The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1856-02-07

toned In the complaint they were cot upou By the ,a
ta and With great yiosnos stssoIsd and sss..s.s
BY the plaintiff and that the deendants resisted saia
assault, usng much force a. was necessary or -
purpose Anc more, and that such reAssanos Z t.
disnet admiration of joint action in making the assau
The jury havs found against much Of It charged
admissioD they have held both DEFENDANTS re-. psnsIs
1t said the answer osy the act OF the dssndAnvs
attorney, and not signed BY them This is true bat u
furnishes ground for rejecting 1t Aduisson To
pleading full binding the defendants II ssnsA
by them for the purposes Of this action 1t would %
In any other Notion for new trial denied, With 80
RicAord Lett d o.. ". VIM. Auuigan. -whstsvsr
Spnn may BE- :. to the psops Of The
that the facts proven connection with the speaking
that they privileged The detendant was Sscrsta
o. Folton Fire Insurance Company; the pAiask
psa as, saS Claimed s
the s 1empsny o 'u4 psyment on the policy -
Issued by the Hartford Company, an interview 49,
place between them and the plaintiff and In III 1t inter
vie. the defendant told the plaintiff his proofs wore n
satisfactory that he had vouchers that thsy hsA
heard rumos, which, if,rue would show taat he knsv
more OF the fire than he admSsed, &C. Such ioforms-
was not only excussbe but the plaintiff might we nave
complained If the defendant other officers of the oc
pany had not hi OF the existence OF such ru
nors and given him opportunity to explain then =
the company. Most of the communication was neoss-
cary be made in reserve 70 the COMPANY ~
right object the proof Insufficient There ia M
Il malice and whole transaction dsprovas
It, The molten for q new trial rh 'uid be isaed:
IN the Matter Of the Application Of John B. Ffink, for
Re'atsson IF Forfeited r. coanizdnces this matter tia
application has been again with the consent Il
the district Attorney and the Recommendation OF tbs
Court Of Sessions to this Court that the amount
duced hcm three thousand to thousand liars. II
spreas ALSO from the papers that the accused besn
sur eDoeren and In consequ ence Of having
witness the District Attorney declines TO try hi upon
the indictment feel bound to yie.d to the recon-
men aion OF the Court of Sessions, by the Utrst A.tor
ney In this matter. In ordinary cases. were the
cape OF the criminal IL secured by bail have nva s0y
refused to remit the forfeit unless accused prison
Is surrendered ana tried There be hing
more than the hardship Of the induce this ,urt
TO discharge the bail after the prisoner ped.
and the sun ender OF the ptiDcioa whsn ia qusuo
OF ceay producea by his absence the witnsse. canno4
afterwards be obtsiped, viii rot be suficent IL ths
present case however yield to the mmepda i'm Of
lhe Sessions spd the District Attorney orOec the
judgment TO be cancelled pa ment of thou and
dollars AND all costs and Sherifrs fees.
Before II IN. j. X, Brady.
The Fire Department Ddne L. johnson .-Jud ynont
for plaintiff for $780, with ceDg Of this
penalty for violating the law In to toe erection Of
buildings III the city of New York
The same rs. Fichdrd NC oratGk. Judgment.
The same ASdniel Iohnson.-Like Judgment
George Blum ,v. W. Hi9ytns-Motion TO set aside
dict oenied with ten dollars costs.