The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-03-28

Judge Barnard's Case Still Under Examination
Testimony of tho Witnesses for the De-
fenoe-Mr. Fields Declines to
Answer Certain Questions

There does not appear to be the same interest
taken In the proceedings OF the Judiciary Committee
as was noticeable during the earlier portion OF their
session. Their attention Is still occupied examining
witnesses on the charges against Judge Barnard.
but up to the present they do not ap-
pear to have discovered any very strik-
Ing evidence in substantiation OF the charges
that have been furnished by the Bar Association.
The charge OF making use OF improper language
from the bench has brought out considerable evil
dence; but 1t Is OF such contradictory nature that
1t can hardly bear much weight with the members
OF the committee
Business was resumed yesterday morning ut ten
O'Clock, the first witness called was Mr.. William
G. Barrett, who was examined with reference to
the conversation that passed between counsel and
Judge Sutherland In relation to the applica-
ton for an Injunction. at the suit OF Tom
Scott, against Tammany Hall. MIR. Barrett appeared
for the defence. and stated that Judge Sutherland
called at his house last Sunday morning, and ap-
peared very much annoyed at the report that
appeared In the newspapers OF Mr.. Strahans
testimony, which stated that Judge Sutherland
shrked taking any action on the Injunction
on the grounds that his term Of Office nearly
pred, and such action might prejudice his renomi.
nation. Judge Sutherland stated witness that
Mr.. Strahan was in error Ii he gave such
evidence, and 1t placed HIM before the pub
lie In an unpleasant light. Mr. Barrett stated
tnat ne called upon Judge Sutherland on the
Wednesday preceding the first MONDAY IN septem.
bers and witness spoke to MIN In relation TO TINS
Injunction ir s ana suggested thar 1t might In;
TO grant an Injunction that would vir-
tualy put stop TO the operations Of the
him for his ADVICE and 1t was then agreed TO nave
the application made to some other Judge; witness
Barrett sahan he tod Se%
how Judge sutherland lelt on The subject, but
t%sy as ey aas ne se
make the application on Thursday; on
that day they proceeded to Judge Sutnerland's
house, DuL beng informed he was sick, they went
on to Judge fngraham's house, IN Harlem, and
again were at fault they were told he was out OF
Judge sutherland, and found that he
two or three days. On Monday they went to find
Judge Barnard, but ne was absent on vacation.
following day and explained the situation IN which
they were placed, and requested him TO come to
case Judge Barnard should not have returned Judge
sutherland came down, but as Judge Barnard was
plicaton Tor the injunction was then made to Judge
Barrett oy George =. Barrett: The witness was
mitee, and stated that four applications had been
made 70 Judge Sutherland.
O. Did Judge sutherland, In course OF conversation
on the Thursday before the Injunction granted,
make an appointment to meet you on the following
q Did Judge Sutherland also tell you that he
thought he could get The nomination OF Tammanv
Hall, and that he was poor, and II he was not re-
nominated that he would be turned out OF house
and homer A. do not recOllect
O. DO you remember Judge Sutherland D,aking
remark to the effect that Judge lngraham had said
he intended 10 devote the remainder OF his term to
the breaking up OF the Tammany- Ring? A. be-
leve he said something OF the KIND.
before Judge Barnard' A. have frequently.
u DO you ever remember his having made any
decision governed by any corrupt or improper mo-
tlye1 A. 40 NOT remember any sucn instance.
Field, WIN Who "i was examined for the defence ua
| In relation to the proceedings connected
with me Albany Aea AND Raroaa
OF the entire proceedings in the matter, ana gave
detailed account OF everything that transpred from
the commencement OF litigation until the close OF
the suit Mr.. Field also produced a NUMBER OF
legal documents connected with the case that were
Al the evening session Mr. Howe, Of the firm Of
Howe q Hummel, was examined in relation to o
1858. He testlded that he brought the men, mad
been arrested on suspicion OF illegal registering to
Judge Barnard's house. AS II was dirty
night. and the Judge had an objection
to. losing his silver and having his car
and Captain irving, OF the detective force went IN
side. The charge made In this case by the Bar
men improperly; witness stated that Judge Bar.
nard asked Captain irving II there was any return
there was no return, and he did not know or any
charge against them; whereupon the prisoners were
they were neld by persons VINO gave no proper rea
sons for 50 holding them.
Mr. David Dudley Field was then brought In again
and examined at some length. During the course
| or examination he was asked the following ques-
| tions -
q Have you any document in your possession In
| relation 10 Judge Barnard tnat was placed Ill your
hands III 1852 A. nave no such document.
u Have you any documents IN relation to the
| case OF Jacob sharp against the Mayor and Com
monalty OF the city Of New fork relating to suit
| about pier at the foot or Wall street, A. nave
no such documents.
O. Have you ever made any attempt to procure
| the impeachment OF Judge Barnardy A. never
| have
q. Did not some OF your clients In 1852 request
you 10 take proceedings to lmpeach Judge Bar
| nard A. decline to answer that question; ;
not that. have any personal objections
pose to allow ANYBODY 10 inquire into any
professional relations that existed between
himself and his clients He asserted that right. and
submitted 1t to the committee as II opened the way
to inquiries OF entirely an improper nature Mr..
| samuel J. Tildcn, who comprised the committee on
this occasion, felt inclined TO sustain Mr.. Field
this matter but deemed II wise TO consult MS col
leagues, and they, therefore, adjourned until this
| morning at ten O'Clock.
| A Cara from Levinger.
NEW YORK, March rs, 1872.