The New York herald., 1868-04-12

ne Judge Barett would share the responsibility
with them. Without motion from any person he
Gould and Mr.. Hamilton Harris show cause at an
early day why they should not be punished for the
hearing the alfidavit read a degree OF Indignation
which a.S would i,n have subsded BY the return Of
justice to the parties. He had no power to
punish so far, but the law had given power
to punish II N no >, good % ca cause were shown, and
an example Of parties for taking such course MS had
been set forth in the affdavit. The order to show
cause now issued would be returnable on Tnesday
next, ten O'Clock and would afford sufficient time
enable the parties to attend the II the facts
set forth In tee atiidavs were correct the course
adopted by Mr. Gould was reprehensibe. The con.
duct OF Mr.. Harris also certainly could not be ohar-
IN evidence that Mr. Gould was then unwe and Se
could have come to New York If he had thought
proper. Under such circumstances, therefore, he
would issue order to show cause why both parties
should not be punished.
Mr. Vanderpoel suggested the adjournment of the
habeas corpus proceeding until the same time OF the
order to show cause-neXt Tuesday morning at ten
O'Clock.
statute gave him discretion to conine Mr. Gould
to the custody OF some person other than the
Sheriff; but II desirable or considered proper ne
could change the custody from Mr. Oliver aud place
Mr.. Gould in the custody Of sufficient force to pro-
Mr. oliver seemed to have been physically unable
to bring Mr.. Gould to New York. The court could,
therefore, place Mr. Gould In the custody OF tnree Or
four persons, or sufficient force as might DO neoes'
-
Mr.. Fullerton observed that there was no doubt
Mr. Gould would come in the end.
Mr. Burrill said the action now taken by the court
based upon the er parte a1ldavit OF Mr.. oliver
While he did not intimate that Mr.. Oliver was hot
conscientious in what he said or sincere in the
be considered he might be mistaken In regard to
the matter, and there might be some good excuse
why Mr.. Gould did not make his appearance. Some
other account OF this transaction might be given
to justify the court In coming to the conclusion
that the inference drawn by Mr.. Oliver was not
hvtl tho pir rnatQ M
tions might appear in another version. lie sug-
gested therefore, that where the facts were based
Oliver alone there Should, not only In justice to the
relator whom he represented n justice to the party
claimed to have represented Mr.. Could at Albany
but also in Justice to the counsel present, be
opportunity afforded them TO present their state.
ment and version OF the affair as 1t might turn ous
Judge BarrettDlt is with that view the order to
show cause Is granted.
Mr.. Burrll continued to say that 1t might De con-
sdered harsh proceeding upon MIR. Gould and MI.
Harris in passing censure upon them Without giving
them an opportunity to be present. Under the Cur.
cumstances he would suggest that as the court hao
intimated that the habeas corpus proceeding shou0
be adjourned to Tuesday morning, the court Wouo
defer making any order until tnat time wnGm n ~
the court such statements or alldavits as woui0
enable the court to examine Dotn sizes t ot tn tno
parties had been guilty OF contempt the court
could then make the order. Inc Statement!
by Mr. Oliver was entirely er parte and while he did
not mpugn its veracty he believed the facts set forth
miscOnstrued the action of Mr.. Gould. He asked the
court therefore, to delay action In the matter. He
would call the attention Of the court to the certificate
of physician with regard to Mr.. GOud's health nOt
as evidence but as matter which required consider.
atiOn He had reason to believe that the aspect o.
affairs would be changed, and he therefore suggested
to the not to grant the order until the case
came up on Tuesday, When II the IactS Warranteo
such course the court could its own discretion.
Mr., Fullerton-The sefrespect of the court re-
quires that the order should be issued. .r
Judge Barrett-The matter does not call LOT any
answer. The order must be issued.
Mr.. Porter considered that the facts should b
placed sucienUy before the court in order to asce
tain whether there was any cause Of complaint
against Mr. Harris. 1t was alleged that he gave Ger
tam advice but the grounds upon which ne gave y
disclosed in Mr.. divers af1davi The court was q
the opinion that the advice given by Mr. Harris We
ing state Of facts entirely unknown to him. He sub
mitted therefore, with respect to Mr.. Harris, th1
order to show that the cause should be suSpendeq
until 1t should appear to the court that the advice
which he gave as counsel should not have been gvea
to Mr.. Could
prisoner refused to submit to the custody OF the cIe
todian who came before the court. When ne dlo
refuse to do so and when he refused under the advic
OF counsel he took the responsibility OF the aca
Under such circumstances he Judge Barrett, In th9
a w Ss Wa ss
sitiOn, be Mr.. Harris high or low, great or smaNs
was Of no earthly consequence. He was not com
gave that advice to Mr. Gould. He would not b
Condemned uQheard; he was simply required g
sn0w w should not Dc
f&r. Mr. Porter~f have no doubt he will. He WIN bs
Judge barrett win be most happy II he can, aH
After some further observations from the court
the following order was mades.-
A writ Of habeas corpus having been horet0s
fore and the 4th day OF April 1868, granted BY me-
addressed to the sheriff Of the city and county q
Jay Gould forthwith before me, with the cause q
his imprisonment and, said Sheriff having produced
the body Of SAID .s Jay Gould before before me- me. sad
Jay Gould was In his custody, together with th1
cause Of his imprisonment and the hearing upon The
jOurned to wednesday, April 8, 1885, at eleven A. NJ
at the chamber OF the Court Of Common Pleas, -
turn should be put in. And it having been BY M
further ordered that In the meantime and until tho
said sth day Of April 1858, at eleven M, the sai9
James Oliver, appointed by the court for said purposd
and on said 9th day Of April, 1868, the proceedinQ
coming in pursuant to adjournment, Il appearing
on behalf OF the reator that he yay Could
was then in the city OF Albany so Ill as "a
having been made by the Counsel for the resss
(Jay G0uld) for an adjournment OF the proceeding
under said writ having been thereupon adjourned
to Thursday, the 9th day Of April, 1868, at halfpaG
nine O'Clock A. NJ, and said 9th day OF April 1855
1t having been made to appear to me by affidavit thai
sonay attending before me In the proceeding undo1
said writ Of habeas corpus. and thereup0n the pre-
motion of the counsel for said Jay Gould to April IL
1865 at one O'Clock A. M; and 1t being now made 70
appear to me by the afndavit OF James Oliver thai
the said Jay Gould, on the 10th day Of April, 1868,
and on the 11th day OF April, 1885, being then
at the city Of Albany, refused to return g
the city Of New York and to be produced
before me in said proceeding on said writ a
habeas corpus, or to submit himself to the contrea
Of said Oliver in that behalf and 1t also appearing
by said alrdavit that said Gould was advised SJ
Hamilton Harris SO to refuse to attend or be pro.
duced by said Oliver before this day under said
writ Of habeas corpus, said Harris acting In said
matter as counsel for said Jay Could and said Ham
ilton Harris being an attorney and counsellor OF the
Supreme Court, do hereby, OF my own motion, re.
qure the said Hamilton Harris and the said Jay
Gould each to show cause before me, at the Court a
Common Pleas, In the City Hall, city OF New YORK; on
the 14th day OF April, 1885, at ten O'Clock A. NJ, why
the said Jay Gould and said Hamilton Harris sh0ul4