New-York daily tribune., 1859-05-18


as, g., new se ''s, ir 'eis 2 rss,.i q. the a IL,
su s~s and paris of laws BoOnsstea. wth rrpssle
tse ro'hns hoesrT ,ke section W uhch havr rrfrS
re, the tra'h g. the espr.s, secesulre. ,bo1sA
% as' p , ,,%,y n aasP sr .ciies 10 ,Ss o at seufca<
uon q III sn The sFguelt; and wee not s-sre o IL.
Tea sha .e.w.Id ~ .sarninst the Provisions Il Ae &c, q
nissoned ohoeo rendered sup~nersrsry ey tn provisions
.d.,on or .sfaten Sr Of ,sse n, S sny cs
or rsn bal D entitled to all the stS Sy
hs question wheh, tb Legislature fs. oonisrrea All. f~os
H. the practical appRo,cn Of ,hi. powr oeh . a, s-,,,,.
,ss Tels,Cr q any ooasa,caa sai. By Se-sSs him
Of the Con,i,ucn seccn provides ths, ~ eomrisr.S
ccer shall b. rnoved firm oce unes BY tie S<rse the
ef the Gov,no stating he sord A b.
N, decision cf Coor; Martial pr.usn, TO law BY the
'chd.on Of the IL question Tie 'or n deprived
quotes expressly po,idss To b. sare, the raor ~ become
Lrutensr, COneli bu, that oay Deriving
his ~ that pchib,ea by constation The .coa
S ass an al Tie i ,S to s ss G
III r-hsr 10 ,h. eaee, q ,se Pcpo.rd oon.ehd.ion to
As have be eglly drpsised Of hs eonsnA aal
sss therise okc-r. 30 command But n did paos
this would BE- anecu,tit,onsL Sc,irn Article H. ia
deed provides that hld ocer OF Resmeu. shall Be ec,ea
By ne usaa officers q the respective rximenis but
doessst ow Rth. exs-nces welfare OF the service
or suy other regiment cerany COo.,uou doss nt say
in terms doss the lanRusge II the section
Snsy Of. e. soasns the sstSoy Of ors to ,ss.
~ho hsyr he'd voice cetr them rhe Constitution merely
nsk. viii spry vita ssa. 9c to The cSrS,os ,h., the s
will be placed by he consolidation under the command Of
officer in regard 20 ~ election be haa voice.
Having arrived at the con'usen that the ChsC
exercise of neither destroys mpsrs the Constitutional
rights Of the rehor eornrs consider the otheC
e. ard hs, IL cxerc prce. 20 breach Of the atioa
it's net for this Court 20 inquire whether toe exercise oft ,hs
the Judge II the Arrangement dissp
points the rva' coussrns him nscNiy .ep
may express regre; while cannot preyen.n must give tho
ed Of sc,used by sense Of pbo duty ssh
hys well founded belief that the efficiency Of the h Brigade e
the h Division and the welfare OF the service generally densu
ded the measure
The application mus, be denied with costs.
Bssorr Judge DAWES
JUDGMENT ENTERED On CONFEssloN-wHAr Is 4 sur.
FICIENI sTATEMfNT.
Wine Arenner ag Edgeron.
This was motion to set aside a Judgment entered
upon confession. The ac,s Sppcsr In the opinion.
DAVIES J-Jonts subsequent Judgment creditor 70 the psa'
t in this moved to set aside this judgment, upon hs
sOInd ,h, the sm%ns sPSn WI inch was entered was not "
II mistake the counsel for the plaintiff suppose that
Judgment lit had been then would certainly be necessary
for the party specify In his moving papers the grounds
aris They Of substance. and IL e.tsb she'd
der the judsusnt ved Wan Beck sherman - How t's
Court o Appeals held that when the object Of the party ony
ing il was by motion held that jadsmen
having been confessed ~itou, compliance with the provisions
Of the Code to be deemed fraudulent and void as TO thu
o,ter judgment creditors of the defendant.
Special Tern held that first, third ANA fourth
statements u causes of indebtedness then sufficient and denied
the motion TO yseae the ndsnen, 50 far sSerred 'heu
From that denial an appeal had been taken 70 te' Court
Amount due from the defendant to the R,Ha ' Saln.a'
President the Market Bank City of York. ssoo -"
Thrd-Amomt of our pomissoy note ndor'ed by th' ps
~ s ft''nd'"' @ due July L" 1885, and held O' o. ''' o'
Foh-Amount e two pomIssoy notes iudor.ed by plaintiff
dceuda April a. 1858. aud the other due on thu
9Th day Of June 1883 both held by the mposrs and Traders
Sub 2Ofs of he oi
confessed for money due or to become due the ~
he money become duel and must show h' tho
conf ..ed therefore Justly due or to become eae ~
iudsmen b. for the purpose securing the plaintiff agsust
constituting he liability and must show that the con-
cssed th. refore, does not exceed the same. -
considering Judgment under the second subdivision
Of this section hold that the eed!P are entitled T. the e' out
evidence of the demand bu, to the facts In which orsnaed
in other words the consideration which susans tho promise
The laid th. case has been followed IN ruOy,.;
Upton 90 How 4siD Bydere ". johnson, I'll How, ",l
Ven Beck shennan tlo How 472) Kendall Hodsns q
Abbott ssl Dmhs% Is Waterman, g sm'h 81 All sAs:.
cases except that m Howard arr @ oSn'G os ,s S Of Judgments
But the Code required that II the Judgment be given secun:
us state concsey the facts constituting the liability using pre-
cis.y the same ueuage in sub Hh same section Nov IL
tung the liability Of the plsiutf pay the several
TONED therein In statement first no particulars Of .hs defend
the plaintiff or Of the liability or sasIantee therein rs
Upon what Considerations No particulars Of the guarantee
given shown how why the plaintiff bound to
pay anything such liability guarantee
So regard to the pronory notes in statements three and
The facts In them only c0ncisely
stated but stated ALL IL does appear whose notes
they that the liability Of the plaintiff them, liability
incurred behalf Of the defendant and which he b under
legal obligation protect No consideration for this promiso
The defendant tn psy the aoun, Of these note' shown Il
Is said they indorsed for the defendant by the PLAINTIFF
but whose is not stated, how ndord or Why for the
u Boyden Johnson lcited strong Justice said;
The question lin that easel FAR relate. To
future sales, obec nbe not only account Of m inde6u-
snss but oc stated showing any objection TO cell
ods At
allowed have any future Indebtedn, should be p.rou
larry specified and should be- called for by existing liability
The Code explicit that when the object 10 he plain
tiff a contingent liability. there must be statement II
In the present cass there no any showing
the liability II this plaintiff to the defendant 10 pay these several
repay the TO plaintiff For aug, that appears Ia ,hcs.
statements the liability Of the pntf have been incurred
other person than the defendant have doubt that
the statements detective and the order aPPraed n h'a
ing them sufficient and should be- reversed
Before Judge ALLEN.
Cumberland Coal and Irh Co. sgt Allen NJ Sherman ~ al
In the demurrer in this which has already been
noce the order has been entered oselnz the demurrer on
every point that is held that here isoindsr Of
Of action by uniting IN the sat the personal claims
against Sherman Individually the main actSn which the
Judge thinks under the construction Of the ccds adopted n HIM
should The opinion o Judge Alien holds that all
Of The o action well taken and sncieny stated
aud ans specifically the able opinion Of Judge Davies on Az
the questions embraced therein.
Patif. have have amend within o days. payment u
costs without prejudice TO the injunction already rsnted
CHAMBERS, MsJ l7-Beiore Judge SUTHERLAND.
DECISIONS.
In re estate Of Clotida Smith ct al-Repor coz
drmed aud order granted.
Abraham Heyman agt. Chas. Fox-Defaut opened
and cause restored " sPsa Circuit Csrna on payment Of "'
John n. Dykes et al agt. Thomas N. Holister et al.
Motion for reference granted without cost. To eher party
COURT OF COMMON PLEAs-spEcIAL TssM-Msy H.
Before Judge HILTON.
SUIT fOR DIyORcE.