New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1866-09-22
TIE CASE or CHRISTIAY GELS.

rug PAT-DouER STILL rIPRBoyED-A NEW POINT
RAISED ron THB DEFESsR BUT WITHOUT sUo-
cEs.
The case Of Christian Gels came up yesterday be-
fore Jutco Sutherland in the Supreme Court Chambers GA
tho calling the lir Justice sutherland stated that
be bad "a yet been unable his associate Justices with
the exception Of Judge Brnatd That Justice grtham had
been the Court bat he had accidentally failed to see
him. ., ,,. d,
been granted by Justice Barnard Tint he wis infored by
the 0rncy that over two years ago the whole mat
minstered uniformly IN The way which they now proposed
Justice Sutherland that lie had had conversation tl
derstood be- was t. hear from Mr.. Han on he point
Ex-Tudgc DranM. Faudery00rt the Clerk ofte General
Sessions bad bcon down ~ shog he course Of prnouce
Judge salher.and-That did no; meet the pont. In his
ESJuaye Deau-Your Honor win bear my points.
Judge suthornndf don cant 10 bear an srnment Judge
Dean but anything will DO listened to aAd con-
J1de, 8ean.Tlen claim FIRST that this matter is sd
Indicated BY the iacoe Of all tie Justices u this Ccartb
Justice Sahtr~nd-WLat my practice was have already
stated and that granted these wIts under tie iupress "a
that fher9 no statute for H. u could D. granted under
lie comno1 law powers ana il maeIed tlo which, Bat
now in Ills case the qnesion hes been raised Mr. Bliss
In aud raised certain points before me- AMI ~ tue exam
inaton Of tho question came uneApscteuy on tio
don't know thai bad read i through carefully before
upon section OF the Revised Statutes at the end Of the
Then The qdtston came or How was the before Lm
Before he mad IMPOSED ha there a law right Of
Ia5tas eorp4a Noa there arc practical difficulties in the
of presung revival OF this article Of the Revised Slu'cs
~ that article tie recosuz nee rs 20 le ea IA VIC
Judge Dean-Ihe County Clerk is now tie Clerk of this
Jusco Sutherlandwen passing by that when the
nsance fled four DAYS before the return day notice VAS
to 10 given the AoryGeaera with COPY OF the papers
Has that been the practice No.
Judge Deln think enough to the papers on the
Justice sStberand-But II you restore the you
IT,. Then whose auty is i to prosecute !he eeroraTi
tho natter they issue bench waran! and take the prisoner
Justice SuseraSdBat how Is to be brought before the
Supreme Court Who 10 give notice Wh93e duty III
Judge Deasl-Ths rrae has BEEN aG Informed for the
Eitornoy ffhey hi ~ Ave sas notice the DisiretAror.
neg dsnissss % proceedings end bench warrant u ksgea
o completion IN co1 aa9 an aSt so as to leave
guarantee Of personal liberty against tue UogOJS INC
Justice sutherand-Tbe Revised Statutes constructed
besnfufand perfect system Of review they were originally
passed. but this tro91lo arises nom indlseres legsaon
Of the minor criminal courts but this has been decded not to
apply TO this eolrt.
the City of New York and that 80 far as this city was con-
eefned, repealed the 4th article Of the Revised
Statutes but continued In forceaDd In force.
Justice SutheandI thought argued that the Revised
Statutes we're revived BY the repeal OF the act Of 1871 IN @
Judge Dean-That IL what they IN the District Attor
nsy's Office. Your Honor would not allow me to argue
}1sI sutSoSa% ssfs 10 op T%n S@ds'
Judge Dean then argued length that the act Of 1857
any OF its clauses intended TO apply 10 the City OF
New-York Its title expressly excepted the Cities of New
York and Albany 1t an act to dehne the powers Of
ard the City Of Albany Various sections went on excepting
the City ofGewYok Theh the final clause provided that the
provisions Of the Revised statuj ~ relation to these cases
brogated This could only apply the Courts OF SEES
ons In relation which the rest OF the act spped that h
tt CQnrs Of Sessions excepting those IN New.f2k They
were therefore not abrogaed 10 the Court OF Sessions In
SewYorh
Julce STANDARDIZATION you claim that this article OF the
Revised snes never was abrogaed The words 81 tho act
seem fall That point however add VII examine H.
Judge Dean further claimed that the act was limited by the
the purposes stated in its title In other words
ID tle eooutes other tim NoWY0rk ANY other co1stfoo
ti0n would mako % uucOustiuti"lal. g., -
Justco SgthellaId-Yog would have to make ial aISu