The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1855-11-15
OFFICIAL CORRUPTION.
The People VS.. Sydney III. stuart, City Judge.
COURT OF OYER AND TERMINER.
Before Judge Roosevelt.
THIRD DAYS PROCEEDINGS.

DAYS PROCEEDINGS.
WEDNESDAY, Nov. a. lS55.-lhe interest in this re-
arkAble criminal increases from day day. The
court this morning closely packed and was
that account very uncomfortable throughout the day.
Judge Stuart sits beside his counsel watches the
ceedngs with much apparent anxiety. He looks care
and oppressed by the circumstances in which he is
placed.
Henry vandervoort recalled and examined by Mr.
BradyDo not recolect Judge Stuart leaving the Court
of Sessions the afternoon of the 10th Of February
fore the adjournment Of the court do not keep rough
minutes Of the proceedings by reference to the minutes
cannot say whether the sentencing of prisoners the
10Th Of February the first last order Of proceed
ings; think they must have been sentenced during the
last part Of the day. the persons sentenced tried
day Of Justice Stuart the bench when
those sentences passed. there other proceed
ngs that day, the Grand Jury having in and pre-
sented bills have distinct recollection of Judge
Stuart lesyng the court that day and returning to it,
not certain whether the District Attorneys note
handed TO me by Mr. Sparks Judge Stuart my impress
sion on the subject is about balanced my recoi
lection is that Mr. Sparks left the court TO
'ook for that paper shortly before the adjournment
after Judge Stuart was informed that could
not find the indictment against Connolly he left the
ofhce; have no recollection of his doing white
we weie looking for the indictment against Connolly;
have recollection Of Judge stuart saying was an
dictment against hotel thief and that he might have
sDund the name Of Mr.. Monnot not mentioned In
connection With It; think it not mentioned till sf-
ter the indictment taken from the files; not
tain whether said anything the subject; however
recoliected the very WE'LL cid not that Con-
molly had alias at that tme had not heard what his
name when went to the District Attorneys office,
left Stuart in the Office; supposed from the terms Of
bis note that the District Attorney, to sign the
iictment Immediately; not certain whe her told
Judge stuart where going; might have it
had the note and indictment in my hand; expected
find the District Attorney there; when returned from
"a rQIuaT az Ind
rt that The District Attorney not in his Office and
poke Of the discrepancy in the and he gave to
understand that It was the he the Judge) wanted
whether he said they the same persons do not
now the June term OF the Court Of Sessions ended
ions to try prison cases in the warm weather and bail
only tried EXCEPTIONS that the practice
n June aud July, 1856 while Jacge Stuart had these
papers in his POSSESSION the July term held by the
recorder and the August term BY Judge Stuart Judge
It uart taken i'll the first Friday OF the August
erm; do not know how long hs ILL., as left the city
lex day. absent from The city till the LIST of Sept
40 person, to my knowledge, wanted the papers in
ae meanwhile; the August term commenced on the 9th
August and lett on Saturday the 1lth; whoa
ready for Trial the papers kept in the custody of
he District Attorney I'LL the Is disposed Of except
where bench warrant Ia issued and where the
rty not arrested and these papers keep the papers In
his would therefore remain in my oice the ndict
nent did remain; the rss indictment in the possess
ion Of the District Attorney, think, while the matter
sashe second time before Grand Jury when the new
aoictment found II went into my Office and remained
here, and II ia on the minutes that bench warrant
hould issue.
10 Mr.. Cutting rhe July term Of the General Sessions
ommenced the 70 and ended on 7th; the Recorders
ues to holding court ended that July and
ugust; in his regular order his term would not begin
gain until september the court opened in september
lOnday the 3D. and the Recorder held that term and
he 9th stuart brought back these papers, stranger
'ould bave had the papers, the usual practice to
ave them ON the e; when Stuart told me that the in
icme ut ne wanted against Cosgrovs agains
onn0ly, did not know that Cosgtove and Connolly
ere one and the same person; he gave to under
aud tbat that was the he wanted; came to tn,
ncuhon tnat they were one and the same person; he
ay have told SO, but have distinct recollection
bout it.
John Sparks examred by Mr.. Catdng.-Is Deputy
ers Of the Court of Sessions have been about years
poueced with that office. Mr.. Hais note handed to
itpessl first the noie on the 10th OF February
IN the Court Of Sessions, in the adjaeent room the
urt room proper; | received 1t think from Mr.. Van
rvo0it between and O'Clock; X about the time
the adjournment OF the court, but would not say
neither was before after, waen received the note
came directly into the clerks office Judge Stuart did
pit corue in with me came in alone ! lett Judge
uart in the court room; am not whether he
The bench or not Judge Stuart came into the
erk's Office probably five ten minutes after Mr..
andervoor, accompanied him. searched tor the indct
ent under the of WIN. Connolly; did ind il;
uart In the whilst was searching f,r It
I'D him could not find 1t; he said wait "A moment and
will eee had suggested to him that the person nigh;
ave been INDICTED under other he left the
ice and returned in from three to five minutes and said
e name was VIM. Cosgrove l then searched for that
me and found this Indictment I handed 1t to Mr..
snicgvoort who standing by his desk; Mr.. Wander
ort took the indictment and held some conversation
th Mr. Stuart in eation to the indictment which do
u reccuect, which did not hear think Mr.. Van
rvoort left tbe Office and went into the adjacent Office
the District Attorney; he returned almost immediate
and wrote the order Of noite proeYi the back, at
he same time directing me to give Judge Stuart a
fed copy OF the order, which did Mr.. Vandervoort
ent, and made certified copy while he was making
te original entry.
O Did Judge Stuart manifest any hurry hastey
Objected TO as leading, and question Withdrawn
q. What the manner Of Judge Stuart on that oc-
SION A. He appeared to be in some haste; he made
explana ton in reference his being in haste; made
X q Ger "a |
is the identical paper that gave TO Judge stuart
q Cioss examined by Mr.. Brady-When Mr.. vandervoort
nded the note of the District Attorney, he asked
to get the indictment; had been absent from the
urt room from five 10 ten minutes when Mr. Wander
or and Mr.. stuart came into the Office cannot say
ebe the court had adjourned before lef there
pversston about this being an indictment against a
tel thief; might have heard, but DO not recolect the
nversaton held between Mr. stuart aud Mr.. Wander
ot: generally left the office about o'clock Nc. Stuart
reray left the building when the court adjourned;
say whether Mr.. stuart took seat In the Office
yoEdefvoort directed to give Judge stuart copy
the order and at the time the Judge also direct
ma; did not felI TO write fast, To hurry up,
i jut gcd frcm his manner he was in n hurry can
give any fact whi:h would show the jury that he
a harry
To Ir Cutting-Judge Stuart did not say what he
with the certified copy; he never made use of IL in
urt t. ny knowledge.
q Is II the usual practice Of Judges to gct certified
Iies Of the noiis posoTiies that are entered
Question objected to AMI Withdrawn.
James NJ. smith, examined by Mr.. Cutting-Am and
been since lst January last, Recorder OF the city
county. in April 1853, was practising lawyer in
of William the i%s & pses
NJ at j, derson Market Police Office he charged
n the osnce Of burglary committed at the New York
tell attended the examination; Mr.. stuart was the
lice Magistrate at that time.
o. state what occurred in reference TO baiing Cos
| ysf
0biected 10. admitted, and exception taken.
A lhe bail was fixed in the case at s6,0 by Judge
aait: IL subsequently reduced to 5000.
u Did Judge Stuart give explanation for
ing 6aii at s., 000 and what did he say that
hjeet same objection ruling, and exception.) A. l
NJ lamp fhatY aasat
Oh of hesitation his part In consequence of the
oence that existed, Of fixing bail my recollection
II Is that the evidence plain against the pri-
Yer thst he doubted the propriey Of bsing 1t being
esf ease against him the evidence then presented
tben Fixed II nj So ooo think his expression he
I'D 4ke good bai Ia the Of sb, 600; told him II
impe ssOc ior him 10 got that amount OF bail and
4, n was equvaenistD having no bail hxed Mt ALL be.
nse ne coad not obtain that amount that IL the sub
nee of all | rrcolect at that time; afterwards Mr..
ink and self went 20 Judge Smart house and there
another interview with him in reference the ball
| IL the Aa