New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-09-16

Raising any mOuoy ny YAK IN the lily anu SOuhg VI
Certain thing. :s. se second that
% s915 Ss G Of
HCns tide Of be
se apart the that
the present Mayor Aldermen. and Commonalty be pre-,
S Ss'd T1 t ppos
the Controller OF the City Of New-York be restrained
less they shall be first audited and set apart for
their nor Pay any debt or bills ~ The Hs l0rs
tho Manufacturing stationcrs Company, and The HeU-
York Ledde Association or any OF them SIXTH that tne
ing any money on the credit OF the City or county
paying any private Claims or any OF the expenses OF the
The complaint charges also. conspiracy the part
OF three Of the defendants by continuation cousion and
the City and County Treasury and to do various other
acts OF wrong and perpetrte acts Of fraud That acga
positively that there any truth whatever IN the acga-
ton; Mr. Connolly denies In the same way; Mr. Hail. the
srSns The of that is %
to the that + made against tine aeff ha
who last addressed the court exudge Barrett that ne
against him Right here gentlemen COME. in point q
taken in favor Of the ID de1 9S1nS
rse ss .o e Charged With
liabilities and created claims and demands against them.
far in Of and egs! appropriations made by
Per Cent law has not repealed all the laws previously
existing for the purpose Of raising revenue ,a IN
think that the Two Per Cent act repealed
all the laws authorizing the issuing Of bonds
SUCH power to raise money by bonds That power was
given to the department Of Parks and the OF
have made will not be taken from the amount raised
m and above that authorized by the Two
Per Cent law 1t would he proper case for an n'uhc
The Department Of Docks and the Department Of Parks
have right to issue bonds whenever In their Judgment
propcr duties ntrsted to them by law No suspicion
allegation Of fraud has been raised against he 80
from ' any sn statement Of which the 2Snr can take
judicial knowcdge There is smother allegation IN IN
several millions OF dollars have been paid to persons who
had existence; who had no legal demand or claim
whatever against the city, or any right orecoyer Tnat
allie CATION Of the complaint has not been Denied rs -
dersand by any OF tho defendants in their answer
Am right there
.Ex-Judge Barrett-Yes Biz.
Mr. Beach, don't wish to be understood as asserting
to the answer OF the other counsel
Judge Barnari-My recollection is that that il So
Mr. Bcach-May be permitted to say that it is denied
edge OF the fraudulent character OF these c aims In my
argument yesterday had the honor to submit that to
Ex-Judge Barrett-It is a " ministerial" denial.
THE STOLEN MONEY MUST BE REPLACED.
Judge Barnard-Before the preliminary injunction was
granted this 1t became necessary to see whether
under the word expenses" of the Government Of the
CITY and County OF NewYork 1t the intention to
stop all work on public parks, DOCKS streets, wharves
piers ETC. All the counsel seemed to agree with In
saying that that was not the intention; and then
@ as a snc ce hah an ppsr
ment the Board of Education and salaries. not In
T pay o, III the ems persons Who may be employed
by the Of and the s cr saS wa pa;
all proper salaries that money was supposed to have
been in the Treasury and the supposon Is that not
there now Il the money has bssn paid out wronsfaIy
then must be replaced and they should see to- It that
mS%cy the they being held and
mot the pSo to tia 5 atgao nnns the O eo
plant Il is charged against two Of the defendants the
MaSGi @ he%
troller Of New York s its financial Officer He is In.
almost all b even after the rendition or recovery Of
he a q n s se aS to sec
and proper to appeal He has , indeed
ali the other Officers together that the people rely for
protection in preventing fraud It is not possible to
treasury il he will see that the bills coming into his
office properly looked after and carefully audited
sbaerns may have deceived him, however unfortunate
or perhaps pardonable thing it possibly may be; but
s"t of these Various aHanen claims so$ S
them Of outrageous and atrocous character bear
than highway robbery it was his business to have
nS w sas a the
charges made correct and that the services alleged
o od Ss failed to do his duty not only
but also Citizen and he was guilty either Of the COM
IN or Of to e duties se Of Of hn he
states that his duties mcasuraby mechanical that he
troler and although that may have been the practice
and presume 1t has been for many years past to sign
han that they we're signed by the conoer
know myself that when one Of the Commissioners
p vine ON Si
that having been the practice for many years yet the
act required performed by three or more persons
that neither should rely on one in the certcston Of
his affidavit that in the multiplicity of the business Of
the ONCE he had to place reliance entirely upon the Con-
this city probably for and do what every
body else had done. STILL, gentlemen, the pay
the % the o%ss
by the Board Of AppOrtonment will not justify me
In saying that the papers will authorize to find that
they are entitled to the confidence the Court-a conf
dence sufficient to justify in permitting them to go
eGSS sy as
ayns sS in s % their
am compelled to say that It Is my duty as judicial
tas not another dollar paid ns time
there shall be some change in that Board tAppausel
Of this order, the tendency will be to disorcanize
the City and County Government with that have moth.
Ing to DO have nothing to do with the employment OF
men connected with the Government, with their pay
ment: have plain, simple duty to perform; one that
certainly is not pleasant one to me but 1t Is one which
cannot avoid and cannot shun; and that is whenever
proper presented to me for an Injunction 1t my
business to grant 1t. In this case 1t has been said
that there a remedy for the purpose
no such remedy Wherever remedy is not given for
the purpose protecting tho interests OF the community
which has been robbed 1t is the duty Of Court OF
Equity to Intervene remedy and promptly execute 1t.
Aud Ii there had been no remedy at all In this ac-
ton the Court would have been justified In resortng
to any means In it's power for the purpose OF check
ing the wrong. Unless the Court had stepped in and
exercised the power OF injunction to prevent the
tinuance Of what are charged be Irregularities in
dscreons and crimes in the past the tendency would