New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1861-08-07

,,r Tso. W. Ford agt VIM. Gnydon ct al--Moiou
sane %eO n i Srayes ct al. egt Abah Weston OF al
| ot 80 s3pa'y agi. Charles q. I'LL 81 al-Mo,ion 10
se' sfIe lrog@' nj for iregulrify denied. with $40
viii, &c 60. o..1 are al liberty 10 serve answer
and execution aud levy b ttand - ssc;,' Ju0enoA'
srscIAL GrhN--Ae 6 -before Iosiee fsen,u,x
| "4h'4'N "f "h'h"I i-SiAIH STREET, PROM EIsHTp
NLAUE TO HUDSON RIVER
Inc report OF the Comm ssi)ner n this case rvos
confirmed by Judge Barnard, Juiy ~ A motion for
relaxation Of costs about 500 was made but no,
yet decided, and Ihos j. Ilers aud Joseph s. King
with oiLers, having appealed from the order conn.,
Vrliug tie report, Judge Leonard granted stay.
which would prevent the coss from being paid, until
the appeal IL heard and determined.
M0l0n was made - yacste the say because the Or
der not appealed and that tie objections could
not be effected by the payment Of coets.
The Court said that the order OF confirmation dis
posed N substance Oi the question Of costs.
Counsel then cOneude1, dat al the terms en- which
the stay granted al complied WITH it should
be continued until the appeal could be heard at Gen.
eTal Session. DeCis n reserved
Ill. III. Anderson, Assistant Corporation Connect for
the COrpcrGdoni Elbridge /. Gerry, in opposition.
COURT OF OYER AND rERhnNER-AUe. G.-gefr.
Justice ISeRauAh
CASH OF HAC6LET, the SfREET-cLEAS1sG CON-
TRAcroR--BE FAILS 10 4FPEAR--NoIIoS FoR
STAY OF PROCEEDINGS.
The Court met pursuant to adjournment FOX tie pur.
pose Of Opposing Of the case Of Andrew j. Hackley,
who some line since pleaded guilty Of contempt with
the understanding that he would abide by that plea
uulCss tie Count Of Appeals Should absolve him om
the necessity Of answering tie question put TO him by
Recorder Hoffman as to what became Of $4,000, ad.
vanced by Thomas Hope & Co., in the matter Of tie
Street cleaning Contract TIE appeal to the Court Of
Appeals not having been heard by alleged reason Of
the deayof Hackleys counsel H. carrying the case up
District Attorney Waterbury proposed TO the Court TO
hold Hacey to lis plea Of guilty TO the Indictment for
contempt, and MORE ttat judgment might DO entered
thereon. Andrew j. Hickey having been twice
called, ard answering The Disti t-Atorney moved
thnt has recognizances be declared forfeited.
VIM. Fullerton, esq, oountH Tor Mr.. Haekley,
moved that al further proceedings in this DO
stayed until after tie reXt sit ing 0f the Court Of APP
peals when he said the before the Court Of APP
peais would be tried Ii he hsa appeared at TINS time
the Dlstct-Att0ney might have moved for sentence,
and Mr.. Hack,5Y been sentenced AID subjected TO i'm
pnsOumeUt The case would probably core up the
first week Of the next term of the Court Of Appeals,
as it wac preferred case Gu tue calendar. IL this
motion was not granted, iLcn counsel would ask 70
withdraw the plea Of gully, and eDter new plea of
not guilty.
lie Court stated that the whole matter presented
itself to hs mind he could arrive nj other
cllzi1n than that the whole Of Mr. HaCk!ey proceed
Jugs had been influenced, not much 10 secure hui
bis personal rights as TO obtain delay. For the failure
Mr.. Fullerton urged that Mr. Hackley not re-
sponsi .e for sny delay bis counsel had only desired
70 put the matter in such shape that there could be no
Misunderstanding OF it, aud the whole subjes; might
be settled up z, once.
The Court remarked that under tue circumstances Of
the stipulation Of appeal. he do15ted whether Dir.
Hackey should be allowed TO amend his plea TO tho
Indictment.
James I. Brady ESQ.,, thought that the fac; Of the
stipulation made the r2ht - amend the plea to the in
dctuent only the stronger. Aud he pledg, himself
that counsel bad done al in y cir power obtaio
hearing before the Appellate Court. He also accused
tine Disrct-Attoney Of prosecuting bis client, and Of
purzulng unusual course in bringing the before
| tie Court during the Summer vacation.
Tie Dstric-Attorney sid the case ore Of great
public importance TO the citizens Of NewY1rk and he
believed il his duty 70 bring be case to AsUc as soon
AS possible lie had abored siduOusly TO DO 20, and,
believing IL his dntv he should continue 70 labor assid
uOuslv 10 that end be next term of the Court Of
Appeals was not until the as Saturday Of September.
he had done all be could 70 aj counsel TO get the case
before tie last term Of The Court Of Appeals-hsd
agreed that tie matter should be brought mp in any
form Mr.. Hackey's counsel might determiuei but be
had never consented 20 any delay.
The Count said he thought H. HSckleys conduct N
filling 60 appear was somewhat ont Of place and 10 Ia
condemned but il did not clearly appear 10 him that
in the matter Of tire appeal he had intentionally failed
Il diligence, he felt disposed to grant tue notion
10 Say proceedings for the present. IL appeared that
while the stipulation wss for the appeal on the
habea corpus the District Attorney had consented that
tie appeal III ald be carried on the certord, aud
this change might have caused part Of the delay. lie
said, however that he would postpone the snbject
until next TUESDAY when he would decide the stteI;
but he would say that then Mr. Hackley must appear,
for without his presence he would not grant stay in
any event.