The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-01-01

convicted OF contempt, were variously SEN
fenced. Alderman Sturtevant was ordered to
be imprisoned in the City Prison for the space
Of fifteen days, and to pay fine Of $3.50 and
$l02 costs Others escaped the sentence Of
imprisonment, but were mulcted IN like fine
and costs. The matter was brought before the
Court of Appeals, and yesterday decision was
rendered affirming the decision of the Superior
Court. Thus runs the record. The great ma
jority Of the Aldermen and Assistants who
composed the late boards have been deprived
of Office by the nearly unanimous vote of their
fellow-citizens-their grand scheme had been
signally frustrated and now Imprisonment and
fines are imposed upon them for their proceed
ings. The new Common Council-the Reform
ers enter upon their duties to morrow What
will be the result Of their labors?
DINNER TO GENERAL WooL.--The dinner given
last evening to Gen. Wool, by the citizens Of
Troy, preparatory to his departure for Califor-
mia, under orders from the War Department,
may be regarded as an event of some political
significance 1t is pretty generally known now
that General Wool's exile is not by any means
dictated by regard for the efficiency Of our
military force on the Pacific. A much more
direct motive has been the cause /; and if it had
not been found possible to remove Gen. Hitch
cock, we have no doubt that Marcy would have
found means to despatch Gen. Wool to the Rio
Grande, or even to join Commodore Perry's
Japan expedition. Any change of quarters
which would have removed so dangerous rival
from the scene Of action during the coming
Presidential canvass, would have answered the
purpose of the aspirants to the succession. The
manGuvre being generally understood in this
light, the Troy dinner may be regarded as
political manifestation, having direct bear
ing on Gen. Wool's chances for the next Presi-
dency. 1t is the first overt act in the canvass,
and the details, which we shall shortly publish,
will command general attention.
Simultaneously with this significant compli-
ment to Gen. Wool resolution was introduced
into the Tennessee Legislature nominating
Hon. John Bell, and two Southern newspapers
came out for J. J. Crittenden. How many
more Richmonds in the field!
MORE ABOUT THE Fry VERDIcr.-The ver-
dict in the Fry case being an extraordinary
precedent touching the law Of libel, we are not
surprised that it has attracted the general at
tention Of the newspaper press throughout the
country. This example Of general summing
up, in single judgment. against newspaper
editor, OF all the accounts Of all enemies. open
and disguised, for an indefinite period Of time
would extinguish large proportion of our
contemporaries, if applied to them, AS completely
as a consuming fire without insurance.
In their notices Of this Fry verdict, some Of
our country exchanges are disposed to be just
and impartial, while occasionally we find one
as narrow-sighted, malicious and regardless of
the honest truth as the reckless Tribune or the
twaddling Times. OF this GLASS is the Buffalo
Express, and also Forney's old stool-pigeon
paper, the Pennsylranian, which says that lone
OF Benefits witnesses in the recent libel trial,
testified that he had staid at home and wrote the
Partisan correspondence Of the New YORK h.
RAID" The idea here intended to be conveyed
is that the home Of said witness is here in New
York, and that here he writes, and has
been writing his Partisan correspondence.
But the simple facts are that the home of
this witness is in Paris-that in Paris he made
out his affidavit touching this Fry case, and
that it was read in our court, the witness re-
naming in Paris all the time. attending to his
duties as Partisan correspondent of this jour
nal. But he had lived here he had attended the
Fry operas; and hence, though since residing in
Paris. he was enabled to give in his evidence
Of what he knew and what he saw concerning
the failure of these Fry operas The paltry
meanness of these editors in their sneak
ing representations, needs no further COM
ment Each pretends that his insiDuation is
from an exchange" but he adopts it, enlarges
upon it. and thus fixes upon himself the judg-
ment that the receiver is as bad as the thief
On the other hand, the editor of the Genesee
Wing speaks the language ofimpartial, UMPIRE
JUDGED deliberation upon the evidence and the
charge OF Judge Oakley. This editor says:
1--WE have read carefully and attentively the
evidence in the (Fry) case, the summing up Of
the counsel, and the charge Of the Judge, and
we must say, we are astonished at the action
Of the jury" So were we-so perhaps, was
Fry himself astonished-so, no doubt, were our
loving contemporaries ofthe Tribune and Times,
for they gloated and chartered over the verdict
as if it were a Godsend wholly unexpected.
They rolled the sweet morsel under their
tongues-they vented their saliva at us-the
verdict was to them as exhilirating as opium
they jumped and danced with delight-their
Joy was inexpressible, for the vocabulary of the
fish market was too poor for their ecstacy-
they were astonished with delight; but for all
that, they may depend upon our sympathy when
they, too shall he called up for general settle
ment before " an intelligent jury" like that in
the Fry case.
Again-on the Fry side Of the question, the
ST. Louis Infeiigencer, without advancing any
judgment Of its own, quotes from other papers
their vinrUn of the rnrdicf and arnnnr than