The New York herald., 1875-07-15
An Imprisonment Without
Show Of Authority.
Ingenioue Plea for the Release
Of the Incarcerated Boss.
Papers Taken by the Court and
Decision Reserved.

Court, Chambers before Judge Barrett. Tne court
room was crowded, many having come hoping
that Tweed would be there ana wishing 10 note
the Improvements in him. II any, since changing
MS quarters from the Penitentiary on BlackTellis
Island 10 Ludlow street jan number being
present out OF idle curiosity and having nothing
else 70 occupy their attention, but oy far the
greater majority attending from desire 10 hear
those Nestors OF the New York Bar, Charles
O'COnor and David Dudley Field. This latter
class were looking for a contest in the legal
arena between these two renowned experts
which, though differing from a regatta or
horse race, was IN its way fully as spirited and
exciting, with the additional spicy Favor OF there
being millions in 1t. Such, however, were
doomed TO disappointment Mr.. O'Conor was not
present, and Mr.. held had II all his own way.
Beginning his argument at twelve O'Clock Mr.
Field spoke for nearly an hour and hall, but
though TO a considerable extent ne went over the
same ground as did Dudley Field on the previous
day, his argument as a whole was pronounced
one OF the clearesi, most logical and tncontro-
vertibe ne has ever delivered, and in short
mastery eeort. OF course good deal OF iE was
necessarily dry and technical but It's main fea
lures Will be found IN the subJoined report.
II the Court please, he began, IL may conduce to
your understanding OF the question arising upon
this motion 10 take note OF the date OF certain
transactions In the litigation. In 1871 tn ee ac
tons were brought against the defendant for
substantially the same cause OF action-one by the
State, one by the county and one by the city. In
the last a summons only was served. In the sec
ond issue was joined, the case made ready for
trial ard for several years remaining so, the PLAIN
tlns having now moved It, The third action, that
OF the state, has undergone various vicissitudes.
The defendant was arrested and held 10 bail In
$1,000000. he demurred, and Special Term was
called 10 hear the argument. The demurrer
o
she General Term, General Term was
order was affirmed. The answer was then put ID,
and for nearly three years that case nas been
ready for trial and no trial ever moved by the
pIaintiGs. Ingersol, a codefendant in tnat suit,
also demurred and his demurrer was allowed. On
tanned. Plaintiffs then appealed TO the Court OF
Appeals. In June 1874, IL was decided. as every
lawyer in the state, tDink-almost every lawyer
in tue State-eXcept the lew VINO met in what
they chose TO call the Bureau OF Municipal Cor
restion, namely That the state had no rgnt
zion thus stood untouched by the plain
ans until March, 1875, the defendant stand
NO movements against him. Meantime these
gentlemen meeting IN the Bureau Of Municipal
pearances-to have taken into their heads that It
was better theory TO spite the Court Of Appeals
The Legislature, where, after industry and per-
Eistence, they obtained law which Is now before
inns attorneys went before Mr. justice DAVIS,
without notice 70 the defendant, and obtained
costs be paid. though that order was OBTAINED
on the 10th OF March It was not served or any
tlce whatever given 10 the ceiendants attorneys
until the 9Th ofApriL On this same 20th Of March
sne plaintiffs attorneys obtained from Mr.. Justice
Davis an order 10 arrest the defendant and hold
him to pau in $3,OOOOO0. That order was kept
back until the 22d Of June, when 1t was served.
Mr.. Peckham-rhat order was delivered At the
same time with the summons on the 6tn OF April,
pr about that time.
Mr.. FIeld--Does that appear BY the papers ?
Mr P6cknam-Yes, sir.
Mr.. Field don't know where IT appears. say
the order was kept back BY somebody; BY whom
Mr.. Peckham-Is was kept back by nobody.
Mr.. Held-l say It was not served; ana as the
would ask were directions given Lot TO serve IL
until the decisien Of the Court or Appeals was
rendered. aud would Ike 70 know II no oirec-
mons we're given 70 the sheriff not TO arrest the
defendant until ne was released by the Court OF
Mr.. Peckham-No. sir; how he could be arrested
when IN criminal custody don't know.
appears nntii the 22d OF June. NOW. on the Bts
OF April the plainu1s attorneys applied to Mr..
Justice Barrett Tor warrant ol attachment ON the
oI arrest was made, and obtained an attachment
against an DEFENDANTS property; delivered II TO
The Sherln With instructions to serve II on all Of
deiendant's property; on when the Sheriff has
eertIAed that he mas attached thirty-seyen pieces
OF real estate and given notice under the act 30
seven alleged holders OF personal estate; sim1l-
taneousy with which, since the gentleman has
Interviews with plaintiffs counsel, Ia which they
were made to tell wnaE they mad done ana WAat
Mr.. Peckham-Tnat was all Imagination.
Mr.. Field-ls was IMAGINATION, Dut got into
arrest makes motion 70 Vacate the oreer or
tnat sue bail Oe reduced. The question presented
Is, Whsthsr according 20 the law OF the lsna,
defendant under the circumstances can be ar
Iested aud kept IN prison until he dnds, what no
human being supPoses any man In thls country
can md when charged Dy the state wlth an IN
deOtedness OF So QUO, ball In So coo 600; that H.
be committed without pail, for u Is equivalent 70
that. IL Is no argument 70 say that the defendant
is charged VITA great wrong He Il so charged
whether 1t will be proved or nOt de pends on a
trial. The question "a whether before trial. on ex
parte ai1davlts, IL is permitted by the law tbat A
defendant shall be committed without bail
Now, this 10 question taat concerns the
liberty OF the citizen, and Is OF the grav.
est character. IL not question what
shall be done with man after trial; after being
confronted with Witnesses against hin, and they
have been subjected 10 crOss-examlnatlOn
against them. lt Is question wnat ssall be
done before when, In Judgment Of law, he IS, or
ought TO be, q free man. Now, sir, you know
we ali knowZthat Jhe country Is dlied with rings
real and rAncied; the Iammany ring the canal
ring, The whIskey ring, the Custom House RUG,
the carpet-baggers ring few Of them under the
theory on which TINS action IS based namely,
that one member ~ accountable f0r the 5pOIls OF
all, ana that punishment by lmprlsogIng men
parte aflidayits. parry IN power whether Of
tue national or state government, any
influence ana annoy It's advsrlarles.
THIS case IS presented 10 ysu under
supposing It were the hrss ana ONLY onoi
Second, how stands ths case, knowing That
~ Is lnc tuAthf anu thlfNt now atanNd
the order OF arrest, knowing that an attachments
has been taken out and used IN the case before
the arrestS First slr now STANDS the case sup
posing it 10 be .he nrstY suit Is brought upon
a complaint not yeIlned-l say not verified be-
cause The AFFIDAVIT OF Nr, Pacsnam whlcn Il an
nexed TO IL 10 not vcrincatiOn within the law.
The Code says as you know as wei IS J. that IL
u complaint IL flea on behalf OF the State 70 may
be verified by any person acQuain tel VITA tue
Iacts. What does Mr. PecSAam knew? THAT
depOnent mas diligently investigated aad MADE
himself acquainted VITA the facts alleges Ia the
complaint and Is acquainted with the same" You
and say, that however wen meant, mat ~ nOg
true. He cannot be acquainted WIZ them; be
saw not one OF them; he sw0re ne was acquainted
with tue facts because he has read certain dOcu-
ments. Well. what else Is there There Is an0tner
anidavit OF Mr. Peckbamis which gives no iurther
Information there s another afdavit OF Mr.. Iiden
made In another action long ago and not repeated p
here; the af1daVt3 " lngefs0ll GaTVey and
Keyser, three men who avow tnat they them
selves robbed the city, wBO are themselves let 20
scOt-iree, themselves and all ther piunder, aud
M nulraA the MalaE lanL