The New York herald., 1875-11-27
THE COURTS.
The Tweed One Million Suit
Again in Court.
Motion 10 Vaeate The Order Of Arrest
or Reduce Bail.
Argument on the Motion and De-
cision Reserved.

There was another sharp legal tournament yesterday
though brief one, il what is known as the zone
miionr sut against William II. Tweed. 1t arose on
the motion the order Of arrest or 70 reduce
the bail Mr Dudley Field appeared for the motion and
Mr wheeler Il. Peckham IN opposition
Mr. Field who opened the argument, began by stat
ing that suit Of the same title was brought against
Mr. Tweed IN April, 1872; that he was
arrested on the ed OF June following and The
ball fixed al $S,oooooo; that while under arrest
IN the rst suit ne was the sth Of October
ensuing the present suits that the bail in the lat
Ter suit was axed at 81 ooo and shat he is now in
prison In the 1rst action the complaint alleged
spracy between Tweed and Watson TO dcraud the city
and county through procuring false and pretended
claims against comfy to be set up allowed and paid
that this conspiracy entered into on May 4, 1870,
and continued anti May 13 Of that year. during which
time they caused 10 be paid upon warrants
drawn upon the Broadway National Bank SO 900 coo
which they converted TO their own In ths present
suit similar conspiracy is alleged 70 have been
entered into between ihs same parties beginning on
the 18th OF July 1870 and continuing till the 23d OF
August ensuing, during which Ss33,o4o are
alleged to have been in like manner fraudulently
obtalned from the Treasury After this preliminary
statement he insisted that the entire claim OF the
plaintiffs curing me peroa a., named n mas merger n
made TO compel the plaintiffs set forth their claim in
many distinct causes OF action as there were distinct
warrants. This motion denied and upon appeal
the order or denial affirmed by the General Term
He cited the decision given by the General Term,
which as he claimed, showed that the present action
Is similar 10 IN action running account He next
cited Of the Court OF Appeals the appeal
10 that Court showing that latter tribunal refused
10 disturb the OF the Supreme Court General
Term on the question Of ball. on the sole ground
that IL matter OF discretion or tho
10 this discretion. The papers showed that
four other suits had been brought against the defend
upon the matters, by the county, one by
lhe city and two by the people. In the first he
held bail in ST. COO 600 Tha; action failed, the
plaintiffs claim was discontinued In the second he
was arrested, and was nov IN prison owing TO his ina
biity to give bail 80 600 600 Why should additional
bail OF 81 0oo 600 be exactcd this actions The judge
VINO the order acted only on the papers before
MIN. On this motion the other suit, the fact OF Tie
defendants Imprisonment, the enormous bail de-
lnanded then the mpossipiliiy OF his escape owing
10 these facts were brought TO the Courts
attention. Why should he be held 20 bail In
ihs suit al all The oh &c. OF bail was to secure his at
tendance That is already abundantly secured in the
other WIN the Court assist the plaintiffs in pill
Ing order after order Of arrest for the purpose not
o securing the partys attendance, but obviously for
the purpose OF punishment and vexatony In criminal
cases, upon series OF indictments of like nature,
when heavy bail was required and given upon one in
dctment but small almost nominal bail was required
Apon the rest. THIS The respect to tho
merous Indictments. thiTy-flye so, against this de-
fcndant IL was time hai the system ol bail should be
amended so not to become system Of oppression.
II this bail undsturbed, they should probably have
next week new orter oi arrest in some otner uneN
amplcd sum- and another the week following and so
on in the future. Upon the points stated no urged in
conclusion that the order Of should be set aside
or the bail reduced to a nominal amount
Mr. PeGkhan, in reply. urged that there moth
ing n the points raised further than that they
had all been disposed of IN other suit. He made a
strong point or ihe fac, that the defendant made
denial OF the allegations in reply TO the conclusion
drawn in the former that he intended TO run
away. Judge, through good nature, reduced Con
nollyg bal 10 500 600, and in twenty four
hours Connolly was gone. That Tweed was secured
by bail III The 81, eco 900 suit why
he ehould not be held in another and different case,
where he charged with taking six specified of
money from the city. As to bringing numerous suits,
that lie said, precisely what he intended 10 do,
and be added that he hadn't half begun 10 bring all
that he entitled to bring
Mr. Field ssid the object plainly to punish by
civil suits man, while there others stand
Ing around liable 20 actions and who we're not ha-
Tassed Ike his client
At the close Of the argument the Judge took the pa
pcrs, reservlng his decision.