The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1865-06-15

Another. sAas Issas Dispose Cd 81.
vsDrhsios COUSIN -osHssAL 1ssH.
0ssOro Judges hoaar4~f ~. Sarvtu.

4 ~"eos1eI BopyD~
! yr., "A ...., wrong rs Aa,y T. sbono mi
| x., .ro.n., issues which have prsv,nte
wa snosns.~ 20 cause from being 49,
this somewhat coloorA sron .. ~ioo ~ w
An appeal OF tho defendant. ~, usr OF Judge q
vim denying motion TO reset. 'ae original issuas
which had been settled by consent In u <ober last The
matter argued before the general term on Saturday
last and to-day tho Court rendered decision Affirming
the judgment Of the lower court The opinion OF the
Court was read by Judge honcrief a. follows
There several why the order should be A.
frmed :-First-A motion to set aside proceeding for
irregulay must be made promptly and before the
Brook SY Paper works vs. wiiiet ID AS Ms w va
Graydon, ID 40 Is ID no. Lawrence Jones There
was an interval Of eight months between the entry Of
the order complained Of and the motion to set aside
Many steps have been taken the part OF the defend
ant, and IT Is said the issues have been upon the day
calendar during this PERIOD and reserved ready for trial
second-There irregulanty In the order sought
TO be the ground suggested did not exist At tho
Third-The order appears have been made after con-
suaton and full debe ration by eminent counsel acting
on behalf u the respective parties and there init
nation that either gentleman not we'll Informed
upon the law practice and forms in such cases they
could have been reading the opinion delivered at
the general term in May last
Fourth-The order has been acquiesosd in for eight
cannot extend the time to appeal Is 4o5 Code)
Frh-The issues sought 10 be expunged were made
by the pleadings and did not require 70 be settled is
plant controverted by the answer IS $50 Code.)
Sixth-The Issue rendered upon the supplemental an.
swer II correctly set forth pago OF ap
peal papers, properly dsaiowed for the that
the answer contained no such allegation
Sevenh-A complaint Ii not fatally defective which
alleges the commission OF tho offence within hve ycars
next before the commencement Of the action This Is
all the statute requires in that regard CAR s. las $685.
sub 81 The defendant may take issue upon such an
ayeTment and proeed TO trial. or he may require to be
made more definite and certain u 100 Code II was the
practice the Court Of chancery to have the charges Of
adultery made explicit at tho time feiVned issue
applied for and the Court directed the issues to be
20 framed that neither party could take an undue adyan
tags OF the other at the trial Wood va Wood.
2 Page, 10S. Tho Code provides protection quito
rs literally. Sc 173, TIA, 900, 391; IA Abb 80; 7
How 204, ABB, 1867 Assuming d general charge
to be true tho delinquent cannot desire to have ii made
specific; and II she accusation DO false
critical nicely Of narration DO useful to person
wrongfuy complained Of the skill Of the advocate
develop tho perjury by examination Lastly, the
grievance alleged behalf Of the defendant is ground
less in fact The compliant rendered tho issues which
settled by the order OF the st Of October 1904 the
Of the defendant did not tender the issue which
disaowed the defendant the 3is January, 1895
(see order OF that date page lib Of appeal papers did
not ask TO have all the Issues reramed
formed expunged but simply those created by her
supplemental answer called additional issues The
defendant feeling herself aggrieved by the refusal
allow proposed issue (XVj, invoked the power of this
Court by appeal and advised by the general term
that the order Of disaowance correctly made II
Issues framed by herself In October previous the
tribunal open TO redress II any committed
The order must be affirmed. Barbour j., dissented
orally.