The New York herald., 1874-12-08
COURT oP COMMON PLEAs-eEHERA1 TERN
The Market Cleaners.

The Market Cleaners.
Before Judges J. r. DAILY. Loew ana J. r. DAILY.
An appropriation OF $4,000 was made In 1870
for cleaning The markets, and Ia December
Pnneas h. Kingsland, assignee OF q number OF the
cleaners, brought suit and got Judgment against
the city for $1l.7ea IS, the Court overruling the
defence that only $51s 4s OF the appropriation re-
mained. Defendants appealed 70 the General
rendered yesterday, Judge J. i. Daily
pie dealing with Ine city 40 so at their peril as %
the employment being lawful and whether there
Was an e pay them and BY this
city from extravaganza by its agents. and this
should be acted upon, especially this case where
action against these agents. Judgment was
therefore reversed, but new trial was ordered,
rs the plalnttns might De able to show that there
was no prior claim on the $5l3 Is.
The Hackley Contract Broken.
Under the tax levy Of 1880, authorizing q con.
tract for cleaning the streets Of the city, the con.
tract was given to Mr.. Hackley Tor i've years.
Very soon after Mr. Hackley assigned II 70 Charles
Devlln and others. The payment was regularly
made until 1882, when there was an outcry made
In the papers about the state OF the streets, a d
the city broke the contract on the ground tha lit
was not luinled. Charles Devlin and his associ.
ates then brought suit and got judgmen against
the city Tor over 100000. The city appealed to Gen.
eial Term Of the Common Pleas court and yester.
day the decision was rendered, Judge Joseph F,
DAILY giving the opinion. The decision s to this ell
iect The contract was void from sne beginning,
because the act authorizing the contract violates
the rule against having two subjects In local act
decision IN Hubners case), and that, without it
being stated IN the title, the act alters
the mode OF awarding contracts i0'Brien's
casel. Moreover, In this case, contract or such
importance was not given to the lowest bidder,
and 10 all appearance on q bribe OF $40, 00O The
Court lurther holos that IN matter like tnis al.
iectna the health OF the community. there was an
Implied discretion In awarding the Contract In
reference TO the character and ability Of the par.
ties; the Charter lorbds making contracts with
persons indebted 70 the CITY. and this provision
assignments was allowed. Judgment was there.
tore reversed, AND Judgment absolute rendered for
the city.
Yenni ct al VS.. Ocean National Bank.--Judg.
nent afarmed, with costs Opinion by Judge Q. ?.
DAILY.
dayton VS.. Reid ct all Judgment reversed; |;
new trlai ordered; costs to abide the event.
:. Bronx. ADMINISTRATIVE &C., vs. New York and
New Haven Railroad Company.-Judgment re.
versed; new trial ordered; costs to abide the
event. Opinion by Judge q. r. Daily.
slater ct al vs.. Mersereau.- af1rmed.
SUBJECT to correction mentioned IN opinion
OPINION oy Judge z. P. DAY.
Meezon vs. The Mayor, &c.--Judgment afnrmed,
with COSTS. Opinion Dy Judge q. p. Daily.
Devlin VS.. The Mayor, &c.--Judgment reversed,
and Judgment absolute tor defendants, The May or
&C. Opinion by Judge J. r. Daily.
kinusland vs.. Tne Mayor, &c.-Judgment re.
versed, new trial ordered. costs TO sbiae the
event. 0pinion by Judge J. r. Daily.
Baxter ". Judgment reduced to judg-
by Judge Z. P. Day.
Altman VS.. Acknowledgement affirmed, with
costs. Opinion by Judge Q. r. DAILY.
msns reversed new ria oraeres cosss 10 suds
hOusi u xSrsnda.-jSdsmsns sashnsa opAs.