The New York herald., 1874-12-31
Conclusion Of the Kelly-Waterbury Libel
Argument.
Suitors Against the City in
a QuandaI'y.
AN INFORNER ON SMUGGLING.
The Erie Railway as Buyer OF
Stocks.
Conviction OF "Bobby the Welsh
man." the Burglar.

man." the Burglar.
Mr.. John 8. Lawrence, as referee, opened the
ease OF the New York Central and Hudson River
Railroad Company against the Metro olitan Gas
Company. The action asks ior appointment OF COM
missioners to tx the value OF certain land on the
North River front owned By the Gas Company and
claimed as necessary by the railroad company TO
connect their tracks with the new cattle yards
Two or three witnesses were examined out NO
evidence or importance interest was elicted,
the testimony being merely Of preliminary
nature.
Mr. Peter Mitchell, member OF the bar OF the
State courts, was yesterday admitted before Judge
Benedict to practice In the FEDERAL courts.
The Supreme Court, General Term, meets to-day
10 render decisions on cases argued at the last
term. Il is expected also that the Tweed certo.
rari will be argued
A panel Of 100 jurors was drawn yesterday for
the retrial OF Scanned Tor the murder of Donohue.
on Monday next, IN the Court OF oyer and Ter.
miner.
In the matter OF the attachment for s15o,ooo,
obtained by the city against the property OF
Henry w. Genet, 10 cover his pecu ations in con-
nection with the Harlem Court House. the app
cation to vacate which was denied Dv Judge Dono-
hue on Tuesday, an appeal was entered yester-
DAY from the decision OF Judge Donohue TO the
Supreme Court, General Term. 1t Is stated that II
the General Term holds that the attachment Is
good, the case will be carried to the Court OF
Appeals.
THE KELLY-W LIBEL SUIT.
At length the long drawn cut argument in this
suit on the motion TO strike out portions OF the
answer was concluded yesterday before Judge
Donohue, In Supreme Court, Chambers. There
were two further instalments OF argument, how.
ever one at the opening OF the Court in the morn.
ing and the other at two P. NJ, before the argu.
ment was fin nished and the papers submitted. At
the opening OF the Court the argument In opposl-
tion to the moton was continued by Judge Porter,
who appeared with Mr.. Waterbury, for the de-
fendant, Mr.. Kelly being represented by Henry l.
Clinton and George w. wingate.
Judge Porter reviewed the various defences
contained in the answer and denied that any Of
them were Objectionable. He asserted that II was
sought under the pretence 6f this motion to pre-
clude the defendant from producing upon the
trlal the evidence to sust ain the charges he made
and which he contended we're true. He gracefully
compltmented the opposing counsel as "leaders OF
the Bar, the one eminent IN his youth as the
other is in his maturity" but 1efed ;hem with
sll their industry and ability, to produce sin gle
made more definite and certain, and claimed that
the court had no power to require party to ad.
NIT or deny anything.
Mr. Clinton. in reply. repeiled the assertion that
the plaintiff was unwilling to meet the ques-
non OF the truth or these charges and Asserted
that II was the defendant who was endeavorfng
by bringing all sorts OF outside matters into he
case TO shelter himself behind them lie read
the lloes set iorrn in the complaint and then dis
cussed the various sections OF The answer, claim
Ing that the defendant throughout ''dOdged the
main issues OF the case" ana sought to substitute
irrelevant matter. That the fundamental error OF
the dee endant was his argument that unless the
correspondence published in the newspapers was
trial. Ii was evidence, not pleading, and he might
as well have annexed TO his answer am
Gav,ts OF all his witnesses as to nat they
would prove. Mr. Clinton then discussed the DIFF
ferent delenees, showing tnat they raised ques-
ton tn regard 10 the democratic party, the regu-
larty Of the paintif-s election TO the state Con-
ventlon, &c, which no court could possibly try,
and which, If true. constituted no excuse Tor these
fendant to bring in Havemeyer's nrst letter. and
then assert II TO be all true, Mr. Clinton reao the
different PORTIONS In whlcn the Mayor asserted
THAI he was scnoomate OF william Leggett and
q follow or OF silas Wright, and attacked Tammany
Hall as well as those parts where lie claimed thai
commented upon them to show the impossibllity
OF trying such matters In suit for libel.
Mr. Waterbury, who had become rather uneasy,
here Interrupted and denied that these matters
formed part OF the answer.
Mr.. Clinton, IN reply, read from this answer to
show Lnat the letter was made part OF IL. and that
every statement contained in 1t was stated TO be
true, and claimed that MI. Waterbury in his argu-
ment mad himself stated that he had right to
prove all OF them. He then proceeded to dlscus IS
what Mr. Havemeyer said In that letter about
Mr. wateroury-why don't you mention VIVA,
ne said about the lawyersr
Mr. Clnton-I certainly shall. He then pro-
ceeded 10 allude to the charges made against At
torney General FalrchId and asserted the idea o
the defendant TO nave been 10 use this case 10 re
try Charllck ana Gardner, and at the same time
to throw as much ooium as possible upon all wac
were engaged as counsel or Otherwise IN theil
prosecution.
At his point the arguments was aoJourneo tc
two O'Clock.
MI Clinton continued after recess. He alluded
TO the reputation OF Attorney General fairchild
and stated that, with tae success that attached tt
al men who were attacked py waterbury, ne had
since the CharcK trial. received the well-deservet
encomiums OF the Bar He then alluded to Coone
Wingate his associate. spoken or Dy Mr.. have
meyer as legal runner Tor John Kelly, and ye
VINO mad that mol ming been spoken OF by Juogt
Porter. man OF eminence ano learning. as one o
the leaders OF the Bar. Probably, however, de
fendanJ meant by legal runner that he had sue
ceeded in passing his competitors at the Bar. Mr.
Hayemeyer's allusion TO Mayor Wcxnam ''as DE
serving 10 ootan soD9 @ eieien ne s.s'ed, as nss
lie then alluded 10 the attack on himself ir
the letter. He regretted that Mr. Waterbury nat
NOT set forth the comp puislon that IL was statet
that he Mr.. CnntoD) had brought 10 compel hi
clients TO employ Dim IN the proceedings oeior'
Inc Governor IN reference to Havemeyer's re
moyal He said that II waterbury's knowledge o
law was equal TO his invention or facts he would
be the greatest lawyer IN the United states.
10 the Statements or friendship to Tweed alieRe,
in the letter. ne stated he had but speaking &C
QuantaBce with him bad received no iavors q
his lands. ON the contrary, 10 March, 1870 whei
the Ring was In full power, he assisted In organ
fzng rebellion IN the democratic party agains
Tweed, and subsequently opposed the Tweed
quoted rom MS speeches. to show the determined
opposition he had always shown TO IT. especially
IN loIl, when he co-operated with Mr. Havemeyer
who as tae chairman OF the committee OF Whict
he was prominent member. That as Have
meyer nan personal knowledge OF those facts
Waterbury was the real author OF his ietter IL
these particulars, and used Havemeyer as his too
TO lorce his way into Tammany nall.
Mr.. Waterbury mere stated "that he did no.
want to get back into rammany HalLn
Mr.. Clinton--It IS but lew months since yor
did your best TO get In and were de ,eated by
large majority.
Being again interrupted by Mr.. Waterbury, he
said d:-''You, Mr.. Wateroury, know that rom the
beginning there was no man IN the city tnat nas