The New York herald., 1876-09-21
The CITY SUIT AGAINST TWEED

In the original suit brought by the city against Will
Ian NJ. Tweed, which has been recently revived by tho
aervce Of the complaint therein the part Of the
r'y. MessTs Feld Deyo, counsel for Tweed, served
yesterday copy OF their the Corporation
CIuas.,. This answer, winch differs from that in the
brought III the of The People in several par
ticulars, us well as in its brevity, is as follows
William NJ Tweed, the defendant, answers the com.
plant, for first defence, that he denies each and
every allegation in the complaint contained For
further separate and second defence he alleges that
after the times OF tho pretended transactions men-
toned referred the compliant tho People Of the
Saic OF New York, acting bcnalf OF The plaintiffs
with their consent ana Tor their bcnen entered into
agreement with the representatives oi the estate OF the
said James Watson, dcccascu by which II was agreed
that the said estate shoud be relieved ofa great part
OF the claim made against IT, and against thc SAID rel
sentatvcs arising out oI the said pretended transac
tlons, and certain amount paid therefor. An action
brought the Supreme Court of this Sate by the
said plaintiffs against Margaret Watson, AS admnislr
&c. james Watson, for their claims against tho
estate OF the said James Watson. deceased, winch
action did should have included all claims OF The
people, tho Mayor, Aldermen and Commonaty OF the
city OF New York, or the county OF New York against
the defendant, and by colusion between the partics
judgment was rendered Tor the sum OF So4s 932 32
III favor OF the plaintiffs, which judgment has been
satisfied by payment and the residue vi sald estate v
great value amounting TO upward OF 81, OOO,U0O has
been released IRON all claims against it. And the de-
iendant claims that not only the money recovered
but tho value OF any and all the property which the
plaintiffs might have subjected 10 their SAID claim,
and lave thus released, should be deducted IRON
lmount which may be recoverable against this de-
ehdant by reason oi the pretended matters alleged in
hc complaint, or any OF them And tor further
separate uBd thIrd defence, he alleges that
he people OF the state OF New York, aclng
or and on behalf ol the plaintiffs IN
commenced an action against the aeiendnnt in tho
supreme Court OF lie state OF New York Tor ill the
causes of action that they had or that the plaintiffs
herein against the de endant that day. and
SAID acton the pialnls herein were maue party de-
icndant and that The said action resulted III verdict
hat
Dared upon the SAID verdict, Mas entered on the 9th
uay of April 1876, favor OF the people oil the state
Oi New York, plaintiffs therein and against William
n. Tweed. the defendant herein, ior The sum OF
So 635 652 l9 there Included in the suld Judg
ment ali Claims that are set up ID TINS action
the defendant and insists tha, the SAID judg
ment ls complete Uur aud defence 10 this action And
Tor further separate and fourth defence he alleges
that the people vi the State OF New YORK, acting
behalf OF The plaintiffs IN this case, ana with lhcr
assent have compromised and settled all The claims
he plaintiffs herein against james Watson his estate
and have released abandoned all claims against him
Or H. although, as they nlege, he or his estate rs
jointly liable with the defendant, which act this de-
iendant insists a complete bar and defence this
action.
THE GILBERT ELEVATED ROAD.
In July last Edward Henry Anderson, an owner OF
properly in South Fifth avenue, the proposed line
OF the Gilbert Elevated Railroad, filed complaint in
the United States Circuit Court against the road ana
asked Tor Injunction restraining H. IRON proceeding
In tho work oil construction The complaint FORTH
among other matters. that the petitioner prop
sry the line OF the road which was formerly part
Of the farm OF Join Ireland aud that tho title 10 this
ground still remains with the representatives oil Ire
land, subject to public thoroushfare that the
city has no claim 10 any part OF the prUpcry that tho
plans oil the road are not according 10 law, and that
the proposed railway Will be IA public NUISANCE. The
defendants hed Their answer Yesterday In which they
Join issue on the greater number vi the plaintli's
allegations They say that the original plan o Gilbert
was tubular road operated by pneumatic power bat
that this was Abandoned by the inventor, ne could
get capitalists to take hold IT, that subsequently,
plan adopted or slmpc elevated railway 10 be up-
Grated by steam or other motive power and having
way OF less than Two eet diameter Tor the trans
mission Of packages, &c, aud that this plan pass
Legislature. The de endants deny that the road is to
be built ON the carriageway allie. Cd and say that
the columns will bc supported on tho curbs Vi tl.o
street 1hry hold that they have legal authority Tor
all that they are dong, and say that they intend
TO compensate the piaiDtIn ior any damage
that may be done to his property and
hat they intend TO acquire title 10 paintn's
nnds with his consent or by the special proceedings
which have peen begun IN the Supreme Court. Ihc
answer her says that the streets aud avenues urc
Intended or public use and the growth tho CIV ana
the necessities oil business demand additions to exist
ing means OF transit; that tho best that be done
10 TO allow o such modes OF conveyance will upon
me whole, best accommodate tho pubic; that this Is
question TO determined by the Legislature aud not
" she courts OF law That The Legislature for the pur-