New-York daily tribune., 1858-09-13

u.rs Of po~er 70 .statA.h - many the Coanop
S ,b tfe o.e-rSia.ei s: .ho
ea the City would require from nse % tune az &c
would b. ureasoab bic say that he <r re- . :. ~ IN.
when providing or The necessities oi toe "a have
t, Ia r them .he markets needed BY then su"n .h.
sy limitation a. to the value Of the land % b. "a,
Corporation, deprived them Of the neSA' oil carrying
T two provisions Of ebarer mos be % 60 ~ applied 70
sive eject 20 both and while This limitation - " ~ now has
b. psreLa,c o and ey city for ohe' no rsb,
any force whAtevef does noS obifb msfs... and.
se...-ary son.eqoence p>reh4se lands '"'f''0' "
sson 'sou'o cen ~ of maintaining hi. seon that oy ne
.,,, no e,eCa.ivs business sboald b. perooso S e I'm
mon GGons s1' !, Sl :hs r. sesa. Of he dsplr;sn.
W,tbou, stopping examine the question shensi ue p'
sh.se o. a ss Of bs ehsr,es Of which entertain great
Scabi 10 clearly IN ne I,olIh pi'.o ~ ~, io
49, Amended Chsel The resOuon su;holi1ins he Plr-
sAA-e eifse re M =, 70 r. "p9 dssHns .be di,oeg
s s t nd do Be- % pas.e The contoe1 S4 had prev pev
s. 1s .pd had submitted sscS propoa to
se Common Co1nc The selection from those offers Of the
nd bet ss for ~ S:f na no s saevs sf % %
province Of the Common CouDen and properly exercised
sosivps The deed and making hePssment This duty ws
BY the resolution oonhdsd 20 he Controller and 30 I a. any
ikls appears before me 10 executive act performed or
attempted 20 be performed BY The Common 0oaneh 10 'n''
matter. g.
Co. the night control BY legislation se d.ere;'on Of the
which "a. turchsse 20 made bat after those things
settled by az act Of legislation they cannot either by
a saeh powers mus: b. exercised by the OF
psrt.n The Of appropriation out Of which this money
ards no sround 70 the Attorney General proceed the
restrain them in the asked fr in The com
~ defendants seep, the alleged f[sad on
tie part Of the Corporate Authorities If such fraud
charged equity give relief on proper sPes,en me ec,
poreton might undoubtedly sPply and where toe So %
ton 10 ta, successive body would require sueh proceeding
b b. commenced they believed fraud had existed There
Cou,
es any has discovered In the absence OF pro-
sdnss their part hsye for the Rps oi M. sapn b aaon go
lis therefore examine the complaint TO ASCERTAIN
vbhe any such fraud charged in the transaction as "oad
Where e wbe Of the action upon the fraud
s.sb shoId BE- charged the ground Of the action "
whos: such allegations the people BY the Attorney General
have nigh; Interfere then should be shown BY the
p hs, the parties had been guilty Of acts o fraud which
would authorize the Codr 10 restrain the collection Of jadg
geDt that appears TO be regular.
The complaint shows the proceedings by me Sonun ooan
l .sthoane % Ssnay IN p9ss s Ssa" ar 81 tb pa
thereon that such action referred ay consent 81
E paid therefor doe value Of the property iha, the
6 detectives thai he Coaas 10 the Corporation rrorted
dat lhe Counsel Coz the Corporation riused 70 taie any
fer the rf Of the Corporation; that application
ne subject which the complaint svers have beeD passed BY
an. eo ,pew on ma se,,s T vsrg he ses
ysepousy that The scon refused by the counsel ane
70 dc Court TO have the judgment orenod which oppo.
COUNSEL the Corpoatlon Loysber ground thai
such motol and t an order was made by . General Ts
providing bringing this and for giving security ,horon
d sppss tho, these a1ts stated the eoPlais do
so shos 'Sh facts as will Y'Sn' M the ooot N e". % fraud
charged with Deet Of doy ia refusing TO apply to set aside
ts sd Lnent sld with proceeding in violation Of b provisions
81 the charter bat no fraud charged against thea snd der
ss complain. fraud oct be proven 0y which the plaintiffs
Ido not consider that tie discretion of the Cororsn Council
b .sdoo be controlled BY the SonIs ttsy have aa;
sjeetes matter exclusively for Themselves They may
Psss impr,yid,nt laws they may nse improvet purchases
2 .y Sai Ssr se the s attorney yT % nor SV s
Ieht TO o them ee the Courts to show S their eelsa
e .etsl value that wise TO ,se ordinances
usiSsaiuins & % this s action 1t wa. bis ds;y examine
s.ps so s10 & sG" Gs hoso ' feet%s dG not conaot
with sw His consent 70 refer the % S"S,e s Of L., LS~s. .s
ps authorized by the Code which provides for the refer
sps ,me Court 70 open Judgment made in
Of resolution passed by the Common Council after full know
sAs Of The transaction in regard to the recovery of the uds
er and Of resolution directing him to take measures 70
fe payment Of sd Judgment which wsie passed BY the Com
Sis deliberate setion Of asubseqnent Common Council
ss:5e Of fraud On their Ps s o nns Isasd Ia a.
,s the purchase and the Counsel TO the CORPORATION would
poeA discretion the Of the Common Council IL
sng the resolution Of purchase 'mprovdenoe in making
be contract, attempted 10 disobey such resolutions
The Heads OF Departments do not bold their places ndepend
sntef the legislation Of the Commoa Council and where slci
kSstion not in violation Of law they have right or powe
10 refuse obedience to such legislation teca they may deem
There !. no difficulty on the part Council
Insulating this scon in the Of he Corporation, they be
He,e The contract to fsudnenty illegally
ana when two successive Councils refused t
she stteP to set aside the and one has express
directed the counsel TO take measures 10 compel The payneI
e the money the acts the counsel in carrying out those eso
ktions cannot be condemned
Nv conclusions are be conceded that the Attorpe,
General bring action in the name Of the people TO re
ssd,sn, or lie gal spOsOn Of the corporate property
That such fraud must be distinctly charged in the complaint
"a .L.E. .npd.f ~ tho. inn
That fraud charged in the complaint in this action apor
vh.sh the same can be sustained
Ars the Controller tomske the puohase Of the land in
Thai the Common Council may order land be purchased
Sra market andns tie limitation IN the charter ss &c
AID passing such resolution they did lot violate
~ rrstric contains, d in the charters Of the city
* 9ssa ohaMbEKsHrrr : .SS TGf feioe Judge baSirs
DvoRcE-DisCBARGE FROM ARREST.
Con"lis e. CLARK agt. John r. Clark
Ths was an action fOr divorce. On the 18th of June
hs order va. rsnt.d requiring the deiendan, 70 pay ts
hrs kesides allowance together amounting
SlS s. Not complying with this order defendant was arrest
obtained writ of eersiorav 20 review the former
:eedns. Subsequently, Judge Davies ordered reference 10
Mr. chsrd C. Beamsh to examine ise defendant In regard 20
hs t and ability to comply with the order of the h Of
nsapst Of eompyins with that jsment and the Coart
.esordh Y ordered the defendant 70 o. DISCHARGED from Gu.
CASE OF cANCEN.
IL reganl to the application M Cancemis counsel
r an order directing the on appeal to be printed
at TIE pense Of the county the Judge gave decision
to-hy. He told Mr.. Ashmead he had given the mat
Ter scme attention, but he could find authority in
tbe xtatutes by which he could make such order.
Hewosld, however, suggest TO the Board of Super
visn 10 pay the bill when presented, If reasonable.
ssewR, OF GENERAL sEssIoNs-ssrukD.r SEPT. IL
Before Judge RUSSELL.
There were no trials in the Court to-day, but few
ant. passed Patrick Mullen convicted OF receiving
goods sent TO the Peni,entary Toy six months
ars aha Abraham Davis, convicted of burglary in
degree, the State Prson for Ave years
he old and rioas offender and hss ether charges still
pendinx stSinst Aim
hhul Collins convicted Of msnsaugheE sent for two