The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-04-06
THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.
The Proceedings i'm the Case or
Judge McCunn.
WHAT WAS DONE WITH THE $500 FEE
THE JUDGE ON THE WARPATH.

The judiciary Committee met yesterday shortly
after noon at the Firth Avenue Hotel, but GA not
get to work until one T. N. The day was devoted
the hearing OF evidence In relation different
cases that mad come up before Judge McCunn. The
committee proceeded TO examine some papers In
relation to the hanson cab suit. TINS was ex-
amned pretty fully on Thursday In relation TO the
appointment OF different receivers.
Mr.. James NJ. Gan0 was put on the stand and ex-
ahmed III relation to the case OF Corey against
long The witness testified In regard to the $3.50
paid TO counsel, and he said that it was the only
fee that had been paid in the SUM- the receivers In
the mad been appointed by Judge Barbour, or
the Superior CourL and not by Judge McCunn;
the sum OF $3.50 was the only fee paid out or the
estate; witness also testified in relation To the
BOARDING HOUSE SUIT
between Mrs. Elliott aud Mrs. Buhler IN which ne
had onicated az receiver. He said he mad received
no fees the CASE and that the parties In question
were tenants OF Judge McCunn. He also stated that
when the suit came up before Judge McCunn the
latter was not aware that the parties interested
were his tenants, but being informed of the TACT he
had the matter settled up immediately.
NJ James ii. Morgan was put on the stand ana
examined in relation to his bank account. IL ap-
pears the Bar Association had discovered some
cneck that had been paid to a Mr.. Hooev; Mr..
Hooley Is cotton spool agent who was the defend
IN the Superior Court, to put an Injunction on tho
OF their patent right IN this country. The case
was brought up at Special Term before Judge
McCunn; hut the latter having ascertained that
James +. Morgan, his Drotherin-law, had received
q lee to act ~ counsel in the case for liooey, he
refused hear the and had II set back on Inc
calendar to be heard before another Judge. Wit
ness stated that at the request of Judge
McCunn he returned the retaining lee of $500 ne
HOOey
the cases. the suit afterwards tried before Judge
Mcneil. Of tue superior Court; witness stated that
he returned the retaining lee TO Hooley III the pres
| ence OF MI. McCarten.
! The next witness III the case was the counsel IN
the suit of Corey against Long, who testified as to
his having received u lee OF $3.50 out OF the estate
NM t. He sse Sas a s ss wss sn
sci Tor the plaintiff IN me SUIT OF OMano-
ney against August Belmont a;,o the SUIT sal,
| Fcnian funds that held by MI. Belmont; the
witness testified tnat tue orders made In the suit by
Judge hicCunn, which were afterwards reversed at
General Term, were all reversed by consent OF
counsel.
against against Buck Il then came up in evidence
ceiver by Judge McCunn VINO had afterwards
vacated his order and appointed Joseph s. Meekss:
also appeared that neither Of the receivers received
any lees IN the case. 80
capacity Of deputy 3 heriff under shcrif o,Bren,
testified that ne was one OF the deputy sneris who
TOOK THE
with the United States Marslals for the possession
OF the Binlnger estate, and gave detailed account
celved no fees IN the case. Some evidence
was then produced in relation TO the case
OF Maruury Hicks against 4. w. Bishop IN winch
another Judge had granted an order OF arrest. APP
plca,ion was made TO Judge IcCunn 10 vacate the
order vi arrest and ne refused to do IT, as ne said
the facts produced justified the order OF arrest.
| Before the committee adjourned In the afternoon
Mr.. Prince informed Judge McCunn that The only
| charge produced against him was IN relation TO
| the Clarke and Bininger suit, and tnat the
! out II the Judge so wished it. Judge McCunn stated
! that he would rather the whole testimony was eX-
/ ahmed ny the committee, ana the Bar Association
! was at perfect liberty To examine into every case
that ever came up before him.
appeared to re Witnesses. Mr.. Clarke, the plain
nli IN the suit OF Clarke against ninger, was again
examined add alter corropolatna MS previous
| TO Judge McCunn's residence, but the Judge had
Mr. Mcknight was also examined on behalf of the
Bar Association III relation 10 the check Tor 500
that had been paid to Mr. Morgan by Mr. Hooley. his
partner. The witness, however, rather astonshed
the prosecution by stating That he was not the
cashier OF the firm and did not know ANYTHING aoont
such a check having passed from his partners
nand. lie stated also mat he knew Judge McCunn
did not hear the case
During the evening Judge McCunn happened to
contradict the prosecuting attorney General
latter stated tnal the Judge would not give him
tine lie outside the committee ROOM They met,
however, outside, and the Judge said, 'contrad;ct
you now, and say tnat what YOU said was not truen
General Harrison thought the matter better end
here, and the General went and took glass OF wine
with the Judge.
Just before the session closed Judge McCunn aD-
Piled 10 the Bar Association Tor the address OF ID.
Macdonald, whose name was signed 10 the cnarge
against the Judge In the Clarke ana BnlnQcr suit.
They declined to give IL. The Judge stated tnat
he was entitled TO the address and business of his
accuseT.
The committee then adjourned until to-day a. ten
A. NJ, when they will resume the examination OF
the charges against Judge Cardozo. rne case
against Judge McCuDn Will probably not be brought
up again.