The New York herald., 1868-04-05
NEW YORK CITY.
THE COURTS.
SUPREME cQuRI-cHAMBERs.

AC.-YeSterday
litigation was to have been brought On before this
court ON argument in the following different
shapes:-
IN the Natter Of the Petition for the Removal OF
Danfel Dre,o-Motion for leave to put In further
verhcation Of the petition, and to file the amended
verihcatiOn nu7lo pro turac.
! TIE People, DC, cs The Erie Rdtl,oav Company,
&c.-Orginal motion for the continuance OF the in
junction.
Richard Scneu ps. The Erie Rau,rav Company,
dc.-Motion to continue injunction.
The People, &C.. rs. Dtper Dduis, Lane, SHrtdrnore
ana Thompson. Proceedings In contempt Of court.
The People &C., vs. James FISK, J, and j. s. Ed
Stdge-Return OF pl,-ies attachments for contempt.
About a dozen OF the counsel engaged on both
sides Of this legal "pacer' were present, together
with large number Of spectators from the vicinity
OF Wall street.
Upon Judge Barnard taking his seat upon the
bench Mr. Rapallo called up the case of the People
against Jay Could attached for contempt and stated
that he supposed this matter would take the same
direction the other attachments against the otner
defendants who had already appeared, except In re-
spect OF the amount Of ball.
Judge Barnard stated that In view Of the fact Of
his time being occupied closely for some weeks to
come and that the sending Of the case to referee
would consume considerable time he thought II ad-
VISIBLE to have interrogatories filed and served upon
"
were accordingly directed to serve interrogatories
upon the def'ndant Gould, at one O'Clock and the
O'Clock yesterday afternoon, at which time the de-
fendant was to answer remaining meanwhile In the
custody Of the Sherin-s offcer.
Mr.. RapaliO then stated the other motions and
matters mentioned above, and intlmated to the
court that lie was ready to proceed with the argu-
ments In those cases II desired, and II the court was
prepared to hear them.
Mr.. Field, Mr.. Pierrepont and other gentlemen
engaged on the other side OF the case wanted some
did not understand the cases stated by Mr.. Ra-
PABLO. and in the second place, they did not compre-
hend whether he was making tie motions in those
cases. Mr.. Pierrepont thought that 'the gentleman
was merely asking what his Honors feelings were as
This led to brilliant display Of wit ~ on both
sides, In which the party raised some nice points
as to the facility OF the other In stating questions.
and expressing itself in an ineligible manner.
The other side, In equally facetious terms, depre-
Gated the inability of the opposing party to compre
hend a statement that "the verest neophyte In the
profession could understand" The 'lelrned frends'
exhausted themse yes and finally subsidized, AMI the
court ordered ali the matters excepting the Of
cuded the cases or Fisk IT, and Eldridge, In which
the Sheriff returned that he had been unable to find
the parties named within his bailiwick Pluries at
tachments were issued against them.
The parties then left the court and at three O'Clock
reassembled with some additions to the forensic
staff, not less than sixteen gentlemen engaged in
the litigation be ng present. including among others,
Charles A. Rapao, Horace F. Clark and A. J. Van.
derpoel and on behalf OF the Drew interest Messrs.
p Een Smith 10n ana E. X Porter
Mr.. Clark stated TO the court that he now proposed
TO proceed in the matter Of the attachment against Jay
Gould, when one OF the opposing counsel stated that
Mr. Field was absent, but was expected momentarily,
and that 1t would be preferable If Mr.. Clark would
wait few moments.
Mr.. Clark assented by sitting down, and lawyers
and lookers-on amused themselves for about ten
$heir rear legs, yawning and waiting.
IN On Mr. Field arriving and securing reserved seat
~ ~ re front Mr. Clark condescendngly asked Mr. Field
Mr.. Field appeared utterly oblivious Of the
him. being informed Of The canse o ,ea
was somewhat astonshed at the Idea of being wated
was hs neSon the w'h to If that
under consideration, and assured him that he mt.
asn & Mas ready TO undertake any branch OF the
case wnicn required MS attention.
Mr.. Clark then stated that ne held In his hond
Swnch was factl interrogatores framed under the
provisions OF the statute addressed to Mr. Gould and
calling for his answers to them forthwith In accord
ance with the order OF the court The accused he
These interrogatOres were pre'aced by a general
statement OF the facts and circumstances attending
Tue commission OF the offence, but he supposed he
Mr.. Clark then proceeded to read the first inter-
rogatory the substance OF which was as to whether |
erwise with The complaint afdavits or Injunction in
the suit OF Richard schel enoining the issue by the
Erie Railway company or Its Officers any OF them
oi any new stock or the conversion Of any bonds OF
the company into stock.
Mr.. Clark docking at Mr. Field) ask, sir, for an
answer to this interrogatory.
MT. Field-l would ike TO know whom you are ad- |
Mr.. Clark am addressing the court,
MT Fieid-Weil, then, perhaps the court will an |
The Court-ls there any answer TO that interroca.
toryf "a pause with no audible 'answer',.l Mr. |
clark. N there Is no answer 90 on and read the next
Mr.. Field (rislng,-Answer to what, srP Are we to
answer those interro@atores nows What is the
thing. Now, shall answer those interrogatOrcs
but we shall answer them in writing and after due
and proper time, and not before.
The Court-When were those interrogatores |
scrvedf
Mr. Clark read an affidavit OF service setting forth
that the documens mad been served before one |
O'Clock by being left at Mr.. Fields Office during his
absence.
Mr.. Field here rose and inquired whether |
any one supposed, in the first place, that |
counsel were the proper parties TO serve inter- |
rogatorics upon; and. secondly whether two hours |
was time enough to answer them. Mr.. Gould had |
been during those two hours In the custody OF the
officer and hao not seen counsel, and how could It
be supposed that counsel could answer them unless /
the answers were to be imagined He could not |
understand why this proceeding had been taken 1t |
was so unlike anything else that had been adopted |
in the other attachment cases. In those cases inter-
rogaores had b en- died and the parties had been al
lowed several days To answer. He supposed the court
had reasons for actng In this way. He informed
tnat ms client Hd had no opportunity for
with counsel and had not seen tue interrogatories.
and the court knew from The bulk Of the nlerroga-
tories that was impossible TO answer them In the
time allowed. II reasonable time was given, as
the law required. they could answer hem, but they
were not 10 be subjected to the caprice OF any man
aud II that time was afforded written answers under
oath would be ied.
Mr.. Clark said tns was the first application that
had been made by any OF the defendants counsel |
for time to answer these ipterropatories The nrsnn
er had never either admitted or denied the contempt
and his silence had been considered as tantamount
TO denial. The accused was now in court In the |
custody OF an officer, and the nerrogatories might
be propounded To nim orally. Still, n the time
asked for was reasonable, they would not object It's
being granted
Mr.. Pierrepont called the attention OF the court to
the section oil the statute at page ssl which provided
that when any defendant arrested upon attachment
shall have been brought into court shall have ap-
peared therein the court shall cause interrogatories
10 he filed specifying tile facts aud circumstance al
legged against the defendant and require his answer
thereto, 10 which the defendant shall make written L
answers Oatn witln such reasonable time as the /
court shall allow"
Before Mr.. Pierrepont had read the section through
Judge Barnard stated that lie thought the section did