New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-12-28
LOCAL MISCELLANY.
SIZING THE BROOKLYN RING.


SnK EFFORT TO REMOVE Mr.. FowLERs CASE TO
KINGS coUNTY-cOMNENTs OF THE PEOPLES
IAwYRRs-EFFECT ON THE OTHER DEFENDANTS
Mr.. Pryor's notification TO Mr.. Parsons OF the
tepson OF the defense TO for the removal OF the
hing sus-so far as they affect Mr. Fower-to BROOK! d.
yesterday formed leading subject OF conversation anu
conjecture among persons interested In the su's' MI
Parsons said that he should contest the removal OF
course, but II Gen. Pryor's motion prevailed II
would probably carry all OF the suits TO
Brooklyn as it would be inconvenient TO sever
che defendants impleaded together Inc
peoples lawyers not surprised by the demand iol
removal Of the suits They had anticipated 1t from the
Arst and were ready TO meet it. The Code tney CHILL
distinctly authorizes Court to remove suit against
pubhc officer another county than that IN Whlen 'no
cause Of action arose. when there is reason 10 peee
chat an imparta trial cannot be had In the latter county
hi, on this ground they claim that the suits were lau
IN New-York. In answer TO the oWecuoh lna'
che Code only provides that the Court may OH
motion remove an action for the cause men
toned TO another county and that the prosecution mas
10 right TO lay action for that cause III
another county they reply that the meaning OF the pro
vision is probably broader than this objection would I'M
NV so that II suit may be removed on motion II may pe
Brought originally in the county where the renhoNai
xonld Mace H. Its also claimed behalf OF the people
that the acts charged against Mr.. Fowler as wrongful
we're not official acts, aud consequently cannot DC
respect 20 the trial of public officers MI Parsons salu
yesterday that the prosecution OF the suits would not pe
DELAYED by the motion for their removal He reiuted
xumor 10 the effect that his private business would pre-
vent him from taking personal charge OF the prosecution
Of the suits by saying he should continue To manage
them himself and had no idea Of RELOCATING his authority
The defendants counsel seem TO look upon Cen fryors
move as master stroke. Gen Pryor himself said yestei
ay that the law this clear its application 10
MI Fowler was entirely certain and in his mnd there
was not the shadow Of doubt that the suit against MS
client would be removed 10 Brooklyn as soon as the mo
ton removal made TO the supreme Court Joshua
Al Van COtt OF the counsel for MesIs hhesey anu
Keeney stated that Gen Pryor was clearly In the right
In regard TO McssTs. LOwber ana Bliss MI van Oot %
that as they not members OF the water bodIu
might doubtful whether the provision or the Ioue
would amply them. and perhaps 10 motion W0uu oe
made for the removal " the suits against them. No suc
motion would TIC made in the cases OF MessIs;
Kugsley Keeney aud the suits against tne1 "oIu
not BE- DELAYED 10y waiting for the decision OF the moO
respectng Mr. Fowler The answers In their cases were
being rapidly prepared and would probably be served
this week. have no hesitancy In saving MI van
of added that the cases should have been brought IN
Brooklyu The defendants charged with robbng the
people OF Brooklyn and it would seem as though those
people should he trusted to try them' and TO nave
chance at their alleged robbers"
The peoples lawyers say that they have three more
puits under consideration. They VIII not reveal agdlnst
whom or for what these suits are TO he brought ne
papers VI them, II is understood VIII De
served this week.