New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-07-28
THE COURTS.

THE TWEED CASE AS Precedent
EXPORTS or AARON JACOBS TO OBTAIN REMis'ioa
OF FINE IMPOSED IN PROCEEDINGS ron con-
TgMPT.
Aaron Jacobs was committed for contempt
by Judge Freedman the Superior Court, special len'
and appealed by habeas corpus to judge "estDo"N ID
SUPREME Court. Chambers. yesterday. JUDGE freedihn
had found Jacobs guilty OF Withholding S2Ods ~ "A'h
LIE lad been ordered to pay TO suitor and that IN al
don 70 that the of the proceedings as aseeahea
by AFFIDAVIT: 1852 %, and eoaDse fee Of 800 were
nrope lie therefore imprisoned Jacobs for 80 days ior
his conterlpt OF court and fined him S2,41o d.
to be paid before lie should be released "heh
the Gaze was presented before Judge "eSt
brook counsel raised the point that superior
Court Judge having the power to punish for contempt
his acts could not be reviewed by another Judge Oh
another court on habeas corpus hut only on appeal
from his order Judge WestbroOk stated that he had
ALWAYS so UNDERSTOOD until the recent decision IN the
Tweed ease. Counsel for tie respondent insisted oai
this was contempt proceeding aldno one on ajudgne
and that the Tweed TIE prisoner had spent one
year in prison and paid fine OF $3.50 ard that the Cct
OF Appeals had only decided that the further sentence
was void II the respondent In ths case woud az the
end Of s 50 days inrsoniler pay 20 lncn OF W Lac
within the conceded power OF nc superior COURT
Judge NestbFook said tho General Term IN IT'S decision
had relied upon the enc provision OF the Ste WhIch
forbade them 20 release prisoner eshihea 20. elr
tempt by fna' judgment or decree by court OK co.
4
fbiding the bringing OF the writ in such eases lDat
seemed nau language. yet the Court 81 Appeals had
dcciigG that he must Dqifc not merely whether me
fi.ic0n was conpctent but whether the judge o the
out nad exceeded hs jurisdiction IN TINS case ~ WIS
charged that including counsel ices N the nue. I've
Court excessive fine, and 80 the ease vas
The same az tir Tweed As the fine vas single y ~
was excessive in any respect. II must be wholly DIS
charged. Counsel then submitted authorities rs 10
whether the CeHsOii OF q counsel re wa laWl OF hot
and Judge WesbrOOk reserved his decision = D. tr"ohs
appeared for the prisoner G cambridge SH'H oppoS@u'
. IIBEI SUIT BROUGHT BY HENRY c. BOWEN.
The suit of Henry C. Bowen against The
Brooklyn Duly Eagle To recover 100000 damages iof
the publication Of alleged libei0us interview" was
brought up yesterday il the Brooklyn City Court BEFORE
Judge Reynolds through examination de benz esse on
the part defendant, James NcDermott, an Ea%e
reuortcr WHO is about 20 to Chicago Mr. Bowen has
the alleged interview.
The witness testified that he had known Henry =
Bowen personally for about two years and half that
be met him frequontiy-anOst dahy-attcr the puh'c-
,ou Of the Trinarta Covenant in 1873; that their Iea
tons continued until August 1874; that he called ~ ms
LO:se Is zee on Aug g. 1870 that he had been at Ms
house fY-guently before that-perhaps half u dozen
tsIes On day that ne NJ Bowen ABOUT p H.
and shat The subject OF the charges against MI b.et
VS. referred by them. Ide witness Sa't tu't t,'e
article which purports 70 be IN interview "ltd -lI;
Tycn on Aur g. 81 published in re kdGic next cav
which he preferred 10 call 4 conversation, not il
tended 10 Ge interview as held as such " ANut rom
the ntruductoi and far that pHrport- - siate
Mr. Tilton MoutOn and Mr.. Cahlu ne said IN SUD
stance what s there attributed 10 HIM never Ll NlaI
+ Technically called an interview. THIS was CONVERSE
ton had frequent conversations Win MN on h' saiiie
subjects" -.
To-.,y the witness will be erOssexamined for the
Plaintiff.