The New York herald., 1866-12-11
SUPREME CovRT-cHAmBeRs.
The Convict Jeremiah O'Brien-A Writ oi
Error Granted with n Stay of Execution oi
Sentence Of Death.

The Convict Jeremiah O'Brien-A Writ Of
Error Granted with a Stay Of Execution Of
Sentence Of Death.
Before Judge In graham.
The counsel Of jeremiah o'Brien, Judge stuart and
Mr. Mccarthy, have issued writ Of error and obtained
Q stay OF execution OF the judgment from the Special
Term OF the Supreme Court until the Appellate Court OF
the State heard determined upon the To-
g.y Of the proceedings upon shs sra q the convict
Kate Smith. This stay will have the eject At least Of
delaying the execution Of O'Brien for considerable
length OF time, and may result. as his counsel conf
dently believes, In obtaining for him new trial
Application ON a Writ Of Habcas Corpus for
the AdsnissIon 10 Ball Of One Of the Parties
Implicated In the Lord Bond Robbery.
IN re Wiiliam r. Bo,cot This was motion for the
admission TO bail writ OF habeas corpus Of the pc
ttioner who s alleged TO have been in possession Of
about 900 worth OF the bonds stolen from the safe Of
Rufus l.. Lord and who has been for time
tody awaiting trial the charge preferred against him
that OF being receiver OF the stolen property. The
the case should be submitted without argument his
behalf but cited the Of the People against Cunning
ham the Burde murder case as authority on the part
Counsel for the petitioner stated that at the time Of
ths facts O. the robbery coming 10 light his client
absent In Rhode Island and thai the Indictment against
him found In his absence Upon hearing OF the
fact that he supposed 10 be implicated as receiver
sary In order TO reuts The charges but found thai he
had been indicted, and was accordingly arrested Coun
rel hon proceeded 10 state that great principle
involved In the application, party whose reputation
had hitherto been above reproach had been imprisoned
without the privilege Of bail being offered him, before
trial and conviction, and cited numerous authorities 70
show that the commitment without bail in this instance
unconsttutonaI and violation OF tho statutes
such provided and held that not in the dis
erection Of the court whether the application should be
granted, but tho question for lis consideration was,
whether the BE- inirinsicalIy baabe. and II, be
Afterwards cndeavored TO show, the was IN
which the petitioner was legally bsable. The princ
piss upon whichA court may take ball are TO Be con-
sered 10 the probability or the petitioner appearing
for trial. but not upon any considerations regards the
said doubts ~ 10 whether any rsosver n guilty but
such - come In Contact with the thief, and no
evidence was sought upon which TO base the
property from the thief had received The bonds IN
The course OF trade and offered them for sale in the
usual way Moreover, there WAS doubt - TO the
copclusion counsel submitted that cases intrinsicay
bailable no discretion vas left with ths court but 70
scoa h sosS q ~ ,s.,s ds
question raised by the counssI for the State 10 the
appearance OF the prisoner for trial, and sucient
testimony In the indictment 10 race the receipt Of the
taken Decision reserved.
The Atiassic Mail Stss smshIp Company
Again In Court.
IN re hs Atlantic Nal StsamsAip Company This
cae came up again before this yesterday on mo-
lion aside the election Of the Board OF Drec
tor About 100000 are involved In the suit now
sanding between the old and the boards Of drec.
toy Of this company and both boards plan,as and
defsndants Counsel for the old board stated thai 10
consequence of nephew Of Ar Justice Ingrsham bay.
ing been appointed on The board there fsi ns
pFsvAIing among the parties concerned that would he
barpcy polite for bin 10 conduct the hearing Of the
motion Justic fnerabam promptly declined 70 hear the
caes. and II consequently set until Wednesday,
,Ss motion, rSiisfson aud R.ppslo; opposed Wander
pei, rarger and Woodruff