The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1874-02-20
SUPREME C0UaT-CHAMDeRS.
Jewish Congregational ut LoGgerhe ads

Jewish Congregations 1t LoEgerheads.
Before Judge Donohue.
The headquarters OF Tweed's old club, No.
105 East Broadway, for some time past has been
occupied as q Jewish synagogue. The Worship
pers meeting here called themselves the Congre-
galion Kenerseth Israel Of Russian Israelites.
disagreement arose and the disanected party, CON-
prsed principally Of Lutherans, formed o new
congregation calling itself 'The Congregation
Kenerseth Israel Merets Russia" A dispute
arose as to the property comprising, among
other things, 1t is said, one OF the largest and
most valuable Talmudlcal libraries in this country,
and the result was an injunction served on the
President OF the latter congregation not to inter-
fere with the until the matter adjudica ted
in the courts. 1t Is said that this Court Injunction
was ruthlessly thrown upon the moor and de-
nanty STAMPED upon, and upon this alleged fact
motion was made In this Court yesterday to punish
lengthy and spirited argument between Mr.. Morris
Wise on behalf OF tae plaintiffs ana ex.Judge Car.
papers, reserving his decision.
The Manhattan Quotation Telegraph
Company In Court-What Constitutes
. witness Contempt Before . Referee.
Herman VS.. Manhattan Quotation Telegraph
Company.-In this case plaintiff, who represents
the Gold and Stock Telegraph Company, asks an
Injunction against defendants, who are charged
with appropriating cable news from England re.
spectng financial matters An order for exam
nation Of Abbott as party before trial was made
and the matter sent to referee to take the testi-
mony. The question was put to the witness dur
ing the course Of the examination, "How does the
Manhattan Company receive its messages from
aproadf" and 1t appearing by the answer that
these messages are first received by a banking
house in this city before they are communicated
to the Manhattan Company the next question
was, "What banking house Is thatr Mr.. Alb
bolt declined to answer this question, and
motion was made before Judge Barrett to punish
him for contumacy. Upon this motion Judge
rulings or the referee were plainly right The
gravamen OF the complaint Is the charge Of In
properly obtaining and using the PLAINTIFFS news.
The plaintiff has perfect right TO show II he
can that the defendants claim OF obtaining the
news fairly is sham and to prove their assertions
upon this head thoroughly l have gone over the
examination and am by no means satisfied with the
course either OF the defendant mis- counsel AS
to the defendant his answers seem TO to be eva
sive and confusing. AS to COUNSEL was a contempt
for him TO advise his client not TO answer Indeed
the referee erred in permitting consultations be-
tween the defendant aud his counsel while the
former was being subjected to examination. It
must be understood that the examination is to be
treated as though the case were on trial. Counsel
may object TO irrelevant or improper questions,
and, II the ruling be adverse, except But ne
quite mistakes his duty when he follows his excep-
ton by advising his client not to answer. Were
the case upon trial such conduct would not be toll
Grated for moment; nor should IL be upon this
examination The defendant is clearly in con-
tempt. and Tor second time. Once before he was
admonished by the Court TO answer a perfectly
proper question, as required by the referee; but
upon his explanation that In thus refusing he did
not intend any thing more than assertion that
he had previously given all the Information
on the subject which he recolected the motion m
punish him was not pressed. The examination
was then resumed, but better spirit was
evinced, and again the paintin has been subjected
TO the trouble, delay and expense OF moving the
Court. This course OF conduct must be STONED.
The defendant Is clearly In contempt, and unless
he shall within two days pay the referees and
sten0grapner'S fees incurred up TO this date and
the costs OF both motions and shall attend before
the referee and answer the question propounded
direction OF the referee an attachment must issue
against him."
Defendant Abbott has appealed TO the General
Term and q stay OF proceedings was granted by
Judge Barrett yesterday from the order commit.
ting him TO the County Jail for disobedence OF the
direction OF the Court.
Interesting to Holders of Second Mort
Cages.
Augustus D. RugQles VS.. George W. Marden and
Joseph p. Wiswall.--This case involved some deli.
cate and nice distinctions In the application or
Interpretation Of contemporary mortgages. The
plaintiff, as alleged, gave defendant, Marden. a
cnatte mortgage to secure note OF 81 600 at i've
months credit. subsequently he also gave. it il
said, second mortgage on the same property.
with an addition Of other property. and the term OF
the second mortgage was made on demand with
o provision that any moneys realized from
the sale Of the property mortgaged should
be applied pro td,lto to the extnguishment
OF the note. Defendant attempted 20 forecose
the second mortgage, but was resisted by the