The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-06-23

an about the lease; knew there was never any In:
tention to prevent Mr. Wood getting the amount Of
he was very troublesome to Tammany Hall, and 1t
became necessary to give him bad character, and
Q. 1t is not necessary now to give him bad char
acter9 A. He was interfering with us at that time
In Tammany Hall. f
The Court-I do not think shall try that question
TESTIMONY OF MATHEW T. BRENNAN.
Matthew 7. Brennan, on behalf OF the CITY, testified
BY Mr.. Williams-O. Were you Comptroller OF the
city during the year isess A. Yes, SIR 0''' =
: O. We're you applied to in any manner In refer
ence to the resolution OF the Common Council Of that
Q. Who applied to. your A. received in the first
place communication from the Mayor.
q. Have you that communication with your A.
Yes, sir twitness produced it.
Mr.. Williams proposed to read 1t IN evidence and
Mr.. Shea said he had no objections.
Mr. Williams read the letter, as follows
How No IS EAST FSysgsnsIH sTnE e. Dee is ls
,ss sn No
street have since seen the same in print and on exam
you return tomorrow mofningi shall be at
Very truly yours, C. GODFREY GuNrHEn
Q. Did you sign any lease of these premises9 A.
which had expired, in May, 1866; one reason that
did not sign the lease was that letter.
o. Dld you receive any letter from Mr.. w OOO ABOUT
that timer A. After my positive refusal to sign Mr.
Wood sent letter which was dated, think, March
Mr. Williams read the letter. Ut set forth Mr..
Woods willingness to remove all objections to the
of the rooms and to put the offices for the Public
Administrator and Corporation Attorney in COM
@. Did you receive at that time from Mr.. O'Gor-
man any . objection to your signing the easef A.
Q. Did you have any conversations with Mr.. Wood
in reference to signing lease OF those premises A.
Yes, sir.
O. Before the passage Of the resolution A. No,
sir. .-
o day or two after the passage of the resolution.
Cross-examined by Mr.. Stoughton-I understand
you to say you visited and examined the premises
with Mr.. Devlin Corporation Counsel'. A. Yes sir;
1t was some time in 1868; it was few days previous
to the first lease being signed for it.
ascertain whether they were suitable for the Cor
pOratiOn COunsels officer A. To show they were
o. You afterwards executed the leaseP A. Yes,
sir. mr. Emott objected to this answer.) ..,
Q. At this examination did you sign the leasef A.
l did. l cannot say that concluded on anything,
but gave way to Mr.. Devn, as he was the head OF
the Corporation.
the ComptrOller's ONCE to which Mr.. Williams OBJ
jected. l iataes fr. W
The Judge supposed the objection was on the
ground Of counter claim and that the letter could
M Mr. - shea said these were part Of the public
Mr.. Williams submitted that it was not evidence to
20 to establish lease. Mr. Wood could not manu-
facture evidence for himself by writing letters to
the Judge received it and Mr.. Williams objected.
Mr.: Shea then read a letter written to the Comp
trOller by Mr.. Wood, dated April TO- 1856, setting
forth the action Of the Common Council renewing
the lease and notifying the Comptroller Of his ac-
ceptance OF the terms and readiness to execute the
lease. -...s .-.. .t..
On redirect examination by Mr.. Williams, witness
stated that the letter OF the 9th was received by him.
ne thought, on the next day. the 10th could not say
Of his own knowledge what offices Mr.. Devn and
Mr.. O'Gormanhad occupied as Corporation counsel.
also called as witnesses for the plaintiff but their
testimony was immaterial 1t related mainly to the
question whether the rents were exorbitant for
premises in the condition and of the capacity Of the
premises In litigation; Of course both witnesses con-
sdered the rents extravaganza.
A recess was then ordered, and at its termination
the
TESTIMONY OF Ex-MAYOR aUNTHER
was taken. Witness testified that in 1865 he was
Mayor Of New York and signed q resolution author
izng the renewal OF the leases Of Fernando Woods
premises, Nos. IFS and lit Nassau street; approved
the resolution in compliance with request OF GER
tain members OF the Common Council; witness had
authorizing ing the widening ana opening
time, which he wanted to have passed by the Board
but could not get them to understand the importance
Of; they asked witness If he would sign the res0lu
ton directing the leases to be made, and he told
them he would in consideration OF their consenting
the Ann street matter; witness believed the Ann
street opening would be benefit to the city, and
this was the only way 1t could be got through the
papers relating to the lease were sent
without paying much attention to them, merely
glancing over them; thought he should
and tile leases for long time witness afterwards
requested Comptroller Brennan to withhold his sig
Aldermen Kelly and kyers and
luton for the leases; witness could not remember
any others at present.
Crossexamined by Mr.. Stoughton-(W witness identi-
fed the letter OF December L., 1869; did not Mr..
Brennan subsequently to the letter the subject Of
the leases; had no verbal conversation with him
about it; before he had asked Mr.. Brennan to with
hold his signature witness had made up his mind
that these leases should be made made up his mind
up his mind that 1t should be DONE believing it to be
to the interest Of the city for what he had In view;
Wood; was on terms OF hostility toward him and did
not speak to him; never spoke to him in his life
Redirect-Q. What had you 'in viewp" A. The
extension Of Ann street; could not get 1t through
otherwise: thought was for the interest Of the
city and would save litigation besides opening O
valuable means Of traffic; some OF the Aldermen
charged me with breaking faith with them and
thought was justified in doing so: thought Mr..
O'Gorman wanted Mr.. Woods premises but as it
turned out he did not; did not understand from the
Aldermen what their motive was In the matter Of the
leases
Nothing further OF importance was elected from
this witness, and upon Peter Cooper and James M.
TAYLOR being called for these gentlemen failed to
spond. Mr. OGorman said he had subp9naed other
witnesses, but they were not present and attach
ments issued against some Of them. Mr.. Cooper
knew nothing about the case and he therefore would
not move for attachment against him. In the case
of the members OF the Common Council whom Mr..
Gunther had mentioned, two OF them could be sub
poenaed, but the third, Alderman Ryers, was dead.
Mr.. O'Gorman then suggested to the court that to
save time the question OF the defendants counter
claim could be argued, which was agreed to- The
gentleman then proceeded to argue that no counter
claim could lie against the city In this case as the
leases had never been executed and the periods for
which rent was demanded. some Of them, were
subsequent to the commencement OF the action. The
action was commenced In January, 1857, and the
summons and complaint served upon Mr.. Connolly
(Comptroler, on January On the 18th OF February
at Congress at the time the service made on Mr..
Connolly. The first quarters rent up to August 1,
1885, and the second to November l. 1885, were the
The other claims for rent due February 1857,
May /, 1857 August l, 1867, and November 1, 1867,
making SIS, 900 In all.
At the close Of the argument the question OF the
right of counter claim the court reserved Its de-
TESTIMONY OF JAMES HAYES.
Ex-Counciman Hayes having meantime arrived
In court was called the next witness, and testi
Al. III ho a NJ