The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-06-04
THE TAMMANY RING.
The Cases Of Tweed, Connolly, Ingersoll
s. Go. Before Judge HOgebOOm.
ALBANY. N. Y. June g. 1872.

ALBANY, N. " June 8, 1872
In the Circuit Court, Judge Hogeboom presiding,
the case of the People Of the State against william
NJ Tweed implicated with Ingersol and others,
came up at noon to-day on the demurrer Of the de-
fendant Tweed, to the complaint the issue being
joined in November last. Wheeler II. Peckham APP
peared for the people, and W. o. Bartlett, David
Dudley Field and John II. Reynolds for the defen-
dant.
Mr.. Bartlett In opening the argument for the de-
PENDANT, said 1t was contended that the county OF
New York held no corporate right to sue and be
sued, and II that proposition was not sound then
the case Of the people failed. He sharply criti-
cised the manner in which this suit was
brought through bureau OF correction,
and by the transfer of the office Of
Attorney General to the City Of New York. He
then proceeded to show the Independent position
occupied by the county, its powers and duties, and
insisted that the county of New York had always
been recognized from the time of the colonies as
corporate body.
After some further argument to sustain the
points made by him, Mr.. Bartlett concluded It
was then agreed upon that 8. q. Courtney should
address the Court in behalf of Connolly, W. Ii.
Peckham In behalf of the people, and d. d. Field
close in behalf Of both Tweed and Connolly their
cases being exactly identical. In the case Of
Fields, that being somewhat different from the
Others, w. A. Beach will speak for him.
The Court then took recess until 315 O'Clock
r. M.
on the reassembling of the Court, S. G. Courtney
made an argument on the demurrer on the part OF
Richard B. Connolly. In Offering his argument he
referred to the decision OF Judge Learned reducing
his clients ball. IN which that Judge left undecided
the question as to whether the suits properly
brought by the people Of the State instead Of by the
county Of New York, as he had doubts in the mat
ter, and said that was the question here
Counsel for the people claimed that the suits
were properly brought because, first, there was In
the bonds an implied faith OF the State; therefore
the people OF the State were interested, and had q
right to bring the suits; second because the COrpo
radon Counsel was implicated in the offences
through collision with the Offenders, and therefore
the suits could not be fairly prosecuted on behalf Of
the people of the city and county This the argu
ment and the whole ss argument Of counsel for
have come here, standing on law and
with demurrer claim that an action
ike this cannot be sustained. We claim, OF course,
If action exists, it rests with the Board OF SUI
pervfsors OF the county Of New York or with the
CITY Corporation TO bring suit. we therefore say
this demurrer Is well taken, and must be sustained
unless the passions and prejudices ofthe hour shall
have full sway. He then proceeded TO state the
points made in his brief to the effect that In the
complaint there is nothing to show that his client
Connolly, ever received any of the money alleged
to have been IS sceo thai ca1v he did
judicial error, for which he was not
amenable. The decisions are tnat officers erring
his actions either as Comptroller or Auditor, were
official, and for which he is not liable In an action
like this. Counsel then asked, to whom did this
s6OOoooo, said TO have been stolen belong; and he
proceeded to show that, belonging to the county OF
New York, it was the people OF That county
alone who were interested in its recovery,
and they only could sue for It, The people
of the State had not ihe slightest interest in
it. Counsel pursued this branch OF his argument
at much length and with effective application cit
ing number Of authorities sustaining his position.
He then inquired why the suits were brought, and
which gave birth to Them These defendants
welded mighty influence politically; they held this
power. not only in New York city, but in the State,
and sought to extend it over the nation 1t was de-
termined that this power should be broken hence,
under the plea OF purring the democratic party,
these suits were brought, duplicating these men in
certain dishonest acts
Mr.. O'Conor on behalf OF the people, followed.
After saying that the references OF counsel 10 the
motives OF those who had brought these suits could
have no influence on the Court, he said that the
defendants were charged with monstrous maiver-
fesson OF all that Is charged against thembut say
in their demurrer that there is no remedy to be
been brought. He then returned to the allegation
that the object OF the suits was to
,hs the panty and ,o sw,
were equally divided politically. The customary
trick OF politicians in appoint ng a committee OF
not resorted to. lie spoke OF the body known as
the Bureau OF Municipal Correction individually,
and asked II either of them could be regarded as
democratic party AS for Mr.. Tilden, he said that
gentleman advised nothing, did nothing, except TO
II Mr. Tden, being member OF the Legislature,
saw IT. as is the fashion nowadays, to get a decar-
erect Tnere we're reasons o
bringing the suits here. These defendants
the " the cy o Kew es and one
those judges has recently resigned, while one
stands In q court OF impeachment, or, rather, is
suspended. These facts would suggest why these
suits were brought as they were. Counsel then
proceeded to detail the action Of Messrs Tweed and
Connolly as members Of the Board OF Audit. The
la
separately, one signing claim at one time and
the other at another. This action rendered the
audit void, and yet Connolly, as Comptroller, paid
the claims. 1t Is also alleged that only one million
dollars out of the six million were valid. The
ia a case OF mOnstr0us fraud on the part OF some
Cials, who made the ponds, got the money and