New-York daily tribune., 1865-11-23
LAW INTELLYGENCR.
SUPREME COURT-GsSHRAL TgRM-Nov 20 -Beforc
Justices IseRABAs, LEONARD and BARNARD.
THE PIERS or TIE CITY.
Iaviof No. Rroot,an

1 Ihl PlEbN Of CITY
Taylor agt. Brooknan
This case, which vas reported fully when before
the Special Term AID Il which ~ gsctoa ske! 70 re-
tension of tie line OF Si1yyeSan, the bounday Of the
proPery Of tie parties wa argued yesterday before the Gen.
era Term. The plaintiffs contend that they have light TO
the of The whole fsn' OF the premises. measured
perperdcuay 10 the buhead md up the proOnggon Of
Suyvc Sants while the de.epsans argue that no right Of
property can be prsdcaed Of the vsr beyond low water
mark and the Mayor Aldermen, -, OF New OH have the
sole risht TO pre.crbe the direction aud locality Of the vhav
and authorized this particular the plaintiff, canno. inter
Beebs Dean Donohue for aefendant.
IMPORTANT QUESTION or PRACTICE.
Palmer aud others act. Terry
This appeal from order OF publication The Court
below granted order publication against the defendant
the sroand that he had property within this State noton
mad to the order OF publication and that
ton contradictory adlys read TO the existence Of
Che property Tie Court below denied the order and the
The General Term held hi. had been decided by
this way by the General Term That the question might be
aed oy The peadnss and necessary brought in that way
'iITe NJ b Lord S1i o dssa peG Mr. as Vo for
CiRcur-Nov 2,-Before Jus.c. PKcxnAx
PREIGHT CONTRACT.
Bret, and others OCT. Mleige and others.
Plaintiffs who are shipping merchants OF this
boush here bv hi, orion Gn om cape rton ans
sep. aS sl for s,tl s The dethdssi. claimed to
delay leaving New.York and devia5n the passage
which enrthsned the voyoge and delayed the delivering II
1 A R he ves @ @
"a the weather fit and the only dcvaon,
They further proved tba, the defendant. sold them coal
The tu eonirae; and hs market price OF The sesop The
per tuu, the uia iny yoyed The question OF costs
The Jury rendered verdict Tor the plaintiffs for the i
To,rence sp1iias Richardson for p'rtia Owens Gray
owen for deendauts.
DAMAGES To A FURNACE.
Pierre Choaeou and others ast Paul s. Forbes THE was
su FOR $4,000 oF damages furnace and for loss
TIE dceudsn rented tue furnace under express agreement
to deliver up good order at the eud Of tier term A. the
end OF about Of the Lad be taken
the whole refined ondne ae' repaired For the OF
doing this the claim made.
The Court anay directed verde, FOR the plaintiffs for
B. " Bonney for ? ln,iGs J. o Dyctmin for defendant
CHssERs-Noy a2-BefoFe Justice CLrHxs
THE tax COMMISSIONERS niBRoGLro.
Henry Morgan, James Anderson, james Dennis,
Thoma, Ouwaier Nathaniel s Hused Charles J. DoieT and
MonIo B ssk nor fiVn, against the Controller ir their
saire. clerk. ard Deputy Tar Commissioner. In the Tar
Commissioners office daring the ye5rs In which they, to-
s-ther with Williamson md b. coar Commissioners wers
ousted from Office by Purser aud Woodrgh aud AZ en-
poye. Il will b. remembered tha, decision has de
cled W lam.On TO have been legally in the ose, and Pur
Copn,e for the Corporation claimed ta, e ra,o. had
not done tie work bn. Lad stood by and allowed Others 70 90
the work and receive the they cou not sk for
ment that office not contract bat the work done
su'ed the sim Of officer the people for payneIt
Homo. not having done the wors they could not claim the
pay He further Gained that the appropriation TOT tue pay
PEI payment by tho City ben; e1De.sy provided that
should De piiI out oi tAr iil lstlAuy irs-
has been expressly appropriated by the Legislature 20 that
purpose snfhit The proper remedy o. tho 'caof. was an
aon aga. the rtruiers fDf received 20 their use
The re n,el claim that they leElY appointed
and never iegy removed from their Offices thsi by q d.
cision Of ths C0u eabi.hed that IT, Controller lad
not Tie over sppont md that flrse NooJfur were
uui pcs s1d tle appointment ey- oni iuyaHt sad that
they could esy remove tfe re;o and appoint Per
tor iu pace
Tta The Controller sustain the defense tia he has
paid 70 hers the salary which the rsfo. entitled lie
En.s h.viug be the ogns wrong irr IN surolt such
other. oS. sni ehMs s,abs viii sle~edso Of ta w,n,
of ght . such atrs
TAs here ournel tie ssspHe % Thusiy Il
ococt a.
..r 7. 7 william. ani Hr. = smy,h 81 fe'sior.
Mf C. Twill As.sia; Cofporiioa Counsel fof respondent
SrPERlOR CD fRT-rRIAL TKnN-Nov 2-Def9Le Us.