The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1871-09-15
TFiE FENAgCEAL TROUBLE EN-
NEW YORK.
The Proceedings in the In junction Case -Afi
dayits of VIM. Nj. Tweed.

New York, Sent. 13.-The proceedings
in the suit OF John Foley and others against
the city government, to show cause why
an injunction against them should not be
made permanent, were. resumed IN the
Supreme Court this morning.
Mr.. Bartlett read the affidavit of Tweed.
aud O'GoTmln read the second affidavit OF
Tweed, denying generally tho allegations
of the complaint, especially that In@crsoll
was ever his agent in the matters of COM
plant, or that the expenses iu his depart
ment were ever in excess OF what the law
allowed.
| MIR. Strahan, in submitting, on behalf Of
| plaintiffs, a motion for decree on the pa-
pers before the court, said Foley is rest
! dent ard taxpayer, and asks specific relief
Iagainst defendants.
! The legations OF the plalntills are in fact
! admitted. Some of the defendants, no
doubt, come III court and swear in contra
distinction TO certain statements in the
complaint, but every material allegation
. remains sustained. We have substantiated
| from Mayor lIaiPs own reply that the debt
OF the city and county has been increased
| from $50, ,G28 $50, Whcu Hall was elected, to
! Sl0G, ,GSg, ,05S on the 3lSt OF July last. Mr.
, Strahan expressed The belief that Tweed
was himself both the New York transcript
| unsatisfactory to have allegations of such Il
| character against city officials tried on mere
aiiidayiis, and plaintiffs asked for contin.
uance OF the INJUNCTION until all matters
were fairly and squarely disclosed.
Mr.. Strahan then proceeded at length
with his argument in detail, in the course
Of which he said the only answer in equity
and Justice to their allegations was the pro-
duction Of vouchers, which had conve..
nienty disappeared ut critical moment
when those evidences of fraud OH their face
were wanted in court.
At tue conclusion of Mr. Strahan>S ad-
dress the couIt took recess.
ARGUMENT OF MR.. o'GoEMAN.
After the recess the remainder of the ses-
sion Of the court was occupied by Mr.
O'Gorman for the defence. His argument
! was based OH what he claimed to be tue ui-
consiilutionality Of the law on which the
present suit was brought. He laoorei to
show that trouble and di treSs would he
caused by blocking the wheels Of the city
government.
During his argument he brought from
the other side the statement that they did
not object to the issuing OF revenue bonds
or consols, nor consolidated debt bonds.
He said he hoped. since he convinced his
opponents OF their error in this matter,
that he had been equally fortunate as to the
court.
MIR. Strahan said they objected only to
| the issue of bonds without first getting an
appropriation, and only asked that the
Government contine itself to the S23, 600,
600. The court here adjourned until to-
morrow.
AFFIDAyITs OF WM. n. TWEED.
The following is q copy Of Mr.. Twecd's
! first affidavit
VIM. Nj. Tweed being duly sworn, de-
poses and says that the defendants, A.
Oakey Hall, Richard Is. Connolly, VIM. n.
Tweed, and Peter B. SWeeny, have hereto
fore, and before the granting Of the ltJunc-
ton herein, met as board Of appoftion-
ment, as required by the 81 section of the
statute referred to in the said injunction,
and fixed the amount to be raised as in the
1st section of said act provided, and set
apart so much of said sum to be raised by
tax in 1871 as may be necessary for tue pay
ment of interest on bonds and stocks OF the
city aud county Of New York which shall
become due and payable from taxation in
1871, and for the payment Of so much OF
the principal Of said bonds and stocks Us
may become due and payable from taxation
within the said year; and also so much rs
may be necessary to pay the proportion Of
the State tax to be paid by the city aud
county in said year, and apportioned the
remainder thereof among, and set apart TO
the various departments and purposes of
the city aud county Of New York for 1871.
In his second affidavit Dir. Tweed de.
poses and says that all the allegations con-
tained in the complaint in this action In re-
gard to this deponent personally, either
alone or in conjunction with others, or ID
regard to this deponent as city or county
official, which directly or indirectly, or IN
any manner whatsoever charge, or are in
tended to charge, or imply fraud, conspi-
racy, misconduct, neglect of official duty,
disregard Of law, or any other wrong what
soever against this deponent, are all and
every one Of them untrue.
MThis deponent further says that the alle-
cations contained in folio % and folio 90 Of
the complaint in regard to certain city and
county officials, SO far as the same may refer
or be intended to refer to this deponent,
are untrue; and it Is not true that he
has ever, with some, or, any of the
subordinate officers, or with any per-
son or persons whatsoever, acting prln-
cipalIy or otherwise. under the cover
of the names Of other persons, or under
anv cover whatsoever. formed with them
associations for the object and design OF se-
curing through such combinations large
sums of money, or any sums whatsoever,
yearly, or at any other time or intervals Of
time, from the treasury nor Is lt true tnat
he has large interests, or anYinteresL WnaC-
soeyer, in the newspaper known as the
New York Leader; nor is it true. as al
legged in said folio rs OF the complaint, that
he has conniyed with or aided any other
officials, or any person or persons what
ever, TO give monopoly Of the printing Tor