The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-01-06

| and J. M. Parker.
| Messrs. Beach ana Courtney appeared for Con-
molly and Mr. O'Conor for the people
| The action was brought to recover moneys
charged TO have been fraudulenty distracted from
the treasury Of the county Of New York by defend.
ant. The order OF arrest nxed the bail at 81 ooo
The motion prayed that bail be reduced and the or
| der vacated, and also general relief The bail was
reduced to $500. 000 but the motion to vacate was
| denied.
The action grows ont OF an act OF the Legislature,
| passed in 1870 by which the Mayor, Comptroller
and the President OF tho Board OF Supervisors are
| constituted BOARD empowered to audit all labili.
| ties against the county Of New York incurred
previods TO its passage. The complaint substan-
tally charges fraudulent neglect Of duty Of the de-
PENDANT as member Of said Board OF Audit. 1t In
| effect alleges consummated conspiracy to who h
the defendant was party, for the plumber Of the
Treasury The act OF 1870 directed that the amount
to be due should be provided for by the issue Of
| revenue county bonds and that the Comptroller
should make the payment. Claims TO the amount Of
several millions were allowed by this Board Of Audit
| and paid.
Mr.. O'CoNoR stated that there was cross appeal
from the entire decision in the case portion Of
which reduced Connoly's bail.
So MR.. coURTkHY's OPENING.
Mr.. COURTNEY. OF the counsel for the defendant,
opened the case He proceeded, simplifying these
p0ints-Frst the papers show no cause OF action
against the defendant; second, II, however, right
OF action exists against the defendant, 1t is not
vested in the State; third, If the first two points
shown, the order Of arrest should be vacated; It
would be absurd and oppressive to uphold 1t in
either contingency: the Court below denied the
motion 10 vacate because 1t doubled upon the law
counsel claimed that this was cruel error towards
citizen In jail claiming TO be imprisoned at the
suit o. party paving no gns OF action against
the design ana purport Of, Of DEFENDANTS afldavit;
hoped the Court would recognize the Importance Of
THE PRINCIPLE INVOLVED
in this motion and give 1t impartial and independ.
ent consideration. II the Attorney General can by
| action to recover, In the name Of the people,
moneys charged to have been fraudulenty OBJ
10 That on
the approach OF an Important state election, that
Criticised the con Of q IN
| the order OF arrest and liking such high bail on
mere aItidavit based on the information and belief
| Mr.. COURTNEY said ne had reason to believe that
had 1t not been for the popular excitement prevail
would never have been issued. II the motion had
been made In ordinary times this order would never
spectacle spec presented Of IA Judge Of the Supreme
Court dOubtlng whether this action II properly
brought, and yet casting the doubt against the de-
4 Mr.. VCONOB-10u- ml1r6pre9euL tAe.- 1uo<e q
opinion. he does not say he has any doubt. -
| Mr.. CoURTNEY-The learned counsel had betrcI
read the opinion again. l know he does expr ess .
| doubt as to whether this action was properly
Mr.. OCoNoR-You are disappearing q tai.
ented and respectable Judge, and take the liberty
| to correct your statements
Mr.. COURTNEY-I claim that am not misrepre-
ama aso c any naae or ayman r when
ind him stepping aside from the line OF his duty,
and WIN exercise It, may De S wrong; . 80,
Otner side would be obliged to 90 10 the Legislature
for some act to sustain the action they have been
| engaged in They have already gone there Tor some
sessio rs IN ext ten It's ierm
DISAPPROvAL OF THE GRAND JURY ACT.
Mr.. OCONOR-n anything OF that kind has been
done 1t was without my approval
Mr.. GouRrNEY.I SAID mat the counsel 1, would. IN
the Legislature to legalize his action. Only yester-
dav in the first days OIL the session, this has been
| found necessary TO cover one case, anu more Sucn
| acts will be required
| Counsel then proceeded to argue that there was
suiiicient power vested the New YORK authorities
| to bring these suits. He also detailed the egis-
| atlve action authorizing the issue OF bonds and
providing Tor the payment OF the mesa same TO SHOW
| In any manner held responsible for their redemp-
| ton, and hence no right TO bring the suit
OF Supervisors, which It IS ella med mas been ooiite
rated, he read law passed In 1871 directing the
levy and collect taxes to pay the interest on the
consolidated DEBT OF the county Counsel also read
esr che 70 as y
| ney, TO bring suit TO recover the
| MONEY BELONGING TO THE CITY
said to have been embezzled, and that the Attorney
General OF the State mas not such right Counsei
claimed that II this authority Is granted to the At
the Board OF Supervisors. City officials are OF no
account. All corporations guilty OF offences must
be prosecuted by the Attorney General, II he will,
THE NEsTOR OF THE BAR IN RESPONSE
Mr.: 0'Conor In responding briefly referred 70 the
Orp tnno hof IN
and irrelevant questions. questions Of merit and Of
law and said that some Of these questions might be
sidered sobery. But he would say that he hsvsr
thought or said that there was such government
as the county OF New York nor that there was no
The decision OF Judge Learned had been called in
doubt and yet decided against the derendsnt This
was not so; and to prove this counsel read portion
| or the decision. He Then proceeded with his argu-
| meut, going over the ground he covered In the
Court below. In the course Of his remarks he said,
IN reply to the criticism OF Wheeler Ii. Peckham's
dence they mad In anidavit for fear OF putting
| Connolly TO Night.
on reassembline counsel repeated his argument
as TO the right Oh the people to bring these suits.
could no. be relied upon to bring the suit for the
reason that MAJ, taey were In colluson with those
point at some length. He then proceeded TO detail
the facts and circumstances which, ne claimed
VIZ vi TOODerlcS
and, repeating his argument on this point, claimed
that he and his associates had shown the best OF
reasons for the arrest OF Connolly. He then dis
cussed the question OF ball. insisting that not
under the circumstances, excessive, and claimed
tnat u was nowhere positively shown that he was
unable 10 raise the amount called for.
REDUCTION or BAIL 4 MISTAKE.
He therefore submitted that the order reducing
the Dali was mistaken one. Counsel then pro.
ceeded to detail the history OF the organization OF
the Board OF supervisors OF the county OF New York
which, ne Claimed, was simply tax-levying com.
mission. They had no other duty. They never nad
clerk until 1857, and he ventured 10 saw In cir
clerical work never cost over I'VE dollars. AWAY
down 10 1880 TINS Board Of supervisors always re.
Council, for the reason that they had no power to
order anything but at that time the Recorder who
vas member OF this Board for the first time in the
history OF the city, drew mp q resolution
directing the Chamberlain to pay some little bill
Now the Chamberlain was no officer OF the Super.