New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-09-10
LAW LNTELLIGENCE
rHELOWBER JUDGMENT.
~ rner WHITING ON MUNICIPAL MORALS
nSsycr1Oy OF THE MAYOR, COMMON COUNCIL AND
i'>''''N NV CORPORATION COUNSEL.

Is The Court based on the report of the referee snoa
IL. be opened, was set down for hearing ~ u
.elOck yesterday before Judge Peabody 49,,
r,.Judoe Whiting and Mr Clark appeared ID De-
,Lf Of the Controller and the tax payers '.1.S
hsyid Dudley Field and VIM. Gurus wy
,uted Mr.. Lowber, and M Busted, 'ouu'e' 49,
EOroration, was present processing 70
It.srests Of the city. ,or,. oe hrs;.
Ml2} O'Clock, there being "iee o,iO NJ.
90, before Judge Peabody in SPeciai ieln' n' VIM
Inc Gated tia, the hearing DO uah7eireu pe''fe
la. R,osevet who was sitting ID the Spscai Term
,0,, ,v;,, bu, little business before him. To this
49, ,udse Peabody as-ented, and the counsel
.,sIv proceeded before Judge Roosevelt.
H.. Ar Noyes nterposed an objection TO the pro-
.ad;,os going on before Judge Roosevelt, on the
t,ou,d rhs. il would be a change Of the forum.
", Whiting denied tina, it would be change of
l,ur, and held that it was merely transferring the
L.rpg of the matter before another Judge Of the
lms Court, for concurrence saks.
lJudrs Roosevelt asked why it would not be better
lst the matter 90 before General Term at once.
I-udee Whiting said be had no objection 10 THE.
Id, Field objected TO such course. The prelimi-
Iv question which had arisen was the legality Of
IL concurrent Courts being held at the same time in
4 same county. In other words, when there was
L Special Term of the Supreme Court sitting,
I denied that a second Special Term of the same
turt could sit 10 the same county.
lJudge Roosevelt stated that he had held Special
Inn in his own house. and if he were not much mis-
ksp, Mr.. Field had argued cases before him there.
Iyr. Field said that a case might be argued any
Ire bu, an order 10 be valid must be entered in
l., Cont with the Clerk Sheriff and Crier, or their
foresentatives, present.
Inaoe Roosevelt stated that in the Brick Church
l,.sy Mr.. OConor and Mr. Field had argured the
I.e before him in bis house, and his recollection
., that he then entered the order in the case az at
knecsl Term and that, too, was when another Judge
<ftbs Court was holding Special Term. If the po-
stou of Mr.. Field was well.fosnded, there were
hundreds of entries made in this Court Involving large
Investments, which would be void.
Mr. Field eaid that there was a case in % Barbour,
karin this point was decided against the position as
lined by Judge Roosevelt.
IJudge Roosevelt stated that be was familiar with
l. case. The Judge who made the decision resided
kbe western part of the State and could not be ex.
kted to be familiar with the necessities of the city
4 did not consider the objection he could admit
Ma az 10 enRtdln IL WOud uPeVs eho Pio,sN" VI eHN
fQrt a. long as he had been on the bench. He had
tsn applied to in many places under pressing circum-
arces to sign orders, which he had done. He recoi-
sd Of one instance where he had signed an order in
omnibus, which he had done as at General Term.
B. again suggested the proprety Of reading the whole
hitter to General Term at once.
Mn. Moves said that whatever might be the legality
Illegal proc edingsa at Judge RoOsevets house, their
ANIMATION was always pleasantly suggestive. But
kyould now interpose another objection to the Gaze
kceeding. The defendant the Corporation) had a
kuar attorney TO the record, not only appointed by
\ defendant, but elected by the people. he Jar.
EAsed bad conducted the case and had Conducted
tusuccessfully. Now it appeared that the bar at
kr was seeking to intervene, by one Of its most re-
lss.abe members TO defend the writ over again. To
Ip,k objected. Until the attorney on the record
ludapged, he contepded that no third party had
krao intervene. This was decided as long ago as
liz, reports. He cited in support of this view
ka reports, 65, and Merrided on the law of attor-
hni56. The question involved the regular course
knducting cases. The Corporation, he commended,
I,ot RESPONSIBLE for the conduct of a case by =
kon they had not rebutted, and their client CMr.
lsber) was not bound to litigate with party who
not authorized to act and with whom they could
lnske bargain TO settle the suit. lie cared meth
sbout this particular case, but only about ts intu-
te az precedent. Bad precedents were followed
tthey finally became bad law.
Mr.. Busted also interpOsed an objection on the
n Of the city, He chsrac erized the proceeding as
3rsotdinary absurd, foolish and dangerous. The
ber on which it was based stated that he Mr..
ksteed) had declined to appear. This statement he
fnounoed to be untrue. Judge Whiting he pro-
hneed to be an intermeodler, and it was the duty of
Court to intervene against all Intermediates, aud
make attorneys and counseors conform to the rules
law and practice in their action. He had made a
lense, and it was false to say that he had declined
interfere now He stated it az fact that the de-
hdants, by resolution OF the Common Council, had
sructed him not to interfere, and by virtue OF his
Zee their agent they instructed him to carry out
far as il could be done, the contract made with
tbert w. Lowber. He hoped that the parties who
tre Dew interfering, and making use of the
burt for false purposes, would be dealt with and the
utter proceed.
Judge Roosevelt asked if Mr.. Whiting desired To
ply
mr. Whiting said he did not know how he could
hike the Court understand bis reply without state
tnt Of the facts.
Judge Roosevelt thought that would be necessary.
Mr. Whiting-I will proceed then, to stste the facts
p: may make my position understood. 1t has beer
teed that this is a new proceeding BY the bar al
fge, and that there is person responsible Tor II
Us take short review of the history of this case
fuppoee, and the whole bar suppOses and the com
knity suppeses that Court OF Justice is erected oi
purpose Of administering to suitors who sppeal
iIore It that great aud important article repaired
kticulsrly at the present time even. banded and
keest justice; and one Of the grsvest questions to
viii allow itself to be used as the instrument
B the preparation of most outrageous fraud
pw, then, what is the history Of this case in
kr words The Common Council at a
by early day was applied to 10 purchase certain
tperty ON the Fast River for the purpose of a
kket. They were beseged until a resolution passed