The New York herald., 1875-07-15

ri am not rlstaHen In my recollection only
Mr.. Peckhap,-YOu are mixing in otner amdavIts
There IS nothing about tnat IN trese andayts.
Mr. Fiele-Wel, make Il any way No one pre-
tends tnat nothing was due. Most assuredly this
building dld not grow in nighttime out OF
nothing. OF necessity something was due, and
surely the excess only Is that which anyDoay can
be charged WITH and all that is claimed to have
been traced 10 the defendant Is $932, COO. Upon
what theory, should ike 70 know, Is it that YOU
sitting here IN the first instance, can say that the
plalntffs can probably recover more tnan 1892 600,
ana sl can hold him on a larger oau tnan thatS
OF these aceomplices, thieves as they are,
profess themselves in the daylight TO be, tools
OF the plaintns for the purpose OF charging their
accompnce they make out $500 How could
they, then, make out the wAole amount Of the
claim Hew can you make u out more than
that But go much further. How can anybody
say that TINS sult has any foundation az a3 Is not
II enough, in this state. for the Court OF Appeals
70 nave decided that this a similar suit cannot
be maintained They have adJudged, after
long ntigatlou, In which everything was done to
convince the Court of Appeals, and for which
they have been roundly abused, tnat the plaintlns
nave not jot or title OF claim against this de-
against the deiendaptf Is not 1t now the same
transaction The gentleman says " is IN a little
exactly, and the Court have decided that
the plaintiff, the State Of New YORK. has
get along with tnatS Tney get along with IL, as
they say, by the act OF The Legislature that they
have obtained. And here let me pause 10 make
an observation. 1t is said, and think truly. that
in times o. war or civil commotiOn we are apt TO
lose slRhL OF the ancient landmark5 OF the law anu
guarantees OF personal rights. on no other
theory Is it TO be explained that In this State,
with all these consequences staring US Ia the
face, fourteen acts, IT l am correctly inlOrmed
were obtained OF the Legislature, retrospective IN
Iheir operation, 10 affect tins defendant. Now,
wnen the history OF these times comes 10 be writ
ten, IL win be said with reproach tnat we have
overeapt all the barriers set mp by our fore
fathers and, In default Of nndng law, have gone TO
work 10 make law 10 reacn a defendant. Why, slr,
have not the slightest doubt That nothing but the
constitution has prevented the passage OF Dill OF
affalnder Mr. Tweed. These
tually acts OF attalnder. Ihey are intended
20 snses nm In manner Irsn.octS aot knowR NU1
place with which he Is charged. TINS law, what
Il sltS 'When any money held by any municipal
fore without right been obtained 10y any one, the
STATE mas in every such case, and shall Daye, q
right or action for the same and for any damages
o6talned.n Now, one OF two consequences lol-
low either that act rehabii ates, puts on It's feet
fepdant or it Is prospectlse ONLY in its operation
II 1t Is decaratory, 10 tne enect that the action
Which the Court OF Appeals decided could NOT
stand, shall nevertheless stand and be good
SUIT, does it make any difference II they diseon-
tinue that suit and the next moment bring an
other ike IL Can they py sort OF iegerdeIhalh
apply 70 you on one side OF the bench
Tor an order dsconinulng one suit
for the same thing, on the strength and faitn of
that aet2 BuI, regarded as prospective In ITS
Competent Tor the Legislature to take from
the county OF New York the lunds that belong
Vest he hem in tue stateS T say It cannot be done
But suppose am IN error so iar that the state
can sue and that the defendant is liable where
/ IL the right TO exact 100000 DallY The whole
theory OF bail Is subyerted by it; that every man
before Judgment shall be a Tree man II he can get
anybody TO answer for him, except IN certain
/ capital cases; that his liberty shall not be IN
vaded until alter trial, II MS neIghoors
proder reasonable security that he shall
! be forthcoming. Mr. Field read from the act or
William ana Mary, tnat excessive bail snail not
! be required and quoLed from the wilkes case as
TO what was excessive bali. He then considered
! the next question, how stood the case as the
/ fourth action. The argument divided itsell into
two branches Assuming that the former action
was not discontinued, then the defendant could
because the costs mad not been paid, and cit ed
many cases and the Revised Statutes IN support
OF that view He then passed to the third branch
or the argument that the order OF arrest
must be set aside, because previous TO
It's service the plaintiffs had used an at
tachment, quoting decision OF Judge
Daniels affirmed by Lhe Court Of Appeals, that
rect and attachment at the same tune. Because
the defendant was Tweed were they TO nave
new law asked for 2 In conclusion Mr. Field
said NOW, II the Court please, have done with
this case. The defendant in all reason mas suf
tered unjust imprisonment enough, lie mas been
held since 1871 Imprisoned In the hands OF mis- cap
tors amount OF 81, 0O0 600, and ALL sir, with
contrary TO law, contrary 20 reason. contrary TO
the sense OF Ofninety nine hundredns OF the lawyers
OF this State. Is that small thing Then, again,
Tor seven months he has been held In the Penlten-
tary wltAOut a shadow OF authority, An violation
/ OF law, contrary right. There are twO cases.
I Most ferveRty dc hope that d third Will not be
added -
I Tn.lra uarratt raaarvad hfs dacfoion