The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1857-08-10
fHB STREET COMMISSIONER TROUBLES.
The Conover Contempt Cass-Poants ON MO
ton for an Attachment Sor Dasobsying In.
function.


Before Hon. Judge Ingraham.
August Sine Mayor, Aldermen add Commercially Of ne
City Of Neso York, again Daniel D. Csour and others
The 1gumeat on The testimony taken before The referee
Henry Hilton, Hq., was commenced on Saturday.
NJ. Sckles, In opening the Argument, said this was
proceeding punish party for violating process OF this
Court and before order 10 show cause and
certain adavi, 70 which counsel specially referred He
said that the notorey OF tho and tho interests In
vovea gave usual gravity tho proceeding, and called
for the application Of those rules Of law intended TO
sustain Tho dignity OF courts. Conover was duly served
with copy of the Injunction and the complaint aud afi-
davit on which IL issued. II served on him In
public tribunal where the subject matter Of attracted
bis sole attention. and that OF his lawyers and friends
He violated instantly by himself his professional agents,
and by tho officers Of the law whom he employed 10 do
In OPP vioatioo or tho law. He did 30 wfuly and
system stcslIy he and his attorneys were That
about 10 issue, and that II was Issued before was
served He had in ample season to avoid the violation OF
H. and when proof Of that fact was brought before the
court he proceeded systematically TO swear out OF It. He
his associates got alarm cd at their emery and when
brought up for this criminal act they A.
tempted ,hemss from the consequences He
thought they could demonstrate by the testimony In the
interior these books and papers
ally and by his agents In his own presence
legal advisers by removing them from the custody they
wes IN anu sooa IN nn o., S
from the office, enng him nom touching the books
ard papers which he himself was r,st aimed BY the IN
| then made the felio wing pon's-
On the motion TO punish for contempt In disobeyiug
and injunction when the dsobedence proven, no ques
before the Court except whether the Court had urs
| diction OF such suit and 70 Issue ipjuc'ions
(Surtevapt Vs. The People, KervAn Passmore William.
son Is case, repore in Philsde p1ia Law Journal
H. The attempt 10 deny timely service OF The Injunction
evasion, taking tho facts which occurred accord
ing any abatement which Conover has made Of them or
any which Conover has attempted TO put upon
| them
II IL the every dsy practice OF courts In Furnishing
IN
kind See cited In opinion toe Sturtevan con-
tempt case in the Court of Appeals, PIP 243 2e3.
g The pretence OF Conover Is that the Injunction was
served after his Law agent Bre and constable Far
stoD bad i the co art room with the process Assum-
ing tis TO DC true Conover promoven OF The pro
ceedpgs on which he search iss led he had
employed those two persons - do the inhibited by tho
he WAS bound al once 10 recall his instructions bem
stead Of doing, he by his counsel Mr. Field, steadily
persisted In urging Judge Peabody 70 rapid and continued
progress he permitted his constable to bring cue parcel
Of papers before the Judge aud to again TO the office
and bring another peIcc In this mater the maxim qui
Jcca per alum fdca FER So NUT DO applied Tue acts or
Mr. fiela are the OF Mr. Couoyer especially they
| done In his presence
g. The proceedings before Judge Peabody were not In
the exerci,e Of any legitimate Jurisdiction All persons
concerned In them are uespaseers consequently the
whole alter touching the sea oh warrant and ts Issue
may properly be left or view. II waa part OF the
chrry employ ed IN color the depredaous upon the plain
a's property, which tie Injunction was designed to pre-
| vent (Purt vs. Place wend coo
The attic mpt to Conover from responsibility
gro nd Of or concert between huise receiver
|
biz retainer and In his pre3nce-Ha striking piece OF Of
| froneyy.
COUNCIL and The conemptuous acts Of hs Junior council
harmonic perfectly net merely In temper but In sexual
elect indicating concert, that were there no proof OF tho
fact that The Injunction known 20 Brewer before ne
left the the fact would be suf iently established.
Bat the proof Ia frl direct and conclusive.
". on the undsputed facts which appeared before the
referee, contempts clearly shown. lis proved by Mr.
yanderpoel that he Informed Mr. Field OF the Injunction
NJ nktr In aWQy
| Conover. Il Barbour's Oh Pr, 6S3)
clearly proved before Inc referee e lSs the In
by Mr. Brady before Brewer or Harrington left the
On this point conclusive evidence was given BY Erode
rick l. yultee, Aaron j. Vanderpocl, Charles O'Csnor
Henry Ber,holf, Mr.. Hatnett, and Others.
VI The eetmony OF the gentlemen just namod Ii zorro
borsted by largo number OF dsnterested witnesses or
the part OF the plaintiffs and to the service OF the In
junction before Brewer or burlington lot court, Ar fo
lock, witness for Couoeer, confirms dstncty the state
ments OF our Witnesses.
VII Nearly all CHnover's witnesses were his friends
fellow parzans, expecants Of Office under him. and &C
tive PARTED pants In bis proceedings against Dcvln. The
testimony Is wholly inefe:tua TO overcome ours
Will II the Court conclude that the violation OF the 10
junction was % TO Conoyer inadverten Conover may b,
excused returning the books removed from the stree
Com pissoncrs Office abandoning his present
Nr Sckes then reviewed II great length the Testimony
taken by the all Of which appeared 10 fall In the
the time 70 poin, out some pspa
bic contradictions In the witnesses onfhe other o.
them directly contratcted In material point almost every
|
that he Court the whole limo, did not hear Mr..
Brady make the announcement, which attracted the ct
,snton OF every enc IN me cur. ,o1n Soan Sa ~,
leave Court until the was made and the srsu
nent Il concluded He then went 10 tho Street, Com
mssioners ONCE and at IN time Brewer and Harrington
had done nothing yards execution Of warrant
iha even admitting that these two not In Court g.,
the time Of the announcement Conover aud bis counsel
had lime rgh 10 prevent ths violation OF he injunction
II they wished. Ardirg TO TIE witness harrington Mr.
sickle, said thai n was refreshing In these 10 had
| nj
night, for nohins taking no hns, expecting nothng-s
be informed Iskng his lfe and sacred houor without
hone OF reward He repeated 10 refreshing aud tho
testimony OF 90 pure and norolted man ought 10 70
ctive great weight Nc no doubt bis honor would I've told
| by the other side. Mr. sCkss commented 1T lopgth on
Confable Fsringtons testimony, coniendng that hn CYL
dnce alone sufficient W prove tnss the Injunction Na1
dellbera ely and conie nptut usly violated ,,.,.
Er Field raid, In reply, that n he tnld all DC thorRm
ABOUT this he would he saying whist would ntt DC
proper be heard In hi; court he ,crned al any
tnpg more Of the language used by opposite coios' DO
fore Jrdge Peabody tad said al that no meant 70 say
on ths, matter ami would proceed 10 the Inns In
MI sckes argument, thai Jedge PeasodJ Pad no iurstlo
lien ia the proceedings in shic5 be decided lie DR. ~
denied thai the Common Pleas Court hal any rsht TO IN
qurc int Tire title TO an office ihai belongs W the s1pree
Court aone ard iparcasn coming from this oour be
would say as COUNSEL would be worth more than wAs;o
PAPER No, Only ceud IS noa y rot decide on ihe valid
nv Of title 10 Office but could not sii on t. DE
thought the alluson of Mr. sckcs b political persecution
IN him d and injurious 10 se court wss not po
Ncal question: aod II I. were ndmiucd " be 40, what
would ne csvo OF the other side boz would be m inu
lion on their part that they could match Court %anst
Court on poltc,l questoa-an idea that he Utterly TO
Judge sitting in n caus5 10 which be was himself pnrtF
ard the appeals 70 the passions AMI sdoo: OF the Court
by counsel on the other eide, Mr. cd Introduced the i0
Trsi-The idea that there WAS any violation OF the in.
ion ou by Mr. Conovcrs entering too Street Commission
er's APARTMENTS preposterous rhe injunction prohibits
Gully hts removing tho books and papers interfering
with them. lie DID neither by entering the apartments
second-Tie Ipunc,i,n asked for by the complaint
TO prohbis hE executing the warrants a. Wei as removug