New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-08-18

fMY. Sckles here read the lplunrtpn gwen aoo's
repsrhing that is was retunsble on the 18TH day %
August four days after the hrst pjunctonI Ihi- lest
INJUNCTION order Of course was entirely unnecessary
We have entertained the opinion all along ana nave
s,ted uHon and tried TO enforce II, that az p)unc'
ton Is. uing from any Court having power " GRAFT AL
Injunction should be- respected and obeysd while Il
il force. Ard in accordance With TINS view a. soon
as your HonOrs decision was pro nuigated upon tne
motions pending before you, the couasel on ths sine
Of the cause bad full consultation and Determined
ihst in view Of this first injunction, issued from rue
Supreme Court and out Of respect 10 that tribunal ana
the learned Judge Who granted the injunction while
II at Injunction shall remain 10 force aud unhi &c nave
taken such We propose to take, We should
lot appear before your Honor as movers Ia ibis pro-
oeediDe And under these circumstances We have
OF " 10 suggest 10 the Court that propose 10 take
in me- date steps for the dissolution Of both OF these
ipunctons ard that in the mean Il ne would rn.ps
be bcter-though we have no motion TO maxi, uodrr
the strict terms Of this iDjuncton-it would perhaps
be be tier that further proceedings 10 Inc Cause 10 ms
Court be suspended uLtl We can apprlse your hooor
of what action shall have been taken in the Supreme
Court upon the motion which We shall make 'hen 10
refereIc e TO these ipjupctiOns.
Mr. Field sm very glad, Sir, that the learned
have 20 the conclusion they have reached
to-day and am very sory that ON Saturday they had
not the mind so that uigbt have been relieved
from the necessity Of stay ing in town on Sunday.
Mr.. Brady-We were Of the same mind then.
Mr.. Eed-The injunction was served oa Friday,
and notwithstanding on Saturday they moved 10 reier
ence TO this matter here. had nothing to say; they
could do what they fit.
Mr.. Sickles-Your Honor will remember that you
fixed the day when the matter should be again brought
before the Court 10 w.t. Tuesday, and that day
fixed with reference to the proceedings in the contempt
case. We had voice in it. 1t is hardly necessary
for me to say that proceeding in this Court Ia rela
ton TO contempt prOct eding OF that kind In which
the parties or council have little TO do It's pro-
ceedng by the Court for tie maintenance OF Us own
dignity and suppose no gentleman counsel or other-
wise will ATTEMPT interfere with the SOurt.
Mr.. Field-I bold that this whole proceeding has
been from beginning to end, an interference WIN tne
Supreme Court, or Judge Of that Court, and take
Judge Ipgraham-Tbat subject is not now before
Mr.. Sckles-That was reflection on the Court.
Mr.. Fied-By no means
TO be made shall enter the orders in this case upon
the minutes Of the Court in form as Indicated On Sat-
urday. Then if should / OF happen to Dc here,
there be dispute to the nature OF the ordes,
and either party can move upon them. VIII hear
any suggestions. ~.
Mr.. Field do not know precisely what the Court
PROPOSES to do.
Judge Ingraham-I propose merely to make the
same decision old on Saturday, To 90 upon tue uh-
utes of the Court in the form Of orders.
Mr. Field-The Court will bear in mind that the
time proposed TO adjourn this case to was -hotea" ~
my request not heightened. i was about sayiay on
SATURDAY, what will now say since the Court desires
it. No order can be made in this procee ing, consist
emily with the law, given in the Revised otat-
utes, and as adjudged by tie Courts, Tor anything
more than an attachment to bring Mr.. Conover INTO
Court 10 answer for an alleged contempt. VIII give
YOU, Sir, the authorities which show hat, ant that Is
all can do. Fret, refer you TO I'd Revised Statutes,
Iaee 535, sectiops ard 10
section mot the before YOU COut shall either
grant an order on the accused party % snow hnlS MOI h
punished for the alleged misc opduct shall issue tac
N, to party bnns him before such Court to
h,pt..o ipetf
The order YOU granted was to show cause why an
attachment should not ssue, not to show cause wny
the defendant sheuld not be punished. Ana when au
attachment issues section 10 provides TOR the course 10
be next pursued 49,,
Section 49, When any defendant arrested upon an .ttsch
hs have been brought into Count or shall ssvs
therein shall nerogatones to DO MED specify
ing the facts and alleged Nhs ,ns
and requiring h. answer thereto 10 "ch 'ns time
the Court shall allow" ILL
The Court then to cause nteroe stories 10 DC NED
II has no power to do anything else, none wnst-
ever That is the course prescribed by the statutes
ar il has three times been decided by the Court 0i
Cbsncery. In Paige's Chancery Reports page io1,
The defendant brought up on st5sehmen'
for complying with All order OF toe ooaf, ~
The prisoner being custody She rht the cty and
County of in execution on e'I oan sss
prisoners being brought before the Chancellor an order was
to the Contempt specifying III. facts and clrcu@staa. al
sgan.t the nda and to copy thereof upn
upon cath and file tn. SAME with the Register, within
wentyu hours thereafter In the mean time the sh.ih wa.
from day day before the Chancellor until the further order
the Court The defendant having put b. 20 "a.
c,or BY their counsel relation 10 the alleged eontsmP'
1 The er next decision to which shall refer i, that 10
Paige 37S-he case of NJ Creole agt. +. & r. Senior.
In this case the bill fled alleged that the defendants
were partners, &c. The complainant prayed tor an
Injunction which was granted restraining tne de,ena
ants from ntermeddliDg with the property, &c Of the
firm. 1hereupon certain judgments were obtained,
and the complainant applied to the for
an attachment for contempt and the Vice chancellor
made an order declaring that the defendants we're
guilty Of contempt in having violated the order for
q temporary injunction. The Chancellor reversed THIS
order on the ground that the Vice-Chanceor had 90
tight to declare the defendants guilty Of conemp',
although there Sufficient ground Tor Issuing an
attachment. Said the Chancellor:
As the parties were ISSUE by their afd.vt as TO the
main facts upon which the question a. to the violation y the
sqns pe soT 90 that the
papaD could have the benefit Of their Upon
Ss ass Of wDe.s. before the CoS
prove the contempt But there was not suhcisn. %
final decision that defendants had been and were guilty OF
contempt Besides it Is not the practice ~ Ins Of
b pit OF ,he accused The such should dire
S nps Of an attachment without any ether adjudication
rs hsuS peeV decaIe that il appears there
10 probable for issuing attachment ina, the
contempt"
The third decision to which have alluded is 10
9 Paige, 81, in which the Chancellor goes more
fully Into the matter. II is the case OF the Aoaoy
CITY Bark agt Schermerhorn and others. The Chan
celor s6id: .,,..,,o
"The necessary papers not before me on ms spps ~
enable decide the case upon he mesi nor hc,r
the pepers which the law requires before the wee
upon making order appealed from according 20 tne
cate Of the Clerk The statute relative 10 proceedlp
contempts 70 enforce civil remedies and 70 protect zoe
Of parties civil ss,ions has prescribed Eve ~, on
ceedins when the misconduct complained OF 70 not con
ted In The immediate view and presence Of the Court saG.P.
in be two cases Of disobedieDce TO rule OF ous % loo pay
n, of money and disobedeuce TO subpoena One Of the
prescribed modes BY order on the sfcass py s1I~
~ ala mo, be- punished for alleged Dscondact ana tue oth
80 sYsn, an attachment to arrest the sccused and bring
- h,,s ,he Court for such misconduct 10 ct