New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-04-29
THE POLICE CONTEST.
ANOTHER INFORMAL DISCUSSION.
1HH HEARING TO TAKE PLACE AT ONCE.

We understand that an application was made 10
Judge Davies last evening for order to show cause
why Judge Roosevelts injunction should not be dis
solved, but 1t proved Intellectual.
This morning the papers were presented to Juds
Peabody who then engaged at the Circuit When
he had finished the case oil trial, he asked t. b. ex-
cused for few moments he wished to hold shor,
consultation with his judicial brethren down stains in
the Supreme Court. Chambers. For half an hour he
was occupied there in secret consultation with Judges
Mitchell, Roosevelt and Davies. On his return Judge
Peabody suggested to Mr. Evarts that he was ready
for bis or parfc motion.
Judge Edmonds, who Anppewd to be in the room
inquired if he could not know what the application
Dir. Evarts observed that. this part,
motion no ono had right to be heard, unless ia It's
favor.
The Court read the title of the motion saying that
IL was order TO show cause. leaving the Court to
designate the time, but asking it for Tomorrow
Judge Ed'nonds objected to the application inn
proper, as an application of the same kind
pending before Judge Roosevelt.
Mr. Evarts replied that Judge Roosevelt had refused
the application made to him, aud another was now
made to another Judge All he asked was that It be
granted or not-that some decision upon it be made
Judge Edmonds rejoned that the last observations
presented a new fact viz that Judge Roosevelt had
denied the apple alton. After such denial he
tended other Judge on the Bench could grant what
wa. asked.
Mr.. Evarts said that no was not present before
Judge Roosevelt himself.
Judge Edmonds said that Judge Roosevelt had
taken the papers, saying that he would hold the que.
| tion under advsement until this morning.
| Mr.. Evarts denied that the papers had been 4.
with Judge Roosevelt
Judgc Edmonds replied that he had seen the Judge
| take the papers.
| Mr. O'Conor thought it improper practice for one
| Judge TO grant what had been refused by another
Judge Peabody stated the practice and rule Of the
Court to be, not to hear amOon which had been once
| denied, unless upon changed state Of facts.
| Mr.. Field remarked that AZ Judge Roosevelt spoke
a. having other engagements, the papers were with
drawn from him yesterday. This is parte mo-
ton, Whch should be either granted or denied That
was the defendants right. Judge Roosevelt had
neither granted refused the order applied Tor and
! the application to him had been withdrawn
Mr.. Nanderpoel stated that the application to Judge
Roosevelt asked for hearing yesterday afternoon,
and went 70 exqin that Judge Roosevelt derlined
a hearing on the specific ground that he had engage
meSts Which would require longer postp0nemcnt
thar the defendants could assent TO. AT the close OF
the argument he took the papers from the Judge HIM
SELF Withdrawing the application.
Mr.. OCoDOr had heard no such thing IRON Judge
Roosevelt whlr he was present. He rad heard HIM
say six times that lie would not shorten the eight days
cOwed by law but would hear on Thursday III case
the defendants would join issue upon thcqno rdrrono
| and discuss the whole cause on its merits. Judge
Roosevelt did say that he would not facilitate hear
ing upon the injunction alone unless they woui come
| Ia the merits.
Judge Peabody said that he felt somewhat embar-
red at the early stages Of this motion, but that the
statements Of the witnesses to the transaction made it
| appear that the papers were Withdrawn from the
Judge that the application therefore, was neither re-
fused held under adyiscmcnt by him. adding that,
the question Of practice being thus disposed Of that OF
expcdiency alone remained, and on that he would
hear gentlemen as 0nlicl cHri6.
| Mr.. Evarts then proceeded 10 urge his motion He
contended that Injunction issued on qt0 tc0rrGRto
proceeding without precedent Independent ot
this consideration the Office Of the cid Board Of Com
msioDers vacant, and the Board, though in-
Quoted into office being restrained from acting in their
prpgf m lefs
from this suspension Of their office as there was no
power to govern the police force. He claimed an I'M
mediate hearing a. matter OF right. The injunction
Illegal and the dissolved the better
! The question not only whether Inconvenience
would epsue, but whether an injunction for which
| there authority should stand an instant after
the party affected thereby was readyt to proceed to
| the argument.
Mr.. Conor replied, urging that the great substan
tive question the constitutional one, and nat no
facility should be given 10 those who desirous 10
eNade that question for the sake Of discussing
question Of practice a. 10 the right Of granting In
junction upon 7uO W0rrGrto. What Inconvenience
was likely TO ensue? Mr., OConor read from the Old
law to show that the Executive authority in respect
Of the policeman TO all practical inents and pur
poses Il. Chief Msse and not in the BosHl Of Com
nisorers and that the preservation of the peace and
good order of the city depended hun, rather than
upon the Commissioners. Why then be in such haste'
Why disausnge the whole civic government in order
to put few men in the possession of office
Judge Edn'onds followed in the same strain. He
further urged that this being new and very impor
tant question: time ought TO be- allowed for preparation.
Mr.. Noyes, in reply, expressed his surprise that tn,
counsel on the other side should not have examined
question Of such Importance before obtaining in
junction. Ii was like hanging a first and trying
him aflerward. II il admitted fact that there Is
precedent for IN JUNCTION issuing in a quo E6rranto
Judge Edmonds-Thst IS not So We make no such
admission.
Mr.. Noyes-Then if you have which you
cite precedent, we >hoald like to have you do 80
Judge EdUOrds-He will do 20 the proper
Mr.. Noyes-At all events your associate the ablest
counsel at the ber, has been able 10 nd none Thea,
70 far as made apparent there Is no precedent tor
such proceeding and the Court is bound 10 presume
there is none. We assert broadly and emphitically
that there is such Gaze. Aud because such is the
TACT because the remedy is doubtful time Is asked
to look for authorities TO seek something whereby to
bolster up what s. the face Of it, Illegal aud
f,me to enjoy all that is desired their part The
real question is whether legitimate power shall be
condemned for single day aud held at defiance, after
the party aggieved is ready 10 proceed 10 the srgu
nent In thus Gaze the defendants the party to
challenge inquiry. The acts Of officers d. dcto do, to
be sure, bind the public but they are not good to
Themselves they liable To be proceeded against IS
tcspsssers
Mr.. Field rose, but Wa stopped by thee ourt, which
expressed itseh satisfied that the order should be
granted. and hoped the parties would settle upon
tine.
Mr.. PieldEwe arc ready to proceed now for ths,
matter; but II It is desired to have the hearing to-
morrow morning viii not interpose objections
The Cour-Woxld it not be vol " make it on
Thursday
Mr.. Piesd1his Is . case Of toe much importance to
b postpesed. At this moment. though Mr. Mstseu il
at II. head Of he peioe yet there nobody By when
pocenaa oAs 10 tried punished or Ped n tAers
sAoud be riot to-aiSht AID the psuesmea sAssl4
refss to do TIER dSty thsre 10 power sfusing By
Which tAey be cosrccd into ds;sx or held -
couatsbSe so< s there ssy means sXtAiaS By which