The New York herald., 1875-03-01
NEW YORK HERALD MONDAY MARCH l. 1s75-TRIPLE SHEET


% MY hat o's'ns hp apepeg sa
through 4ra psH was as sSasa IN ha4 e
pasGs IN the s eiys ana not s"ss one ro
ma. N The Judgement ., IT, the proposer slaborate ar
Settlement was considered necessary 70 induce me
entertain the idea a. all s. personal interview was
i6a,sysn Then s1enasd no favor any seitlemen'
ior portion OF the deiendants S That at once
placed The matter in the hands of counsel As Mr..
ny own S yoSalaIy acts from the day Of entering
such atons with my counsel and in such attitude
y @ a .ana Sp S my hs %
ton or reaecnon
Second-My reason for not prosec uing this case was
s a an
BY involving the city in useless costs allowances and
and nSss n a The
ceived money from the city ought have con-
nd
: Hs s Ys ssaPeah's S
@ p s''S sS''s ' % sS-
@ he ne Ts Of since me-
iablshed this view Of the law N Plitman rs The
faasss oson ana jSAa dssi arsay %
q ae .c
Was Illegal. and N the face Of an express statute ~
the amount taxed This defence was true in point Of
S s s asa plssSs to s
s S IT ss * Sa
SH Saa n he
for and recover it from the city Such have
9 M so ny y
W sonsirastion s @ Of he laws and ordnanees sdopei
records show received part OF the money vhch
ssans oniPla'y mD'sn
M before H each nsn pay@sS. D0s sssTkwsshsrs
law by the supreme Court in the taxation aud allow,
TO- The thar the
equally Apply TO the ring suits not OF, ,adH,ssols @ 70,
Of conspiracy 10 which the hnancia party,
a suse M Of 1 the aySr
plausible TO layman ignores important distinctions
Upon these two grounds have rested my Justification
In 70 to- % dy wth o regard sS to s
Ing recovery Impossible eyen II Judgment could be
facts have been mentioned in addition to the uniform
suiiicient and controlling.
Before my defence TO Mayor wickham no word had
been by in relation to this except to tn
late Mayor Haveme in answer to his inquiries that
once and in Writing dismissed these charges Mayor
in giving Mayor Aavemeyer that paper. "published
defence for .tars weather. . ,
have We ABB @
:,Y Saf a.
Nv Of T tns @ ask
sshsr sash = W. sssadsasd sros%S %sss
Mayor Wick3am have substantially copied from T. the
saaaa Documentary testimony, proving not only that
am stssa IN M b., hs
To- am authorized 70 state that the counsel deems
H 91 possible ssa %
s Meua h Of Ps SOUND TO S
law in him is TO be matter o. serious acousa
postscript tS subdivision ~
Third-The last OF the Mayors reasons relates to
this subee lie mistaken as the statute books
M the a IF s ali aes G S
iSs rsat. mat
a have . sS hs was have %
facility whatever in either consenting
a to sa so aaa sa y III
a 5een Of the III s o s
possibly have been kept In court ne remaining hty
ss
myself and II Is there alleged As GROUND oi suspicion
6oih a o these hs former and
S all s bSy |
ever f1ewn s5 as "a xOrs Mn ., N.
sStn fsssSns e
ssyRs Ssy this
cited 4s se rrSe pSscrR s2sss1s
xSel % no injury
result Of my Official acts, ,s alleged or shown.
unanswered. 80 official lawyer, citizen newspaper
has or aaea az ~ close ~Ss
contained and now also afix my oath to this supple
6y me gFs' ed each
sed s5siueea " 'aisa 0' Ass A'e p"0"' '''0iasa An'
Both the charges and reasons are founded upor
mere hearsay. No verilcatior accompanies them. No
aTe given to fe rs aae aas
my satenents they all stand nnquest,onsd n and un
tained in my sworn defences ana the docuine ary
The Mayor inadvertently returns to which
have completely reiued by documents and figures 1
SdS IsseI Las Sms read the defence and
has been withheld from his eyes as he proposed to with
rosrcRirr-xH ocoSoR's OBSERVATIONS
viewed the grounds alleged BY the Mayor tor his DE-
Of h M Drspasa upon ngve oea
| What follows relates to them:-
he prepared them under deep prejudice. The atere
D e peadce s
now diminished ii not DESTROYED, and indicate tina
4 u
pressed upon him Tor the first time he would reec
them
Under absorbing msapprehension he became my
prosecutor and OF course he now comments upon ,ht
with convictions materially modified.
AND CHARACTER
Mr.. O'Conor says :-'Neither the private morals moi
the personal character the respondent could be
cessfuly impeached In these respects he stands, un
and Justly on the same high place In pub
gentlemen referred TO by him.
This Is ordinary language II Is followed by the
plain mtimation OF his own conviction that 'in TIM
High Judgment which sees ali things and cannot err
shall stand acquitted of any obectonable inent" Ii
ADDS 10 the yor:-"should you think III to remov
the respondent from Office you Will doubtless conside
the proprety expressing in order that ecc
this personal excupauon.n In another part OF hi
paper am credited by Mr.. OConOr with great intel
Pence :" but this Is more liberal than just.
II will thus be perceived that upon grounds bott
moral and intellectual Assurance Is given of my genera
fitness for the position hch hold; II only rema d
Tor 10 proveas certainly shall not only TO you
but also TO his sasiactionthat III any matters which
criticised by him the facts are not as ne sup
poses When | have done this there Will be noihini
lett but question whether corporation Consei ough
10 removed because after consulting with eminen
counsel he has In one or two cases acted upon we
OF law dHering from those OF other lawyers.
will now take up the Observations" In their or