The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-06-27
Counsel Back Out and Advise
McCunn's Return to His Post.
Violation Of All Court Rules Charged in Ad-
hitting Elk Parte Evidence.

political; have known Hanrahan some three years;
became acquainted with him at the time he was
appointed receiver In the case OF Clark and Bin
niger; l had charge OF portion OF the property,
not as a Sherifs officer, but q private individ-
ual; there were five of us, who were thenin charge
some four or five months.
Counsel here offered as evidence an order issued
by Judge McCunn that three deputy sheriffs should
be paid for taking charge OF the property also an
order to protect these parties in charge Of the pro
perty. These papers were witnessed by this wit
ness.
Counsel for the respondent objected.
Mr.. Parsons said he offered the papers to show
that the Of the name Of Sheriff O'Brien in this
case was without his authority.
Judge Selden, Of counsel for the respondent, said
that was NOT the proper way to show such fact,
and the Senate sustained the objection.
Counsel read an order issued by Judge McCunn
directing the Sheriff to take charge of the property
which had been seized upon by the United States
authorities, and asked the witness If the Sheriff
acted on that order The witness replied that the
Sheriff had nothing to do with the property what
ever.
Cross-examined by Mr.. Develin-Inever received
dollar, nor did any one with me, for the services
we rendered.; neither did the Sheriff; went by
order OF the receiver Mr. Hanrahan; have been
running three years for my pay
To Mr.. Parsons-No, did not get my pay, not
withstanding the order by Judge McCunn to pay me-
Thomas Boese, Clerk OF the Superior Court, was
recalled to identify an order directing that Hickey
and others should be paid $4,000 Witness said his
opinion was that the order was In Judge McCunn's
handwriting, though he was not positive.
TESTIMONY OF BIN1NGER's COUNSEL.
George N. Titus was next called and sworn-Am
counsellor at-law; was Bninger's counsel. wit.
ness was shown ths receivers bond and identified
Mr.. Parsons pointed out an erasure in the bond
n in
said ne had not at the time noticed the erasure
Mr.. Develin objected, unless counsel could show
the erasure was made by the Judge with corrupt
intent; the mere fact that there was an erasure
was no evidence OF corruption on the part OF Judge
McCunn
Mr.. Parsons said he wanted to show that in real
ity there was security taken from the receiver.
The Senate overrued the objection.
Counsel read an order, issued by Judge Jones,
restraining the sale OF the property by the receiver
and the witness identified it. Witness said that
permit the sale to go on. Judge McCunn's order
Cross.examined by Mr.. Moak DO not recollect
that my motion to vacate the order appointing a
receiver was based on the ground that the order
was issued er pdrte, but suppose that was one OF
Fithian to vacate the order did not give notice to
the opposite parties my application was er pdrte;
it was denied by Judge Fithlan:
The witness was crOsS-eXamlned ut mucn length
by Mr. Moak concerning the orders and counter
orders issued In the case. '
FRANCIS N. BANGS STATEMENT.
Francis N. Bangs was the next witness. He
said:-Am lawyer, and was employed by the
creditors Of Clark Blninger to institute proceed ns
and also as counsel for Bningef. He
also stated the circumstances under which aSn
bankruptcy court, was arrested and brought be-
fore Judge McCunn for contempt OF his order In
taking possession Of the property.
This witness was crosse examined at length by
counsel for respondent, to show, as he said, that
Ctata OrtrfQ ore ~
United States Courts. Witness detailed the var
GUS motions he made to set aside Judge McCunn's
orders, and which were denied.
BEECHER ON THE STAND
John s. Beecher was the next witness He
detailed the manner in which he was lorcby taken
assignee, by two men, without the authority Of
variant variant After being brought before the Judge he
was told by him that he might go. On his cross
examination he said that paper had been previ-
ousy served upon him, to appear before Judge
McCunn and show cause for contempt.
ABRAHAM BININGER's STATEMENT.
Abraham Bininger was the next witness ex-
amiEed. He testified that the stock, at the time
the receiver took possession, was worth between
sl0O 900 and 100000 There were other assets
valued at between s400 900 and $4,000 The security
tailed conversation with Hanrahan, In which
Hanrahan told him 1t would be useless to attempt
to have him as receiver removed as Judge McCunn
wonld not do It, Witness complained to Hanrahan
that 81, 900 was too small security for an estate
worth s5ooOOO and Hanrahan said he had volun-
tarily increased the security TO $4,000.
Crosse examined by Mr.. Moak-Hanrahan told me
he could not be removed after Judge Fthians order
was issued.
JOSEPH A. HOFFMIRE
was the next witness, and testihed-Am the sOn-in-
law Of Clarke; saw Judge McCunn at Carke's house
several times; at one time Judge McCunn said 1t
would not be proper for him to be seen there; Nc
Gum was there once with Sheriff OBrien; witness
was present when the settlement was proposed.
Counsel asked If Melville Clarke's account was
correct, but this question was objected TO and with
drawn.
The Senate, on reassembng, prior to going on
with the trial, went into executive session, but
failed to confirm the appointment OF commission
ers to propose amendments to the constitution.
The following names were confirmed as trustees of
the State homeopathic Asylum for the Insane at
Middletown:-.John w. Ostram, De Witt Q. Jayne
On resunng the trial James F. Morgan was called,
but failed to respond, and the sergeantat-Arms
Edward Dunness was then called, and he failed
to respond. e--~s' >-'y = z ~ -. ..-s'r-g
srcsA go JAMES r. MoRGAN's STORY.
After waiting awhile James +. Morgan appeared.
He testified that he was an attorney and counsellor
at-law; is q brother-in-aw OF Judge McCunn; never
was in his ONCE; the receivers bond was not APP
proved by Judge McCunn; after the receiver took
possession OF the stock procured the order from
Judge McCunn modifying Judge Jones' order; the
was that the latter was not at Court. witness was
shown the account kept by Hanrahan, as receiver,
and stated amounts deposited. The accounts
pendtures ST. 46 a. witness had no pecuniary
transaction with Judge McCunn, except the pur,
chase OF house, for which he paid some fi4,oooi
was appointed received only once by Judge McCunn,
and acted as counsel to two receivers apponteu ny
that Judge; was appointed referee In numerous
cases. This question was objected " anu Tue
objection overruled. -
The witness was crossexamined at length Dy MI.
Moak az to proceedings under tne receiver, ine
was carried on In regular and proper manner,
and that there was no waste so far as ne knew.
COMMUNICATION FROM MCUNN.
Durinr the cross redirect examination OF this
,vitness the President OF the Senate laid the follow
ing communications before the senate