The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1861-02-06
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT.
BEFORE Hon Judpe Be ita and a LurY


| FEB SIN The Matter Of The Uniicd States IS George
Lar and Gusorus A. Conorer.--Ihs suit TO test
the liability OF the defendants sureties for Isaac v
Fowler late Postmaster Of the city Of New York The
grounds upon which they dispute their liability are that
the bond not perfected inasmuch that Mr. Char
lick had not offered his signature il the third bonds
man. that the department at Washington held the bond
in that imperfect and that tho government were
aware, should have been Of the fact-that Mr.
Fowler actually defauter the time they (tho
defendants) were induced TO sign the bond.
TX Judge Roosevelt United States District Attorney
and Mr. J. W. Gerard appeared for the government and
Kessrs Charles o'Conor and H. W Robinson for the do
PENDANTS.
The opening Of the the conceded right OF the
defendants, aud Mr. oConor proceeded address the
jury. Tiom his statement II appears that action was
commenced on a special equity side Of this court by
law and Custavus A. Conover against te United States
for the purpose Of procuring the application Of certain
principles tr law and equity IN Controversy with the
United states. II is case in which the Jury
10 try, in fact a claim Of the United
States against these gentlemen who, nevertheless
the plaintiffs in the present action the jury were TO
say Whether INC Government can seize upon the goods
mary distress warrant therefore the Law permits
10 come into this court 70 have It determined whether
any debt exists not Mr.. Isaac v. Fowler for
number Of years Postmaster OF this city In the year
1860 the Office taken out oe his hands and he de-
citrcd 70 be delinquent and he went away avoid
rest Public officers generally give bonds for the faith
full performance Of their duties There was bond for
Mr. Fowler in when law and wore surcties to
the OF so 600 and II avoid the enforcement
Of that bond that they then before tho Jury As
the Objections Mr. Oonor stated that Mr. 10 xle- was
appointed Postmaster May 1853 and his term OF office
expired in 1907 he then obtancd eyecutive appoint
ment, that ~ BY the President, un appointcl by the
cnscft Or tho Senate The confirmation by tho Senate
took place in May 1853. draft form OF the bond was
forwarded 70 Mr. Fowler from Washington for execution
and 90 far that bond executed was signed
on the 10Th Of September 1885, and hat ocer pei
United e pascfm the duties q one Of the largest Offices
in Tie country for months without having given perfect
bonds fer tie faithful discharge Of his duties In septem
Der 1858 The bond signed BY these two defendants came
nto the possession Of The department Washington.
The pec reasons Why this bond should not be enforced
against these ecnteren are that the rst bond was FOR
$4,000, ara executed by law, Conovcr and Nr.
Chark the f. m ~ the second bond was forwarded 10
Mr. Fowler 20 BE- executed by three suretestherc were
no names cmboleu bot four seals for the signatures
were afyed 70 t. Fowler applied 70 law and Conovcr
ohd they preceded 70 execute the bond, believing that
the 'hrd party was - agn 10 before 1t delivered
and having full confidence in Mr. Fowler public
onCer Who ihcy believed, had fulfilled the dulles OF
his Office faithfully. Tor reason pcrhaps the alb.
fcnce Of r Charck from tbs city the other signature
vas not obtained In consequence OF tho urgency the
department NJ Washington, tho bond was sent By Mr
Fowler imperfect ann incomplete, and remained IN TINT
state IN the department The rst intm7on either Mr.
aw O Mr. tonoyeT had " delinquency tho part of
Nc Fowler wUs the issuing 81 the distress warrant Tint
corgti.1tc defence 70 this Instrument the question
o. fact winch the Jury would be calod upon answer ia
whether K duly cyocGcd without hc signature of
tie third ralty 10 tho bc that these two giruatrras
affixed To thc bond which was no, 20 be perfect
until all the signatures attached, why, taon
then tho Instrument remained imperfect. law and
ton7yrI did not authorize uo delivery Of the bond
" thc government untl Il we completed
Tho Jury would 10 called upon 10 answer, rst % 10 Mr.
law and shcn 70 Mr.. Cunoyr, whether lie executed
this bond IN the Intention n h wing il delivered With
ont any thing further, a his act and without the al
dton q any ether cosecnrity. Mud secondly whether
al any time prior 10 tic doulty of Nr Fowler the do
fcn9an had any knowledge notics lint the bond had
been delivered ~ the imperfect state ia which IL was
And tn, whether tlc tmo these bonds wcro put In
the possession Il the fof Office Department Mr. Fowler
dcliuqunt. Mr. Conor referred 10 tbs business
ana duties vi Tie oSt Once and the bet we
Fowler and the government. Mr. Fowler was required
BY law 70 make Ills deposits With tho Assistant Treasurer
at least week, 10 that The public business was
rightly conducted between the department ut Washing
ton and tha Postmaster " m city he could be more
Ian ono eek In and that would amount To
cincthus considerable III CITY like this. Mr.. oConor
rccnrdeA a. read tile stipulation between the United
tatss f1xtFi,t Attorney and Mr. ~ W. Robinson coun.
II Tor the defendants, and the statement 81 account
rouperced reading the answers to the lnterroga.
tari,s pGt 10 Mr.. Fowler by Commission In
Havana ANA which were f,hiishcd IN the HEnup im
mcdiatcly On tho return OF tn commission onie,tiohs
to -oo III TIC uestiOns and rased by the
Jnnt states Attorney aud NJ. tcrart and f9y aTslel
by them and SIR OGorgr.
tn VI. oourge ~ The arRpwent, Judge Bctts said-Ihc
OcuIt tUprcge eentluen wil instruct the Jury under
standrgy ths point u wi tell them that whatever
cftcubtha Interviewed uetwclr tho parties ~ respect
" TIC 2c t"oa - The iced, hey might take ini0 cln
hfAt'h " tesrtct ~ the tujctr' mjnE OF the parties
siBhNF IN. eonNrrftD al not relate - the eSe
cution 81 Tie Iced btu wes rnnsofn t4t the evidence
Scgle ~ IL 10 asah.
NJ Ocungr nisss directly com .ctcd Win lie &c, OF
| delivery, and was part 81 i'c tFAnsa 4 on
III duds lufiher fcmuhe'.--i admit tie ovilencn
hu viii uato he exception ~ The ust5'ct Attorney ln4t
thc point iaay be discussed ~ the 6nal argument II the
rac. ti9li The delivery a tbs dei according IA Inc
intent SUD obeci ~ thc igncrs The real tUe III be
I iEstomtut tsCif n ~ ~ tred mih % 81 -su1i ~ d.
s.Ie