The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1874-03-27

Another Phase in the Controversy Over
the Seventh Civil District Court judge
ship.
Before Judge Van Brunt
Judge McGuires efforts TO resume his functions
as Judge of the Seventh civil District Court seem
to be beset with as much difficulty as Casar's at
tempt TO breast the pillows OF the turbulent Tiber.
No sooner had he again taken his seat on the
bench, under judicial order TO that effect, given
pursuant to previous order granting him new
trial. than he was served with a stay of proceed
ings and an order 10 show cause why Judge
Stemmler should not be permitted 10 continue to
act as Judge until a Judgment was rendered in the
new trial. The case came up for argument yester-
day In this Court this last order. The interest
felt in the proceedings was shown in q crowded
court room. made up largely, OF course, OF the
friends of the respective claimants to the ONCE.
After the reading of various affldavts on both
sides, those on behalf of Judge stemmler setting
forth a violent re-entry the bench by Judge
Mcclure, and those on behaif OF the latter, includ
ing one OF Captain Gunner OF the Nineteenth pre-
cInct fatty denying the charges OF violence or
the slightest breaches OF decOrum, eX-judge POr-
ter opened the argument ior the notion It's full
hinder when Judge Mcclure took possession mat
vacated the judgment in favor OF Judge Stemmler,
and also to continue temporary order now In ex-
istence staying all proceedings on the part OF Judge
MCGUIRE Tor the purpose OF exercising his Official
position as Judge, until the final determination OF
Brunt granting him new trial Judge Porter in
sisted that the question as to right OF possession
was res ddjUdicdt0 through The trial by Jury
and verdict in favor OF Judge Stemmler: that an
appeal then pending from that judgment precuded
further action till the settlement OF this appeal;
that there was no error IN the Court rulings; that
the Judgment should stand until reversed Dy new
trial, and, that until such reversal, Mr.. Stemmler
should remain in possession.
Mr.. A. j. VanderpOel claimed that the question
free from all difficulty. Under a certificate OF
the county canvassers Judge Mcclure HAD held the
office and had discharged its duties with marked
ability and to the entre satisfaction OF all parties.
him. he quietly submitted to the verdict. Knowing
that this verdict was an unjust one and discover
Ing evidence to invaidate the Judgment, he applied
for a new trial and 1t was most justly granted
him. Upon this he obtained order to resume
his judicial functions, and in doing he complied
wholly with the law, and the charges OF violence
or conduct in any way undignited or unbecOming
were not and could not be substantlated. MIR.
Stemmler, he claimed, had not sclnttlla of right
to the ONCE and Judge Mcclure had every right
to 1t.
Ex-Judge Beach followed in lengthy defence of
Judge Mcclure, and cOntended that the whole evi-
dence on the part OF Mr.. Stemmler had been over
the latter had not shadow OF right to the ONCE,
and that the Judgment In his favor had now fallen
to the ground, aud urged in conclusion, alter
cOmplImentng Judge Mcclure Tor his ability ON the
bench and his moderation all through the trial and
since that the public Interests demanded that
he should continue in the discharge OF the
judicial duties which of right solely devOlved on
him through the vote OF the people and the dec
laration OF the County Canvassers.
few additional remarks were made by Judge
Porter in reply, and then Judge Van Brunt took
the papers. reserving his decision.