The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1857-05-02

commonwealth there was specac provision in the con
stution of the ,ate Of New York which forblds its con
tinued exstence In the form which incorporated
su;t was accordingly commenced by the District Ator
no.. of he CITY of New ork against that institution for
The o testing the Constitutional %ax,n question sM,s o ge
dence in the constituionalty OF the law Tin which
proved they were mistakenly came into this court and in
The most amcable manner conceivable sat down with the
Ns,rics Attorney and agreed upon and united In case,
stating as this case might the simple and undoubted facts
and rssinr upon them markedly and simply the const-
tiona issue and thereupon they presented II 10 the gene
sal term for Judgment There peadings nothing
hut an amicahio case 1t a matter perfectly notorious,
7 beieye-I dare not assert IL positively but l
sincerely believe it To be true--that the learned
District Attorney who that proceeding did first
entertain opinion that the Art Union perfectly
stitutional DO wish this with too much po
stivenes because that worthy gentleman (Mr Blunt has
ceased live, and might be thought by some reproach
would not so consider it, believe that he entertained that
opinion and that in the course of the proceedings while
looking into the matter he became impressed with the
trary opinion. An was amicaby Joined the Court
gave Judgment in the case and il went to the Court of Ap
pea The Cour of Appeals gave the precedence on the
calendar 1t heard early in the term, and Judgment
rendered that that act Of the Legislature was unconttu
tonal and void institution ceased to exist at least
in its then apparently legalized form | merely mention
this fact part Of the current history of the times
Judge Roosey et-That very case came before me- I
think wrote the opinion myself
Mr.. OConor-Yes, and ysur opinion was concurred in
by the Court Of Appeals. was in the case acted for
the Art Union promptly met the queston with their
entire consent We were happy to have it determined at
the earliest possible moment il il must have been deter
mined against u.s. Now in regard to this case am here
the part of the people move for Judgment NV only
desire to accelerate the proceedings and il Is for
your honor to determine whether YOU will render judg-
ment for the plaintiffs after hearing u.s. or whether with
out hearing US you will render judgment pro Jorna
against u.s. TO the end tina, we may appeal and bring the
regularly by appeal before the general Of
course YOU would not render Judgment in our favor With
ont, perhaps hearing my argument But as the points
have been all printed and as suppose the Judges have
looked into them, do not suppose that argument is
necessary move judgment for the plaintiff but your
honor has discretion TO render Judgment either way aud
as may be most convenient to the advancement Of the
case
Judge RooseveltThe way 70 carry up the case will be
deny your notion then you appeal otherwise
there is no one TO act the sense of the general term can
only be taken that way. The only difficulty is that the
sense of the general term will be first taken on reversal
Mr. OConor- am Indifferent about that would az