New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-12-22
LAW INI,ELLIGEN

SUPREME COURT-DEc. q Before Judge ROOSEVELT
THE BoWERY EX1EsStON JOB.
Daniel Be1An j' eat the h bls A' o. 'Hd
After disposipg Of the calendar for the day, Mr. VA
lard stated that the plaintiff was ready To produce FUR
tier evidence.
air Field said that the Gaze had bssn called on
Thursday in the Absence Of Mr.. Devlins council aud
had proceeded thus tar ex parte, Dir. Deylns csss
rOt beir ready. Mr.. Field explained Dis connection
with the case. He sad that he had been for twO
yesrs The standing couIsel vi MessTs. StInsn All
swain the attorneys Of Mr.. Deylin, snd oy them h.d
beer ken TO months suce to act as counsel fof
Mr. Deyln 10 this case nOt~ithstst ding that ne bad
BE- en- opposed to hin in the controversy lnyoVisg the
Z tie 10 the office vi Street Commissioner; ana nAs-
much as he present csse was sePa'ate sna clsuot
from that, ana involved proc ecngs anterior " Mr.
CobOver becoming connected with the ONCE ne VIZ.
had consented TO act for Mr. Dsylin IN the oase.
Mr. Fled then asked thai John Fltzpatrc6 be made
a patty defendant to tbs case, OI the ground that
Fitzpatrick and the Bowery Bank were the persons
who were Interested in the matter lie bAsed his re-
quest upon the affidavit Of Fitzpatrick rec;isg tue
tact of his being the assignee Of tne contract
with Devlin. Mr.. Field contended that Dir. Dev1in
had bad no interest in the matter since the l2ta OF
JuIe last, and that the Bowery Bank and SIR F.tz-
patrick were necessary parties to the controversy
Jucge Roosevelt said that evidence had beeb pro-
duceG 10 show that M. Deylin va partner Of Mr.
Fitzpatrick.
Alter some further discussion, it was decided th.t
the case must continue vi nous auy Inuecise decls
ION being taktn on LDc oPPAC1A"u ~ oeAau vi r1s1
psnick.
Dir. Willard then called George 7. Rogers TO the
stand az witness. Mr.. Rogers testided tns. he was
the Contract Clerk in the Office Of the Street Commits
soner from 1853 till June, 1857, sad, such, had
cbarg, of the contract book. His duty was to pre-
Pare contracts, ard have them sigEed The contract
involved in the presen ssue, he stated, was dgaed
bisrk In November, 1856, and that the blsEk not
filed up thst he is OF, on the 9Th Of June,
the day OF Mr. Tsylors death when the wine took
biz departure for the West, where he remained Until
the last If June. The blsnk not filed up in the
handwriting Of the witness, out in the hand writing OF
Mr. Lynch, his assistant be was told by Mr. Taylor
to prepare the contract The signing Of contract IN
block be stated 70 be a common occurrence 10 the
oHice-yhe details being tiled in subsequently from
the specifications The OF 20 long time lnief-
yenrg between the date Of the contract and the III n
CT i up, the wiiDees accounted for BY the iAcs Of
his beng unable to tnd the answers 70 CERTAIN
notices given 10 parties, which wers important " naye
in filling the contract up The witness sso s'.Iso tue
fact that when contracts were eouP1eteo, oeuer
wo4k were directed 10 be coDs by the sai'eyol VI
speotOr il wss not al unuequert ocounee .n ~. .ao
work afterward Inserted in the conuec' OF voc
amount to be paid was Of come MAGNITUDE, u wa
a ade the tubiec. OF spsciA contract Sonenues
the Street Commission and Surveyor ~o1,a eaos ~
an cunt and have it put n toe nsI Saou'
bsvirg it 10 the cobtrsct az Az "neeeVeI oo.'
WORK vss ordered 70 be put IN the cocusc' tae VIZ
aess put opposite tie enGy Of the Work the less' "
s Che sans bong ssed - indc.ss % q W. Ne
osds, Of tns Street Cc0misGoosr Tns witness s'sss'