New-York tribune., 1867-08-14

ton from the complaint that the plaintiff abs0utefy
owned the play and the defendant had taken copies
evidence that the plaintiff only aquafed Interest
IN IN T. which does not for sIca reasSn ente him In ny
even plaintiff did wholly own the play the aidays o1
month before plaintiff purchased his qualified nteresa
hat during some OF these public perform ances one OF
and from memory of tho incidents, scenery, dramatl
PerSoag, ana Dialogue, concoted manuscript wh,ehh
from what know of the human memory, think such
exercise wonderful That the decisions allow person q
foo fort TO- 81 ss Is aE s
hibon of the play took place in London in the month Of
qured title In my opinion such exhibition dedt
cation to the public when considered In with
An examination OF the authorities has failed TO con.
vince me that plaintiff has established such claim az
Beyond this however doubt the propriey OF granting
an injunction in any case where the party can nave ias
relief and satisfaction at common law for any damages
which he shall sustain. There is no suggestion In tha
case that defendants are nsolvent or that pann woaa
sustain irremedabe damage through acts OF tho aeIen
dants seven he had established Da ace case ior an
The motion for Injunction is denied Mr., Booth fos
plaintiff; Mr.. A. o. Hall and Mr. Cram for defendants
THE EXCHANGE PLACE ROBBERY.
1t will he remembered that daring robbery
Sl Gd IN e
boy Of Martin Mass Co.. the robber putting hs fngers
his hand Schultz was arrested but proved to be wit
ness rather than criminal but by some error was hed
admission OF this fact by he Assistant District AtO
he was brought up Oh habeas corpus and discharged
Mr. Howe for the prisoner; Mr.. Blunt for the people
THE s,vv5.H WAR OF w. THE EXPRESS n P COMPANIES ION
This Is the suit of a stOckhOlder of the Mer-
chants Union Express Company against the sockhold'
order was granted on the affidavit Of Robert Greens
appointing Referee to tako the testimony OF certain Of
sdsvts such testimony to be used on the motion for
Receiver The affidavit OF Mr Greene set forth that he
had seen portion OF the defendants at the st. Nicholas
and that they had expressed willingness 10 give
their sdavfts, but the hour being late had promised g
torney There they had cOme but their attorney had
appeared and after adjournment on account OF the
absence OF counsel the counsel and attorney offered 70
furnish afidavits they allowed to draw them
This was held refusal within the meaning oi section ~.
to yacate the order some weeks ago. and the motion DO
leave TO the motion, and this the paintf con
Afdayts were then read on behalf of the defendants
in which they stated that when they expressed thet
readiness to make affidavit Mr.. Greene seemed taken
Is cce but Hi their P attorney GT Pierce had promised
so; that they entirely willing notwithstanding theis
adsvis to any pertinent facts but the facts on which
they bG sGued tSs 70 sn %as reST nad s
BY the old Express Companies they having paIa M. MI
counsel in the being employed by them and that h
Merchants Union Express Company Is not insoyent al
real re- estate IN this city, not due they 6aSns isrss
&s mater Of law they argued that the Code not
authorize the examination Of party In this way oat
only OF persons not parties Whenever party Is mesns
ton $780, Of the Code expressly limits the examination 81
party the mode expressed in that chapter while thls
thory the point the section being smSs ssS Saa
Of d mo 81 5nS Hs also cited deoso
of Jas 70 sec ala
ants The weight Of evidence in favor Of the deendante
overwhelming Then again tee afdavs OF s saS
iaSts were reSuired and that the knowledge Of them
persons whose adayits he sought and that they
eSGs The Court should be SATISFIED as to the facts fhS
TP1SS Of ssoSa e be guarded
dangers OF general ineulstlon Under thus Ssas an @
TO him In the conduct Of tho order ,,s
In reply II urged that tho statute was reneaa3
party desiring to use the adavit should draw t and
that refusal to allow hip TO draw 1t was eQuVaSn' :"
The Court took the yapers reservng s decision nj An An
other motion was at the same time ~ ce & Ia
tfs for leave 70 'mend the complaint III "uiO" '"O
M and Mr. Brady for plaintiff for ae,eud
Mr.. PiecTe Mr.. Allen, aud MI ComSVoch' '0' "
ants.
HABEAs CORPUS. u
Ia Herman GeraBge
This was an application by habeas corpus for
the custody o child The petition set up that the wife
@ the applicant deserted her rusv~ In sostoS s
nor sou nHr that on her sr1ly3 sxSs,S ~ SeS uyas
2sSfsSdes RsysS sdG s2 ss asGif q
% ss. and eSs.st ~ s
husband discovered that his wife had left him he fob
lowed her to New York, and after long aud weary
search for three weeks last found out the retreat OF h
child He petoned the court to paye his son deliys
cred into his care The officers OF the Asylum made %
tn stating the In which they became possess9d
~ The nv After argument the court granted the sppl
se Iar6n and ordered the child 70 be restored
70 ts rather Blumenste and Cohen, attorneys for pe
tioner. ne the supe ylntendent for the Asylum.
DECISIONS.
Jarvis agt Barker Motion granted.
Douglas ait RoSdworth. Motion to yaoate judgments
DlS AsSTorth ast Notion to vsOsts attachment de-
Hay agt. Yeaton -Motlds denied
Rioker sgt Yeaton Motion denied.
Cahill agt. Rumpf.-Moti0n depled
Smith agt. Halstead-M0ti0n denied.
MoVieker agt. McVicker-Report OF referee oonrnaed
and tud dgment Of divorce granted
Before Judge MULLzE.
In tho election Of Trustees OF the lathrop sewing
Machine COmpany.-Motion TO continue Injunction de-
MED. Same agt. 5ame-Motion to deliver over oooks
granted, with 1l0 costs.
Snowden agt. B0gardus-Metion granted Tor leave 70
amend summons on payment OF costs
Before Justice BARNARD
NorIcE-Ordered. that the third Monday on August
and for balance Of said month"; the Chambers CaeR
dar FOR contested will be called at Ii O'Clock n
instead Of IL M, as formerly.
SUPERIOR COURT SPECIAL TERM.-Before Judge
JONES.
DECISIONS.
neD Darpnrd AipapA