, 1864-06-25
suPERsa1EhnEncY Of Police,
Assthef Prayer IL m Iajaas4sa-psas,se,.
N-1As Apekear5sa Wkh41sWa.


Yesterday morning J. L. King nd ". @, qoudy.
ahorneJp for Turtla, fled soathsr hI1 OF complaint
Ia the circa1t Court and agztn moved for in,uno-
ton against Acting Superintendent Of ppllcs
Bradley. who hss now obtain sd full control ol the
znottoa-iha asns hesosososs aade Before the mss-
tet-hr. King sstd that for "obv1ous reasons he
had ssdueed what b I'D 70 ~ to writing" 81
accordingly submitted the foloW119:
Imeve fur tempozsry injunction On the accom-
psuying bill, in favos q William Turtle. euoeriu-
sendeat Of Police, akaiast cyrns P. bfadie1, .
lice. Substantially, the same reliaf il asked In
IN, ~ In the former case before 1he Master OF
this Court. But this IL different bill, with addi-
n: T. B. Brown might not even b left to the aus
ficioa OF completely In the conspiracy alleged. by
being pasty % tns bill he II leh out Of tais pro
The only question Il the case IL jutisdichonal
one. 1t IL not dtrpsted, sad cannot b disputed By
sswyers, that u prDeeeGinss p Of II: Pretended
4 .oe.,ef y ~ for Ph e. asisad.ns 3's eeneess Ssa
ingt were indefenzibls, and the Master intims-
Ted It. There being only question Of turisdlc-
ton, then. thas quesitn has enough Of personal
and oticaal interest to Jour honor to incline you
But there sre higher and znore important inter.
etts involved than mere Official ones. To eay
nothing Of the confusion decentralization and dis
organization Of the pol.ee-A vesy serious public
detnment-edat,nc In consequence Of tbs Bradley
ueu1pauoR. tbeso IL one consequence TO the men
Of the police themselves, which probably has not
occurred TO those who ure sustaining that usurpA-
ton The paes Q! eVery policeman IL the city fs
dependant on the question OF whom he yields obe-
disnce 10; BE must, at ny p<TA, oher the right
ful Superintendent. Dlsobeylng hun, the police
man toFfsits bis place and his.wagee. he 10 bound
to Know who Is rsurper and who IL Bupennten-
dent, and must govern himself acecordinEiy. This
ls1hc responsibility and the penalty the law imposes
on h11n- This understand to be the law a.
annonaeed IN TIE contest bstween the old and Met
TupoAtan boards VI police IN New York That the
desperation aAd andac1ty of one man ahon!d sub
ject the policemen 10 30 nesdess responsibility,
and auch pronah!e sacrifices Is cruel and untortu:
the plaudltA which now attend q ssmblsnce Of lib
!s, 5r. *ss i Z Hox sssy eyshs hh IL 4Ps I'D
dieg7acsin1 and ruinons. It may occasion vacan-
ctee 10 IN extent nst now dreamed Of BY ths Gun
nipg conepralors aud their aide1s. Such state Of
ai'a.rs. for Ihe s1Ae OF the men who are morally
Rnnuess, ought to be Terminated bT the apedless
and most decisive Of measures. II a solution Of
the dlhculty can he fonnd In tbs exsrhoa Of
fAlusary and effective Chancery power, an tneati-
mxh1s service will have been done the public and
the police. To rescue those policemen from The
consequences of the fesklees mendAcity Of an
usu1per will be the most tnestimasle beaeds to
them.
having said 70 much to Indicate that there are
ve1! gres, sad tupsrtant REASONS for renewing m
application Tor an Injunction, and that we are act
1ng tn 10 pesserse, obstinate vexxtious or factions
eptIi nov move for the relief prayed for In 1h,s
poee Of he mos,on at your earlies. convenience"
Mr. kales admitted the elegance Of d1ctIon
shown In the written remarks Of Mr.. King, and
Lao no objection to the motion, but be wished to
be allowed time to examine the bill III order thst
be might be prepared with such objections to the
document on tts coming up for barring as ehould
occur 10 HIM. he denied the suggestion made bY
Mr. King. that ans admission sas made before
The msetcr or elsewhere to the eject that Brad
ley'a appointment was rod. The validity Of that
appointment would be attended to when the Ques-
ttou WAS properly rsieed. He did not deem It ne
cesearJ TO diecuse the validity Of the appointment
before ihs T. msster but eontended T. Il q
could no: EInns the Injunction.
Judge Williams said this case Was before the
maslcs 10. bearing upon former molten He
the injunction. Tie Court said:
II should have been gratifed to have heard tbs
oi counsel, and prepared me for more intelligent
view Of the matter: Bat With the short exRm1na-
tun made Of the bil-aye very brief one, IN faa-and
q the law Pertaining to tie case, ,n1 Impression
then wss, and etill continues be, that the former
nill showed no proper case for IN injunction.
Etill. that was mezs impression. aud VIC all know
| merits Of the controyersy. II I had the tine 10
| hear thlt argument. should be quite wiling TO
bear bear counsel on the respective sides-to bare 1t
merits Of the bill inteligeauJ The caee IL one Of
! such Importance, that would not be willing TO
cxtainly would not hesitate 10 reverse % NJ oriei %
| oal impression. II on . more thorough ,nTestlga-
! tlon, T were led to different conclusion. such
wrong. hare tbs honesty and caudor to reverse the
| opinion expressed TO the master. I cannot, such
T. the state Ct the docket and pressure Of bnetusee
tleation the cs.e deserves, and know it i impor
tans TO both parties 10 hare the case passed upon
Immediately. have ten csses day till the e.ose
h,nd tho call already. fhoee cases st vim occupv
nc to The END OF the term. do not, therefore,
hoT !. is 'ot me her
aire II the motion IL to Sc made that it aoaid be
naes before one OF the other Judges tp the cisY.
doing NO ln,ustlce to any Of the parties. Il would
then be ba'ote Judge, honest and competent Is
mske1, who has never passed upon the question
with thu. the complainant would make his motion
before one Of the other Judgrs. But II the matter
be Insisted IN this Court, could not take il 10
she term. Therefore II will b tho middle OF July
before the matter can receive attention 1t my
M. King ssid that he WAS sor,3 to hear that his
Honor could not give the matter somrthlng uke an
immeaiate attention. The first hil. WAS brought
pass npon it and they we're Disappointed that he
could not have given 1t personal attention. But
aiteE ne intsns.it@ q the Courts Inability
s~er any reatonsbe purpose Of the bin,
and a. delay during that tlmr was alto .ether IN.
deaitable ths oounsei On hls ede felt inclined to
acqniesce IN the suggestion Of the court to take
the care before anoLher tribunal, u the opposite
etIe Won1d agree to It.
Mr. kale1 said that they were defendants and
| had option In the matter, but must answes In
any court they were taken TO.
NJ. King replied, as the other side declined
agreeing to transfer by consent, bnt ons course
was LETT, -ad that WAS for them TO Withdraw the
motion EeFt with view Of 1eanming II in another
cDuft, He tha1 proposed to give The other side
1ne eho,ca Of the court, and i they would init
f.! nnsA preference Tor either Of them 1he com
! p,a1nant Would make bis motion IN that court,
After private conference between u. EAles
| end Nessrs. GondY and King, the latter aunouur-
ed to the court that Mr. Kales declined to express
any prefetenee, and be said they must themselyes
draw, BY leavt Of court, the motion without pre-
I judice.
The court aasenting, the motion was then With
dawn,