegally Of his liberty defence tho actioa
slightest exercise Of physical force carry out such
illegal restraint The Court further said thatas the evil
the premises OF the defendant Tayor in his presence
and by his servants there engaged in his business ana
with his at least tacit sanction, he became thereby
party to the trespass The circumstances said HIS
Honor need but be recapitnlaed show the applica-
ton OF my remarks to the defence set up The PLAINTIFF
and friend entered the refreshment saloon or resa-
rant kept by the defendant Taylor the corner u
broadway and Franklin street this city. The other
defendants there in the employ Of Taylor. II ap
charge for which Gfty cents the plaintiff offered In
payment a FIVE dollar bin the Medina Bank Tho
clerk or waiter to whom the rendered declno&
receiving the bill In payment saying, the hank wss
.shaky and might break in a few days. The plain
ed 500 in bills of that bank, which he stated ho
had received from Judge Beebe and finally after giving
Cd without the bill having been received or payment
Of the fifty cents made, to leave the premises.
and at the door was met by the defendant Nc
Naliy, who thrust his body against the plaintiffs and
refused to permit him egTess unless he paid the ffty
cents or left the bill without receiving change which
last the paintif refused do, The defendant McNauy
did this at the direction Of the defendant Pierce and
while the parties in this attitude towards Ona
another the defendant Taylor came up to the scene AZ
disturbance and after conversation with the
ties, permitted matters to remain in satu quo, without
any on his part to cause the
as their drst point that the plaintiffs tender or bank
bi was not good not being specie hold the objection
they nave tnat specific objection NJ
the time As their second point they insist that undee
the English law an innkeeper has afght to deain tho
person q nonp paying guest until payment This =
bad, nrsf, because In this State be impkf-
soned for debt and second the defendant Tay
lor's establishment ls not inn. That the defendant
Taylor ehond have ava;lcd himself Of his own rirhts
which we're TO require payment In advance or to hare
sought his remedy by action his debts -
every other creditor Is compelled to do The eeendsnts
are equally guty--wc cannot discriminate betwecu
their guilt for though perhaps Taylors interference
with the plaintiffs liberty was not as active that q
a fnArd ante Ix.Ylh
aud one word orhs would have ended the imprisoaen3
at oncehe In fact should be held equally responsible
and perhaps Ieprchcns blc Considering the pain
ful exposure to which the plaintiff subjected
crowded thoroughiarc, with a c0ncourse Of his fellow
citizens drawn around lv the incident witnesses or bis
HI initiation and the ah OF any one 10 be placed in
tniiar rrcdioament, feel compelled, by way Of
ton and example to give exemplary damages. Judg.
ment Tor the plaintiff against all defendants $3.50 DANA
ees, with costs aud allowances.