New-York tribune., 1867-08-27
,,, ururNr TUESDAY AUGUST g. ls6z-w1TH SUPPLEMENT

that the demurrer would have been held GOOD ana tne
dismissed lie has not chosen 10 do so, but mas
rsolred o ss motion TO dismiss the complaint on the
ground what is set forth therein does not constitute
i'm arms resisting the laws and authority OF INC Ohlted
states Government Congress Dy a%s NV sS Pf N sneb
a state OF disability as TO prevent thelr DIlnging ao
ton agans loyal citizen anes ne m acts
citizens shall have been restored Dy paru1h or ~
of Congress In this case there Is no sucn Vi
ability. Again, the action caLnot DC i,shr
appears defendant the proprietor ana pnDsner
of n Newspaper OF large circulation, lnsertcd
report only Of judicial proceeding To h0id ihat the
pUrctor Of newspaper can be sued by every one who
may mgg ginc he has been damaged ny publcatiOu cph
ig There is no malice here-nO desire 10 iniure the
paiafi or his business To hold tnat this acton would
copVence suits Tor that winch they might think dam
aging but else world The Director Joulh;St -
Information. That can ory be obtained ny puDIIsnI
ing such items OF fact as may Do OF eencISl
nGtOriety 5uch public proceedings as3my htc u' hy
Two persons are engaged in common cnnlhai en't
Prise cannot take advantage OF ms own wonS G "
such criminal iransgnsn IN ~ os phI g1e oSernncnt ard
plaintiff Rce s'ndie1 snG yerunert keDSr never had
any legal existence, and any ono who gave ald OF
arce thereto was by the acts OF Congress fepsl
r. ,l1 be no 0euse cause OF action Tor one
Rebel To charge another with having sWndleu tne ioO
Government or Rebel cllIens'
Motion 10 dismiss Is granted. -. o,-,,..,.,,
Mr. Harris Tor plaintiff; Mr.. Field aud Mr.. Gabraith
for defendant ..
TIE BOARD or AUDIT CAsEs-THE coNsTITU-
TIoNALrrY OF THE WHOLE PROVISION NOT
PASSED oN-TIiE BOARD TO CONTINUE ITS
SITTINGs. 49,, u Va,
' rum, IT,. agt Chauncey NJ pcpew ct al . ~.
The motion To restrain the Board OF AuulI
from proceeding with the nearing OF caus aB'' HI IN @
city has been decded adversely to the plaintiffs, Mr. J
tce barnard delivering the following opinion Whieh SUI
Whatever may be the force Of the objections urged to
the constitutionay Of the act IN 4esu4h SUI tie S sct
which creates and defines the powers OF the Boaru OF
Audit 10 he unconstitutional In all its parts sun 40 not
see how the plaintiffs, the citizens OF Cy
can be damaged by the Boards proceedings unless @ tIe
Supervisors lend their aid In carrying out the hI
inc n tax sufficient 20 the expenses or the boiru
AMI the amount OF the Claims reported Dy ~ 10 Do uv
fron tbc ntv None of the expenses Of tho Board oi
Audit and none OF the claims covered by y can be phn
eYreu out Of n fund directed by the act in question 20
bo raised for that purpose ny tne bo4t" & o
refuse 10 raise tins fuud. IT. however, they lhlpopSty
proceed 20 raise the fund and the act Is unconstu
tiOnn the action the report OF ne boaru OF Auui
would be mproper then II Injury would be likely TO re
suit remedy may be had. Section g. chap 405, Laws oi
IoG For another reason this injunction should DC uls
Laws OF 1904 applies the paintis clearly nave no sahu
ing IN Court Tho provisions Of that section 0nly give
remedy In behalf OF taxpayer, memDef OF tne Com
mon Council, or Supervisor, against the 1Onilul
Council or the SuporvsOrs; there Is no remedy gwen
| against such body as the Board OF Auh.,
| have not deemed IL necessary at TINS siagt
Of the proceedings 10 piSs upon me oipo
at future period OF time, II II SHOULD become heces
sary those questions be met and decided AT present
I'm conseduence Of the interpOsOn OF the technical 90
lection before passed upon it, wOud Dc anticipating that
which IL not properly before nc, nnd Whlcn WOuN ho'
bind the parties, would be anticipating that Wncu
| may never arise. Motion for INJUNCTION denied
-
| COURT OF COMMON PLEAs-sPECIAL TERN.-BeSoFc
Judge CARDoZo.
| DECISIONS.
Stern agt. Lloyd.-IOrder settled.
IIirt a.t. Afrtkicr.-C Complaint dsnI scd.