The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-01-24
EX.C0MPTROLLER CONNOLLY.
Further Action in the Courts on the Suit Of the
Board Of Supervisors to Recover Six Million
Dollars-Motion Of Counsel for Stay OF
Proceedings and Opposition Thereto
Judge Barnard on the Situation.

The Board OF Supervisors Of the Cttv ana county
or Ne,o YorE vs. Richard B. C0nnoAv.-The hearing
In this case first came up on Monday last, on
motion by defendants counsel for stay OF pro-
ceedings for the reasons set forth below. 1t
Will be remembered that Judge Barrett de-
cliued to hear the motion or to adjudicate in the
matter, because Of his previous connection
with those and kindr ed cases against our city OIL
cials as counsel opposing before elected to the
bench. Judge Barnard, having no such compelling
reason TO decline passing on the case yesterday
took his seat on the bench OF the special Term Su.
preme Court when, counsel on either side being
promptly In attendance, the case was called, on
MOTION FOR STAY OF PROCEEDINGS
SAMUEL @. COURTNEY said:-May 1t please Your
Honor, rise to motion for stay OF proceedings
in this case OF the Board OF Supervisors vs. Richard
B. Connolly, cx-Comptroller OF this CITY, until the
decision OF the General Term at Albany In the case
of The People vs. the same defendant Is declared.
present. with the papers In the case, a11dav,ts
showing when the respective suits were commenced,
their present condition, aud the fact that this suit
was not lar advanced as the suit brought by the
people against the defendant by their counsel, Mr..
Charles O'Con0r. These afldavits truly set forth
that the two suits-the prior and this later one
are Identical in every respect and that 1t Is unjust
to the defendant that both suits should be prose-
cuted part posst well that this course, II pro-
Ceedcd with, would SUBJECT the ueI6nu8nJ 10 inc
hazard OF having TWO Judgments recorded against
him, II recovery could be mad In either case.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Corporation Counsel O'GoRMAN presented an am
davit, which admitted that the two actions were
the defendant had already twice obtained nexten.
sion OF time. These were all the papers presented
Mr.. COURTNEY then proceeded to argue IN support
q MS motion Tor stay Of procee6n 1, addressing
authorities in favor Of the court granting The stay
asked or until saHn time as me decision OF me GEM
did may be rendered. He c0ntended that all
the authorities on this point were IN concord that
questions were at issue the Court in It's discretion,
aiwsys granted stay Of proceedings IN one case
the people was further advanced, having been
being presented for issue: This was al the delay
to state to the Court that he had nothing and
knew Of nothing which showed any
C0LLUsION ON THE PART or THE CORPORATION
with the Mayor or any other person or persons en-.
by adavlt declared that the charge the insinua-
tion in the complaint OF Mr. O'COnor oil colIusion
ton in saying shat the Corporation Coun.
sci had acted Justly IN the matter and with q
bringing TINS and similar SUITS In all Of these pro.
ceedtn2s he saw nothing to warrant any insinuat0n
sgains the good aith ana the integrity o. Mr.
his clients Claim for the relief asked Tor on the
ground OF justice and fair dealing.
Counsel Messrs G. I. Curtis and J. X. Porter
arose simultaneously to reply, when
Judge BARNARD, mterrupting, said that he, as well
as most OF the Judges and members Of the bar, had
Kept track OF the variety OF shapes In which these
suits mad come up before the Courts. He had inves
tigated the principal question involved, whether
the people OF the state through their At
lOrney General could maintain this ACTION and
pc could see no right or power In the
n
that If any OF action existed 1t rested entirely
In the Board Of Supervisors OF the county. He would
therefore, deny the motion stay OF proceedings;
but as decision was expected from the General
Term at Albany In the suit OF The People vs.. The
Defendant Connolly, In which the question Of the
right OF the people to sustain the action would be
expressly passed upon, he would extend the time
OF the defendant to answer until such decision was
rendered.
Mr.. COURTNEY said ne was GLAD to find that His
Honor was 80 prompt IN passing squarey On tae
point raised-the right Of the people 10 maintain
their action In the premises, and he was perfectly
satisfied with the ruling OF the Court
Counsel then argued as to the form Of the order
10 be entered on the records and the case dropped