The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-05-11

signee of trustee, and that the could only
pay tor tic road, but could take whatever
In tho shape OF subsidy. Mr. Mount, ia his opening,
stated at length all the facts OF the suit already
fully gwen the lERALD He referred tho seeming
impossiby OF his client getting trial. and said tina;
the other side had boaslcd that they would kin him
financially that he would be obliged desst from
prosecuting the He added that had been for
The nrmness of HIS Honor who was TO try the case
the trial would probably have been Indefinitely
postponed. After Mr. Mount had finished the opening,
Judge Fullerton moved TO dismiss the complaint which
motion dered. The taking OF testimony will begin
to-day and the probability that the trial will occupy
several days.
DEPUTY SHERlFFS' EXTORTIONS
An action tried yesterday in the Marine Court
Part 2, before Judge Gocpp which illustrates the
length TO which deputy sherls and deputy marshals
will 20 transccndng the functions with which they
legally vested 1t action for damages
brought by Lew NJ. Cohen No $50 Bowcry dealer in
toys and fancy goods against Thomas Dunlap, Jr. The
latter, deputy marshal made levy on the plaintiffs
store judgment and execution $3.50 on the 2lst
Of December, 1874 OF the busiest in the plaintiffs
business, of the holidays The process for execution
placed in the defendants hands at halfpast
twelve AT about eleven O'Clock attorneys clerk
appeared nj the Shcrin's olice and informed
the Shcrns representatives there that there stay
OF proceedings obtained, so that no levy should be
Cohen's goods The clerk showed the official
order Tor tho stay, stating that he had not yet time
make and copy. AT twelve O'Clock Dunlap
ordered proceed with the execution. O'Clock
he made the levy took charge OF the whole stock OF
goods-between $4,000 and SIC, coo worh-turned
away the customers then purchasing locked the doors
and stopped the business then in the busiest part OF
the day. 1t Ave O'Clock before plaintiffs
counsel succeeded in satisfying the deputy that stay
OF proceedings had been granted, when the usual
guarantee was given him and u sum Of S25, which tho
defendant claimed youn tary gift on the part of
the plaintiff but which the latter urged was cxtorted
from HIM Tho whole transaction was branded as most
arbitrary act the part OF the sheriff and
his deputy. involving heavy loss upon the plaintiff.
Tor which special damages cnimed together with
Judgment for the recovery OF the 23 exored from him.
The hearing OF the occupied the whole OF the day
Judge Goepp charging the jury comment upon the
act OF tho deputy exacng ices beyond what the law
allowed IN this case. The Judge said, II feel It
my duty 10 romark upon the anomaly that in tho
city of New York the sheriff, the executive officer
OF the law, maintains corps OF followers, indeed OIL
cal assistants, who situated peculiarly that Il
they confined themselves 10 such compensation or In
come tho law provides and restricts them 10
must necessarily starvc but who by virtue OF uni
versal practice. live entirely the money they extort
FROM the community in the shape oil official fees
trary the dictates OF the law and contrary 10 the
dressed prohibitions OF the law. That a community
where such custom prevails must be one IN which
the admit abstraction of tho law docs enjoy that
spect which under ali circumstances ii should enjoy IS
very manifest and | am glad have this oppor-
tunty of calling the attention OF twelve citizens to
this remarkable defect in our institutions, and to
press the hope that some change for the better may
ensue II occasions OF marking the probation
with which all honest men must view such system"
The jury found for the plaintiff, awarding him $3.50,
the amount of the original Judgment and the S23 cx
torted by the deputy
INGENIOUS POINTS OF LAW
At the General Term of the Supreme Court, before
judges DAVIS and Daniels, yesterday the Judges lis
tened to an interesting argument made by Mr. William
T. Knitting, on behalf OF q. W. LOOMS and Thomas
Lewis the twin confidence men, whose detention in
the Prison he claims be Illegal The prisoners
convicted at the December Torn OF the General
Sessions before Judge Sutherland, OF the larceny OF
500 from Christian oason, an emsrant, by trick and
years. The facts developed upon the trial showed
that the accused 'plcked up the cmgrant who
prevailed upon to visit a drinking saloon. IN which
place the accused commenced to throw dice LOWS
tucod the emgrani to loan him $780, in order that he
might win some money from LOOMS, promising,
should he lose go up to the bank and get a check
cashcd for 5000 which he said he had In his posses.
SION. As matter OF course, LOOMS won, which
the accused disappeared, leaving the emigrant
alone, minus his money. The Judge charged
the jury that II they conspircd randulcLty
and fcionously TO obtain the money and intended to
convert IT absolutely to their own use, without his
consent and against his WILL they could convict to
which ruling counsel excepted.
Mr. Knitting argued that tho conviction was wrong
the grounds that the complainant parted not only
with the possession OF the money but also with his
property it, That IL was not taken either against hs
will or without his consent that the money loaned
in bank bills knowing would be used at
game OF chances that in doing he lost all control,
power and possession that the accused were inrusled
with the possession of the money and were not ex.
pccci to return the identical bs and that other bills
were TO be returned 20 lquiJate the debt Counsel
further argued the OF personal property
Intends surrender his title aud delivers possession
absolutely u is not larceny, although he has been
duced part with IL by fraudulent means. In support
Of his views he cited number OF authorities District
Attorney Phelps replied upon behalf OF the people He
paid the conviction proper one; that the money
obtained through trick and artlcc, and without
any intent OF parting with the property absolutely;
that the accused consprcd together 10 dcraud the
complainant out or his money and that consent OBJ
tanned through fraud was, IN law, consent at ALL
The Court reserved its decision
IMPORTANT INSURANCE DECISION.