The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-10-07
THE SIX MILLION SUIT.
Important Decisions in the Tweed Case by the
Supreme Court, General Term.
NO BILL OF PARTICULARS TO BE GIVEN.
The Order of Arrest Not Vacated and No
Reduction of Ball.

In the long course OF litigation OF which William NJ
Tweed has been the unhappy subject the great exchef
tain Of Tammany and leader of the Court House
"Rng has not barring, course the sentence passed
upon him by Judge Davis consigning him MS felon to
the Penitentiary received such severe blow as that
given him yesterday in the decisions rendered by4he
Supreme Court, General Term He received in fact a
double blow. First in order the decision upon
the appeal taken behalf OF the people from Judge
Donohues order, given at Special Term, requiring bill
OF particulars to be given the So 600 900 in
sttuted against him. The Court reverses this order,
and thus spares the city the necessity Of attempting
do what in the nature of the is alleged to be
an utter impossbility, and thereby removing
insurmountable stumbling block the prosecution ofthe
suit. Both Judges Davis and Brady write opinions
upon this branch of the Next in order was the
decision upon the appeals taken behalf Mr. Tweed
from the order ofJudge Barrett refusing the
der of arrest reduce the bail from So 900 fixed
in the early stage of the present litigation The Court
susains this order the effect of which is TO continue
Mr. Tweed prisoner at Ludlow Street Jail until he
furnish the amount of bail required Opinions this
branch of the written by Judges Daniels and
Brady. We give below the more important. points Of
the various opinions.
JUDGE BRADY's OPINION.
In this action tho defendant charged with raudu-
lent procurement ana appropriation of several sums
indicated by warrants issued for their payments,
amounting in the aggregate to several millions of dol
lars The averments of the complaint charge that the
total fraudulently and by false devices OBJ
tanned and used schedule the warrants is annexed
to the complaint The defendant, the assumption
that valid claims to extent were included in the
various thus paid and that it would appear by
bill of particulars If ordered, applied for one. He
thus seeks IT would SEEM to change the character of
the demand made against him, b reducing his liability
to just such an amount as the acknowledged validity of
the claims might make. The obligation to give this
information If imposed, would necessarily require the
plaintiffs to examine and ascertain what part of each
warrant If any represented a just and legal claim
against the city, duty which incidental to the
office held by the defendant II would effect re-
quire the plaintiffs therefore, to modify their de-
mand-to forego, perhaps, the defendants personal
liability for the sum paid in gross, and to furnish the
defendant with what would be- if admissible as part
thereof the principal if the chief feature OF his de-
fence 1t would change the gravamen of the complaint
and make it substantially thus-The defendant fraud
ulenty and by false device obtained warrants which
based upon valid claims certain extent as fol-
lows,n &c. This is not the case made by the com
plant If the defendant lessen the apparent fraud
by establishing existing liability extent ms
to each warrant the onus is upon him; the plaintiffs
are under no liability to admit any liability for any
sum- The warrants being the result OF frauds perpe
trated the presumption not that they in part
only, but on the whole When the warrants were
given the plaintiffs did all that they should be required
do according to this action its object and nature IT,
however this view be erroneous, and II be by in
cumpent upon the plaintiff in action like this dis
sect the fraudulent document separating the good from
the bad, and thus take upon himself the burden
OF protecting the defendant the extent Of his
fair dealing then il be said that nearly all the
ind
not by the city or the plaintiffs but IL would SEEM
by the defendant or the persons with whom he
league to perfect and carry the system by which
the frauds were accomplished. IL further appears
least to some of the bills that the prices charged
were fictitious, and that being So entries made
upon the books of the sellers, and cannot be repro.
duced These are difficulties which array themselves
against the success of the application defeat
it, The learned Justice in the Court below Judge Dom
ohue on this branch OF the case felt governed, it
would seem, by the case of sThe Mayor Mariner
and Tweed, F" but there is distinction between that
and this In that the clam alleged to be
passed by fraudulent means. deem it unnecessary
20 over the other points discussed by Justice Davis in
his opinion. think he is right in his conclusions
to them and that the disposition suggested should be
madeaof the appeal
JUDGE DAVIS OPINION
This action is brought by the Attorney General in the
OF the people of the State Of New York under the
provisions Of chap 40 Laws OF 1875 p 49, The right of
action by that act vested in the people Of the
their corporate capacity, and authority is given To
maintain and prosecute the action independently any
other public authority; and whether not such
thority he party TO the action brought by the
part OF the State The Mayor Aldermen
&c, made parties to the action obviously for The
purpose OF rendering unnecessary bring them
in as parties SO much Of the order requires the
plaintiffs TO serve amended complaint that shall
specify what right of interest the premises the
Mayor &c, set up or pretend to-" was improperly
granted for several fhe opinion then goes on
state that the action of the Mayor &c was perfect
and Tweed had no interest or question what fright
or interest" the Mayor, &c, pretend to- That
portion OF the order which directs plaintiffs by
amended complaint to strike out the allegations
OF neglect TO audit the claims against the city or
State in such complaint, that they do not intend to
reply upon the neglect TO audit cause of action
cannot be upheld, as it proceeds upon an erroneous
idea of the OF the action and the objects OF the
avermcnts As to the bill OF particulars being ordered
Judge Davis says:-There are several reasons why
that portion OF this order should be allowed TO
stand First It IS apparent from the papers that 1t is
not in the power Of plaintiffs to comply with many of
the requirements Of the orders IL is not contradcted
that defendant required nstgatcd his nfederaes
TO burn or destroy tho books and papers which con-
tanned all the entries that existed OF any real claims
and the false accounts were, with few exceptions,
feloniously taken and no doubt, destroyed by some
person interested In their destruction; that de-
PENDANT stands as despoer of evidence He should,
at least excupate himself from all connection with the
sequence that the eendent should have the particulars
granted by the order Tho complaint alleges in plain
terms that all the claims upon which the de-
PENDANT his confedcrates obtained the money were
wholly false and fraudulent If the demand be for
$40 900 lent the defendant may demand the items that
made up that sum- with dates and amounts Of the.loans
but II he AYERS that $40 600 Is due and unpaid he
not be compelled by bill OF particulars contradict
that averment by showing that the amount actually
loaned is not due because portion has been paid
some credit or counter claim exists. In
admissible view has the defendant Tweed any right or
interest In the question whether the parties who con.
spired with him TO commit the fraud had show Of
claim which, If properly presented and audited might
have been lawfully paid ~ IS matter of no moment
to him how much just claim his confcdcrates might
have honestly made, since in fact and in law they
made none honestly The opinion then takes up
the portion Of the appeal relating to whether the COM
plant should be made definite and the redundant
portions stricken out Judge Davis says that por-
tion of the motion properly denied by Judge Dono-
hue as plaintiffs had perfect right TO for the
whole Indebtedness as whole although the frauds
perpetrated at different times That portion OF
Judge Donohue's order is affirmed with $40 costs to
the defendant The order extending time revoked,
and the defendant Tweed allowed within tho
time remaining unexpired when the order hereby
versed was entered
JUDGE DANIELS OPINION
After rectng the facts upon which the suit to
the 80 900 is based and giving the points Of the
aidayits on which the application made for reduc-
ton Of bail or vacating the ordor Of arrest, Judge
Daniels goes to that clear from the evil