The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-04-09
COURT or COMMON pleAs-CaAMSsHs.
The Jay Gould Contempt Case-Hnbeas Cor.
pus Proceeding.
Before Judge Barrett.

Inc ssOuiO COntcHpL CuSc-nnDeaS Cor.
pus Proceeding.
Before Judge Barrett.
The Inooie &c rel. Jay Goud Us. James O'Briea.
Slceri6, Gc.-In this case Judge Barrett granted a
writ of habeas corpus returnable on Saturday. when
he directed that Jay Gould be transferred from the
custody Of the Sheriff to that of James Oliver an
officer ofithe court The further hearing Of the case
was adjourned until yesterday morning.
Mr.. Vanderpool, on the case being called, inquired
for Mr.. Gould.
Counsel for Mr. Gould said he was unable to attend
being at present detained in Albany by Illness and
read affdavits in confederation of the statement.
Counsel urged for an adjournment of the case for
week.
Judge Barrett referred to the indscretion and i'm
propriety OF the officer in ALLOWING Mr. Gould to 90
out of the jurisdiction.
Mr.. J. T. Brady. counsel for Mr.. Gould, observed
that 1t was anticipated that Mr.. Gould would have
been present. At least he was so advised by his
counsel.
After some discussion Mr. Field said that traverse
had been hastily filed. despatch had been received
Yesterday stating MT Gould's illness, and the
rayerse reaop % ou e
traverses the return made by the Sheriff to the writ
OF habeas corpus. and says he was arrested by him
and taken into his custody before either OF the orders
to which the papers attached to the said returns
purported to be copies was made, and that he was
not arrested by virtue of either OF said orders. The
reater further alleges that the writ of attachment in
the order mentioned was allowed by Judge Barnard
eX PARE anT s' t Ie @ was o So OF SAD
attachment was issued to the Sheriff OF Albany and
that thereon was endorsed direction to said Sheriff
to hold the relatOr to bail In the sum mentioned
That this reator delivered to the Sheriff bond in
the OF s5OoOOO merely for his appearance on
the day mentioned In the ORDER but that the obliga-
tons OF said bail that this relator should appear
before the Supreme Court to answer to the matter
alleged against him and abide by the order OF said
the bond and discharged the relatOr and
returned the said attachment with his return
fhnra hat hn hnd Inf ty.ta syafn
bail, and with said attachment returned said
bond SO taken by him as aforesaid That this reaor
appeared before the said court at the time and place
mentioned In the said bond and attachment and the
said Judge then and there notwithstanding the said
bond verbally directed the Sheriff OF the city and
county of New York to take this relaor into custody
and the said Sherln then and there did take this
lator into custody, and he remained In custody until
the order made by Justice Barrett, on the 4th of
April, 1868, with proceeding upon the said writ OF
habeas corpus And he further alleges that the
said Justice Barnard, by whom the said orders
purport to have been made refused to cancel or
surrender the bond taken by the sheriff of Albany
county, but insisted that the said bond was still
in force, and that the obligers were and remained
bound that this relator should appear at such time
or times IA the proceedings on the attachment might
he adjourned. and should answer the matter alleged
against him and should perform and abide by such
order and Judgment as the court should make, and
required The reafor to give additional bond in the
sum Of s50,0on and this relator alleges that this
amount was excessive, as no facts circumstances
were presented 80 me court ustiiyng it.: That this
resident and householder IN the city and county Of
New YORK, and that he is a member OF firm doing
business at No. IL Broad street, In said city, and
That his residences No. 200 West Thirty fourth street.
and that he was arrested said attachment at
the city OF Albany where, ut the time OF his arrest
by said Sheriff OF Albany county, he was engaged in
the BUSINESS he weM there to transact, and he says
the proceedings upon which he was arrested
nave been aud are oppressive and were, as he be-
leves, actuated by malicious motives and that all
the said proceedings were taken in violation OF an
injunction granted by one Of the Justices OF the
supreme Court OF the State OF New York In an ac-
ton brought by the Erie Railway Company men,
TONED In the said order, against the relator and
Others, intending the SAID George q. Barnard; and
that by the said injunction the Attorney General
and Judge Barnard were restrained from
taking any proceedings whatever on the action
mentioned, or on any order or proceeding
and the relator Is advised and believes that the
said attachment on which this relat0r WIS arrested
and the several orders and proceedings referred to
against the relator and under pretence OF which he
was arrested and imprisoned, are Illegal without
foundation ana void and that the said orders In the
said return to said habeas corpns mentioned are
likewise Illegal without jurisdiction and void. That
as the reat0r was advised and believes the people
OF this State who are the PLANTERS In the action in
which the injunction referred TO IN the petition
herein was granted, have no intertHfs to be pro-
tcted thereby, and the only interests affected by
said injunction are such as apperain exclusively to
the Erie Railway Company and its stock holders.
Tue arguments ~ the case were set down for half
past nine O'Clock this morning.
Arrest or che President and Secretary or
Chicago and Rock Island Railroad Company
for Violating an Injunction.