New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-08-06
LAW INTELLIGENCE.
THE STREET COMMIssIONERsHIP.

In the matter Of the Habess COrpq. Of Chs, De.iin
Judge lpgraham rendered the following decision this
morDirg:
IyoRiH,M, 1.-THE petitioner is brought before ma
OF habeas allowed ON his petition aud the
rant for his arrest Issued by Mr. Justice Peabody under the
statute which authorizes iI ,bs Of ns
dying otherwise vscans the oce Inc poceedlnss
b. fore Mr. Justice Peabody instituted on the complaint OF
Daniel d. Conovs claiming be the Of the late
Street Commissioner Tsslo In his be ayers that he
he has the commn that he has taken the oath of
and filed the bond and has done every thing
proceedins i.Len The els. section tit sh p,
Of ST. volume p i5 Sd sd I'm: se snv % ba
die or BE Office shall in any way become vacant and any
ooon' OF ,nS. of sy be successor to such Office
in ike manner prescribed demand such
session and the same being withheld order may be obtained
FOX such delivery also provide: that in sse OF o1.oa Of
and papers demanded such person may be committed
to jail and is,ued &c, Ihe IN cnss was
s ay e ,Se M Of City
the 1 relative to u s OF isfs and IN
mand the prisoner except IN certain ,;,;r %
ss SG aHs Of hs been exceeded
When the process has been issued in case not allowed
When the process not authorized by any provision of
Although separately stated these different all in
Guided within the term jarsdct aud the question which
to Justice Pesbody the foundation Of the proceedings which
stes to bring the case within the provisions
atue SO as to authorize the justice in the proceedings which
one summary in its character severe in its operation as
in the late action Of the Supreme Court In deny
as IL and 'n the
prisoner perpetual from any cause he
Beina of this character It should strictly
the and there should Sc
other than the facts warrant to make out such nr-c
as necessary to obtain the order from the magistrate then
jurisdiction conferred on him which would sustain the sub
/. The death Of the incumbent As to this there no
That the books or papers shall the hands Of any
person This stated in the petition to the petitioner al
his 1t may well doubted whether the pos
session sufficient without showing that the possession s wa.
Of the act are however that should hesitate before
the magistrate Of jurisdiction Whether proof of the fact
before him was proper to grant the warrant " not within
The appointment Of successor the demand by him and
the Withholding books and papers by the person charged
It's to the questions arising regard the matters stated as
third head that the arguments Of counsel
sminstion Of these questions shall eon6ne myself this
submit. a. an objection any conclusion different
from that Mr. Justice Peabody that my duty to recos
decided he had full Jurisdiction of the matter IL h my
aa e Pns ns do % s
opinion Mr. fe"bEdy that h the ssdSs 81 S
ps So SRee IN the OBJECTION But as the
has stated have been the shall take it for
s sSSIis a"s'' thereby fseSeS Ss
any opinion. which might with those Of that Justice
IN m ans oMn mind Spd from the that in
the instance is sustained BY v sueseme Court of this
eIent conclusion The liberty Of the citizen involved
ne to p.e .ns Jy @ ae
in of the Supreme Court and the first judge Of this
court and the either mot to be regarded as the de
cison OF the which he belongs but Of himself indi
A Ius
suppose any magistrate would for moment entertain Tue
to hi, decisions shown when another magistrate
duty which made obligatory BY Law and from wsh he Sna
For my own part should be thankful if in any ike this,
the close Of od :, any dyc Gas1 eai
rect them the Of the People Yates j. 3S and
S. j s .RsFesa
sbea. corpus ey r wa. Affirmed
Court Of Errors by large vote In that e.se also by
sisebarsed from imprisonment by judge and although
the Chancellor who had originally committed Yates i9 the
view Of the case Of the conferred BY
the law inferior yet he never yeSseS she
superior tribunal and refuse to interfere although satisfied ina
The People agt orser Sheriff q2 Howard Rep 800 as
showing the Justice Of the Supreme Court refused t. re-
where person committed for contempt In that case
however the question was one OF practice IN the Ion s
Where the seRerS Term had settled BY their decision w. the
practice should be- could not WITH pIope De uas SPENCE
rpe 70 the night OF review says. II las been intmated
ton ibs. it wa. incompetent for Judge Of this Court either
Ito Wh its Poee.s Sr question ,cs az opnop
cannot subscribe to Reyery case arising On haon. H.
the soeinquiIy ought to be- the prisoner Italy OF H.
also says 1t viii readily bc admitted that IN revleSihs
which la; been passed pOn y oO Ons v 20 . s
exercise jurisdiction claimed by that ocer-neTe ought
lead surrender Of the pTTerol'Ie, Of
another judicial department no. to the d'% S % psn
Quoted the proceeding in this would not thus limit the
of .Si1r for o" his 'i s than %a Seas
' uy due to rt S sn q bu o. be s G.%S,
that Magistrate thus called upon BY the law to decide as
LEGALITY Of the mPoniaen Of Geh b bound 70 s 5
WINGED on such examination that the Imprisonment unauho
animation be should arrive different from that Of
the commn. magistrate Thi. brings TO the question OF
i Of III nds Whh The
United the decision Of the question IL conceded
proceeding for the delivery Of books and paper. CANNOT
b u'sa for | % book. sna Ti.
be done arraHtO The right Of ConGver to the Gee
made therein nor would the claim, of Devn be any manner
nvsded order deliver books aud papers IN nn
% pI SvI i '%s S for the
between two claimant. for the same ONCE VINO sIa !, 'G
decided who is the party legally entitled TO the ONCE
| and its Sppurtensnces the statute no, 70 oe
to be obtained by taking IL from the other The pot must be
can be upon and where the complaint 81 the pps
shows either that his title to the Office doubtful OF ha
the pson from whom he claims the delivery Of the books anu
hold the Office neither ID III pohoh
he take from the Other books aud paper: IhaTf
much who shows defective title to tie once clam
to take such possession Such j. the decision OF MI Justee
Peabody this He says never Intended py ue
Legislature authorize Justice OF this Court sitting here 70
decide the title of Office II there reasonspe
doubt who Is entitled it should be- decided decI
preceding PIP9 Such was ths opinion int m St 5a:
sys The rea,or should establish hi. title TO the office