New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1866-01-17

eversed and held altogether void to be regarded as good
nn,e wc lie Cont of Appeals have decided TO be- and
TO have been during all that period the true anu 0hy
Commits opeTs and appOlntees II, -.
point witch @ss decided E 5ecw But &S9..'
necessary to contrGve that opinion by er quite
certain Il win neither adopt the Language or spP'oP'ao INC
leaning Gs s opinion s% S psew T.o in July
the possession Ind enjoy ment OF the Once N
Commissioners
and Allen Ia that mouth his very rcpontent-the' oht'oe
Of this Cy-atempted to d,pace these CommssioneI ana
substitute other end een person. in thei, places hat ne
had no power 30 TO do i certain. He however oy the
aid of te decisions Of the Special and General Terms Of TINS
Court r succeeded in bis attempt that be Obtained ior
mis- apyontscs possession OF the mlninets ~ those oces
those appontees thereupon assumed to discharge nose
duties aud continued them until June 1862 waen andsr pro
render those monuments to the lawful ComnisoneIs WI
Brown and Allen and abandon q, claim nno e the sen
July c and Jans 1862 these pretended or as they are
saa s the c0os Apso doe: o with
no.e color Of rieht than they assumed the functions oil e
Upon tue application made by the rcator at Special
of the Office. in question to him as tho lesa
hss esaed and that the appointment BY
Controller Of Purser Wood,ut and Allen was an unlawful sp
pontmens OF these gentlemen and all other acts done by
them such Commissioners were usupstons ana as Utterly
ds,0G I'D G w ~ i hey had derived rom ron "t the
Spec al and General this Court aid in violation Of
tho statute altogether without w,r,nt oil a"' ana now
The Court, however, took different view Of i an decided
have shown that the decisions Of the SPeS ae b m
Court Of Appeals rendered The appointment by the Con
er If w H% and pnS Of es in laws
their appointment and other acts done by them'
s !. eeG .pss dssd %'' zeal pot ,s' that
which hcy derived from decisions Of the Special and General
Terms IN violation Of the statute. or without waTan,
nf Int
legal tie opiyng handing the money In 'he rea,
my appropriated the payment the person lawfully hold
n the oce question TO the sppontees OF Purser wood
h rroeeea TO discuss the question with reference to tie
Your ionors will md from Peru.a of the papers that ths
money for the paymen Of ,.s aay IN question ns'
esly entitled TO this salary Having determined this ques
ton your Houor viii not BE- seriously Affected when yen hnd
thar the respondent has paid out to some person not legally
Wherever there are claimants fund the holders Of
such fund have yet thought 1t defense TO the claim OF
ono such claimants that he has paid it 70 the other The
fndholder il such case has never thought 1t sac 10 part WIN
the fund until he has compelled the parties claiming to inter
The only question Of presen. interest h Who legally ent
tod TO this fund.- IL i o. moment TO inquire who Is NOT
entitled H. and it is equally lille inquire whether has
in fact been peid to patty not legally entitled 20 H. A..
e-. holder Of tina, Office too well settled to be suf
-red be drawn into d cn.on unless indeed the principle
of ,farr dcisis il 10 be entirely Ignored
II not presumed that the Controller will fall bsck upon
he doctrine relied upon BY him bslownemely that the re
"a rpng Conui- this office by eayfdnso or
ohefac. La. ,lePt upon his rights that he now e'op
pod TO csn his saTyespeciay this doctrine TO
have been entirely epudatei by the Court below IL l. en-
rely obvi as tho. the preceding sssnt the %
noya tho ig 81 IlaieHid ofthc office would operate
"a renoy him Bot II bis appointment Illegal there was
no necessity o, removing ,n his appointment WAS void
VOID th1. aIs pothus Ia ihs eye o. tho law These ~
ponioes wsrc respass:s No VIII pretend that rs
tan recover 70! their services no matter now he'oI
ANY rctercs that the Controller paid the moneys in the
Of tho tyrfp
e. i'm GOOD ith and that therefore tho Controller should
he protected ]. ie when II iencmoered thS' th2se ve
usurpnr Commissioners the apponte.s Of ibis very
Controller The principle 'J,soioaf sHperor' makes him
liable every act u those usgTpns Commissioners and
Again the relssor made the paper. before The Court
show during that whole period monthly drnshd or ,h.
tas office This demand alone IN The absence 81 every other
qniry, which hsd tie eject charge him with knowledge
Of al he let. n the CASE and Their legal 80 tha
good 9th predicible Of the case Isee Hitler at Carr
S o1 no soons s'S soaS i lie Controller pro, himself til.
painss principle. Of , applicable 10 the Of p
ya,. individuals, demand tiie payment now sought
Tie is,or wa. individually appointed BY the only persons
va. darhs The whole parod undputcdy ready willing and
DESTROYS 70 90 o., duties The oiee The controller and pc
AGENTS apron,es alone prevented BIC dons 90 shs. the
Controller he heard 70 claim immunity rom SUCH hs own
III rrrra,r Of the third oJe .on taken BY the respond
counsel TIA. hesc andsn the treasury eppca-
To- D III. Of ce5n he rsfrs to tho Act Of 1851 emit
County Of N@wYork" fifth section Of
this at prohibiting tho drawing Of money from the
treasury unle IL have been previously appropriated
The council In this point seeks 90 cyads the direct and posi-
tive provisions Of at passed In lS9by citing IN ae. passed
Il I he liz, time We have Lctrd Of statute bcus repealed
OF Tpi,d by I'o "s %, , ~ o' s. Inv.
Is directed 20 oE,roy DID, rent parties. ha.ns no connection
But tho objection wei taken for other and
L doe, not ,how Why there 10 10 money Ia The Queen
aBdar sued cat to compel the trustees TO fence road
they lad aid out over the grounds OF the reior They re-
turlei to tic wit tia they I'D To funds hsretum W" on
motion qnashod and pcremp,ory writ ordered Tho case
again mp motion to st aside The perep,oy wanda
The Court Dcnman, I, j. aid. II seems 20 thtt
the want Of funds point Of law the writ
Though duty which the defendants had to di'ehse was
public duty Il does appear In the return why they
without funis how they have disposed Il them" Cole
rdso j. aid much the duty Of the trustee. to
proper fences to make the roads, Paterson and VII
Jams, j., coneuued See also Tapping On Mandamns 20
Law Library COS, IN. p. go.
II is plain that .turn Of no money In the treasury
a sufficient retun without ASSIGNING te oI the
deficiency would only hsyo draw out. remove
Otherwise dispose Of the money In the treasury for the
TINE being, and put q defiance all wri's Of mendimu..
The CATION that the moneys IN the treasury ere not
mind lie does not Ia. why they not applicable. |
Tho allegation , those moneys sre not appropriated to
the payment Of this claim, is but saying that whereas
his day 80 10 appropriate such moneys yet no has neglected
to DO 40.
Tho witt that the requisite money levied col
lectcd and paid into the uoasury This Is not denied and
therefore stands admitted. n not there now. ia his fault,
He ayers that this money which lie admits levied
collected and paid into the treasury has been paid to another
lao sets his rongul ioT II this
levied collected aud paid into the treasury pay
tho services oitLe Deputy Tx Comm siones u so levied
to pay tho rzltl and the wrongful claimants. Ii
tho Ioitor DO the rishll claimant, Whit avas it to tho
respondent that hc has paid IL out 10 the wrongful claimant
tie rca,or be not the hul claimant let the respondent
show IT,
Nothing clearer than tina, the respondent show fact
inron .se nt with his original duty.
The Queen ast Eastern Counties Railway Co. 10 Ad FL
sal; Tapping Mandiuus ~. y. 500.
These arguments related principally to six Of the cases
The following were the points VI the defendants COUNSEL
Trst Tho rcAor is clearly not entitled to recover The sal
ry of the Office for he not In its possession aud
did not d.s charge it, duties.