The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1857-06-23
Supreme Court-aenerai Term.

beiore hon Judges Mitchell, Roosevelt and Peabody
JrSx 22-Dccs'cns the matter Of the First Me,ho
dis, church-rhe order confirming the award Affirmed
with coeH.
Adclne N. Curtis vs. Joseph =. Curtis --Jadgmen, OF
Special Term affirmed, with costs.
Chester NJ Foster vs. Dennis Julien. judgment for
plaintiff Affirmed with costs
aaron . Eenton, 30, vs. Elias Y Munssn &c.-Judg
meDt y defendant affirmed. with costs.
Reuben W. Howes President, &c, w. Fernando Wood,
&c-Judg meni for plaintiff affirmed, with costs.
Geo VI Striker vs John H. sriker.-order OF Special
Van RyEer vs. van.Ryker.-order for new trial, with
on, e, e,'e o. appe ~ A.. ..,,.,, go
The order transferring tho custody 70 Mr. Couant IL re-
scpded, and Mrs. Burton appointed the guardian Of tho
ch,id.
Tho Psoplescx rel lang vs. Joseph Ebuns; The same
": me acknowledgements on the Dandsmts opened and
Bd.Md 2. Cowles, Receiver, &c, w. Joseph Potter
Judgmcnt for plsAun affirmed with costs.
The People CT re-. Houndstcne Henshaw Order Of
Ibrsbm ?. Main Va. John N. Besch-Jndement FOR
painuf affirmed with costs
The Mercantile Insurance Company Va Madison NJ Caleb
Judgment fof defendant affirmed with costa
thas Whitehead Alex. McCouer.-New trial
granted. without costs Of appeal
Edward Bck, &c va. Jacob Rybsck, 6c--Judgment
for The plaintiff affirmed with costs.
Cstbsrine A. Conover Samuel J. Hunt, &c-Judg
meni for the defendants affirmed with costs.
Hill vs.. Hin-rhe appellant paying the costs OF this
motion may submit the case IN both parties, their points,
the submission be made within s,ort time, TO be pre-
sbed IN the ordcr and the Court should be Of opinion
that the Judgment should be reversed the default win be
opened, Otherwise IL must stand
Miller the Illinois Central Railroad Company and RI
bert and George Schuy Ter, &cNew trial granted
10 abide event Judge Roosevelt dissenting.
TROUBLE AMONGST THE Docs MASTERS
Sp~noer B,neds7 10 Efadrd Hobey some four weeks
ago, UPON the and VT OF the plaintiff IN this case, setting
forth that the def ndsnt, who dock mater Ter
the old regime had hndered him In the discharge of his
duty, order of arrest granted In the Marine Court
Since then the parties have agreed up the following
10 be submitted 10 the general term n the Supreme Court
without argument in pursuance ~ section ga Of the Code
81 Procedure Fscv 10 be submitted the Supreme
Court "a agreed upon by the parties 10 this action spen
Ger Benedict and others were, before the OF NAY
1887, appointed Harbor Masters Of New York and duly
qualified and entered uron the duties the TWEEN.
" eighth cay Of April 1851 In the division Of labor
Into = dstice. Benedict assigned all that part Of
the city from Market street pier 81, 10 the end OF New
York city, VII III geographically included the wharf
mentioned That pier No 40, East river, belongs 10
city u New York, and In by them leased N be present
holfer. Edward Heley was duly appointed dock master
for the First ward Of New York. which includes the pier
above mentioned. That the - day Of May, 1867, said
Spencer Benedict claimed the ght regulate and station
directed the ship Harvest 10 he hauled berth said
Hoey proven cd said vessel harborng into the PIER add
prevented her from being modsted be claiming the
right 10 do such dock msster. The question submit
ted a. whether under the OF the state Of New York.
the sad Benedict has the 70 regulate and station
vessels at what called Corporation wharves, whe-
ther the power lie n The dock master.