The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-10-12
THE COURTS.
Orders Entered in the Supreme Court
General Term Decisions.
Tweed's Bonds and the Notices Of
Appeal and Argument.


two orders have been entered based the recent de-
cisions Of the Supreme Court General Term in the
case One these orders embodes the decision Of the
Court reversing the decision Of Judge Donohue, de-
clarng Tweeds right bill Of particulars the other
declares the decision OF the Court sustaining Judge
Barret's decision refusing to reduce Tweeds bail or
yacate the order OF arrest against him.
ORDER REVERSING JUDGE DoNoHuE's DECISION
This order is as folows:-
At General Term Of the Supreme Court OF the State
OF New York, held on the Sth day OF October 1875.
Present Hon. Noah Davis, Presiding Justice, John L.
Brady and Charles Daniels, Associate Justices.
The People OF the State of New York, plaintiffs, VS.
William NJ. Tweed and the Mayor, Aldermen and Com
monalty of the city OF New York, defendants This
having come to be heard the appeals OF the
plaintiffs and the defendant Tweed, respectively, from
certain portions of order of the Special Term this
action, made the Goth day Of July, 1885, and after
hearing Mr.. Peckham for the plaintiffs and Mr.. Field
for the defendant Tweed 1t is ordered that so much Of
the said order appealed from by the PLAINTIFF
70 Will the part thereof comprised within the first and
second divisions thereof and so much thereof as
extends the time OF the defendant Tweed to
answer or demur or take any other action
be and the hereby is reversed, with
$40 costs OF the appeal and the plaintiffs disbursements
thereon, and that the motion OF defendant Tweed be-
and the same is hereby, denied, with $40 costs
Ordered further that much of said order APP
peaed from by the defendant Tweed be and the same
that the defendant Tweed have days from the
time Of the service Of copy of this order to the
complaint herein.
ORDER UPON JUDGE DARRETT's DECISION.
The order sustaining Judge Barretts decision the
question Of bail is folows:-
AT a General Term of the Supreme Court in and for
the First Department of the State of New York. held
the It'll day of October 1875. Present, Hon. Noah
Davis, Presiding Justice John r. Brady and Charles
Daniels Associate Justices.
The People OF the State OF New York, plaintiffs, VS.
William NJ Tweed and the Mayor and Commonalty Of
the city Of New York, defendants-This having
come on to be heard the appeal Of the defendant
Tweed from the order of the Special Term denying the
OF the defendant Tweed to vacate the order of
arrest herein or TO reduce the amount OF bail after
hearing Mr.. Field, for the defendant Tweed, and Mr.
Peckham, for the plaintiffs ordered that the said order
be and the same hereby in all respects affirmed with
$40 costs and the disbursements of the appeal
APPEALS TWEED
From both the foregoing orders the defendant Tweed,
has taken and perfected appeals by executing the
say bonds and serving notices of appeal and argument
on the Attorney General yesterday
on the appeal taken from the first order the bond
executed is as folows:-
SUPREME CoURT-The People of the State Of New
York, plaintiff and respondent VS. William NJ. Tweed,
implicated with the Mayor Alderman and Commonalty
OF the city of New York, defendant and appellant
Whereas the Sth day of October 1875 the General
Term Of the Supreme Court of the State OF New York
the Court made an order against tho above named
appellant and in favor OF the respondent reversing
much of an order made the goth of July 1875 at the
Special Term comprised within the first and second
divisions thereof, and much thereof extends the
time Tor the defendant, Tweed to answer or demur
to take any other action, and affirming so
much thereof appealed from by
tile defendant Tweed; and whereas the above named
appellant feeling aggrieved thereby intends TO appeal
theretrom TO the Court of Appeals Now therefore,
Charles Devn of No 81 East Fifty seventh street. in
the city ofNew York. and John Muholland, OF Seventy
third street. between First and Second avenues, New
York. do hereby dertake that the said appellant viii
pay all costs and damages which may be awarded
against him on said appeal, not exceeding $500,
CHARLES DEYLIN,
JOHN MULHOLlAND.
NEW YORK October O. 1875
State OF Neo York city and county Of Nec York
Charles Devn, of the subscribers TO the foregoing
undertaking being sworn says:-That he Is resident
and freebooter within the State and is worth the of
ST. 000 and above all his debts and liabilities and
exclusive Of property exempt by law from execution
CHARLES DEVLIN.
Sworn to before this 9th day OF October, 1875 f.
H. KUHN Notary Public, New York county.
John Mulholland the other surety TO the foregoing
bond justines thereon in form similar 10 that OF his
cosurety, Mr.. Devln, and both have executed a
similar bond in the appeal taken from the decision OF
the Court affirming that OF Judge Barrett refusing
reduce Tweeds bail the order Of under
which he is held.
NOTICES OF APPEAL.
The notice Of appeal from the arst order is as fol-
lows
SUPREME CoURT.-The People Of the State Of New
York plaintiffs VS.. William NJ Tweed. implicated with
the Mayor, Aldermen and Commonaty Of the city Of
New York defendant
sIR-Take notice that the defendant Tweed appeals
to the Court Of Appeals from every part Of the order
made and entered herein at the General Term Of The
Supreme Court the Sth day Of October 1875 except
so much thereof orders that the defendant, Tweed
have days from the time of the service Of copy
FIELD & DEYO
Attorneys for the defendant Tweed.
To DANIEL PRATT, Esq, Attorney General for plaintiff
similar notice Of appeal from the second order,
Judge Barrctts decision, states that it is
appealed from a whole.
NoTIcB or ARGUMENT.
The notice OF argument is as follows
Court Of appeals cfhe state IF New York an appeal
from ne First judicial District-The People or the
State Of New York, Plaintiff, William NJ Tweed,
implicated with the Mayor Aldermen and Com
monalty Of the city Of New York, Defendant
SIR-Take notice that the appeal from the order OF
the General Term, entered herein in the above entitled
Of this Court at term thereof to be held the 9th
day OF November, 1875, at the capital in the city of
Albany, at the opening Of the Court that day
soon thereafter as counsel can be heard Yours, &c
FIELD & DEYO
Attorneys for Appellant Tweed
Dated the 9th day OF October, 1875
To DANIEL PRATT, Esq, Attorney General for Plain
tilt and sIondent
on the part OF counsel both sides Of the case dis
position expressed TO DO ready argue the appeals
on the day for which they arenoticed for argument
9th of next month. In the meantime the defendants
answer will be served. But II the Court Of Appeals
shall tho decision Of the General Term and
tain that Of Judge Donohue awarding defendant bill
OF particulars then u may become necessary on tho
part Of defendant apply to the Court for leave 10
serve amended answer II the decision Of the Court
affirming Judge Barrcttis decision refusing to reduce
bail should DO reversed by the Court of Appeals then
will become necessary TO renew the motion decided by
Judge Barrett II is understood that counsel for the
people will urge in the Court Of Appeals that
the question OF reduction of bail discretionary
with the Court and, therefore, not appealable; and
should Tweeds counsel adopt similar tactics they may
urge that Judge Donohue's order declaring rweeds
right 10 a bill Of particulars also within tho dis
erection Of the Judge, and therefore, not appeaiabe
ASKING STAY PRocEEDISCs
Application made yesterday by Dudley Field on,
behalf Of Mr.. Tweed, TO Judge Lawrence in Supreme
Court Chambers, for order TO show why
stay Of proceedings should not be granted pending tho
appeas from the decisions Of the Supreme Court Gem
eral Term, in the six million suit Judge Lawrence
stated that he thought the action OF the Supreme
Court General Term, prevented his giving such
der Mr. Field said lie very positive il did not
and Judge Lawrence said he would give his decision on
the matter this morning