The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-12-11
CASES SENTENCE.
gUDoE BRADY DENIES AND JUDGE pyKMAN
GRANTS AN APPLICATION FOR STAY OF

SuDoE BRADY DENIES AND JUDGE DyKMAN
GRANTS AN APPLICATION FOR STAY OF
PROCEEDINGS.
AZ the opening OF the Court OF Oyer and Termincr,
yesterday, Judge Drttenhoeer made application Tor
hearing ON writ OF habeas and certlorari In the
else case Of Roster Bial to Judge Brady
ierred to Judge Davis, in Chambers. Judge Brady OBJ
served that he Of the counsel for Mr. Robert
L. Case, late president of the Security Lie In court
and would hear him. Mr.. sullivan, counsel, replied
that the order of Judge Dykman had been vacated.
Inc Judge said he not of the fact officially,
but presumed IL had been. He had prepared
an opinion, which was new being engrossed,
and which denied the application for stay.
Mr.. Sullivan said he not wholly unprepared
FOR that but having right 10 do he should renew
the application before another judge. In oil
The right he desired TO make motion, and that was
10 have bill Of exceptions now on hlo delivered to
him for submission to any judge to whom he may re-
new his application. Mr.. Rollins opposed the motion,
and said II was entirely contrary to practice. Mr..
Sullivan insisted 1t was entirely in accordance With
both law and practice and the Judge sustained him.
Judge Brady thcn rendered the following decision:-
BRADY's DECISION.
"lt was my Intention to decide the application for
stay In this Friday, but Information received
during the morning that day rendered 1t unncces-
sary Tor me TO flo any direction In regard
TO It. informed that stay had
been granted. Subsequent events have restored
the consideration OF the subject to me, and proceed
10 do what thon contemplated. The cases relating
10 applications for stay are unity II reasonable
ioubt entertained OF tho Of the rulings
" the trial IL would become the duty, doubtless, OF
Tho Judge 10 grant II. II, the other hand, he
Ihould entertain doubt the subject presented
or consideration 1t would be his duty to deny the
stay.
.srhc exercise of discretion, viewed from legal
standpoint Is tho discharge OF duty and not the ndul-
gcnco oil caprice. Ii tho guido otherwise, then
stay would DO substantially matter OF right
ana the administration OF criminal justice de-
prived OF It's chief elements-promptitude OF ar
rest and trial and certainly the
quences. l have examined the question presented
ana particularly that In relation To the affidavit made
by the defendant and l entertain no doubt that the
construction and Interpretation Of II already declared
wer. correctly adopted ! entertain no doubt elmer
with these conclusions predominant. there Is one
course only Tor me TO pursue aud that is 10 deny The
application Tor the stay. The defendant having been
pronounced guilty by jury OF his country must DO
subjected 10 the rules Of law which apply in criminal
rascs and bear tho burden"
JUDGE DYKMAN APPEALED TO-
Al three O'CLOCK in the afternoon Mr.. Sullivan ep-
thambcrs In BrookIy n ana presented the bill OF cx-
rcpions and other papers IN tho case. Mr.. Sullivan
made an eloquent Gnd earnest statement OF the points
OF tho deicucc, claiming that, without entering
Tho moral aspects OF the case, the legal questions IN
Volvcd were of such gravity with view 70 just and
prisoner to u review ana stay Of the proceedings
Judge DyKman listened very attentvely TO Mr.. Sui
lvan's argument, and alter examining papers said
II was his FIRST impression that there wero reason
able grounds Tor review OF tho judgment and subse-
puent examination had only confirmed this impression.
II was now his conviction that Justice required hun
grant stay Of proceedings the points oil legal doubt
presented 10 him Hc then granted the following stay
which was Immediately served upon tho sheriff.
appearing to that writ of has been hereto
fore duly allowed herein BY Hon Noah Davis. judge Of
~ me that the applications for stay here tofore
Hon Moan Davis and Hon. John t. Brady justices this
sourt have been determined and tho said application
stay proceedings herein being before notice
10 the District Attorney OF the city ard of New
YORK, proof service OF which notice exhibited
Now reading the case and exceptions writ of
hearing Agernon s. sullivan and Howard II. Morse Of
counsel Tor Robert L. Case support said appca
tion, behalf Of District Attorney
si said city and county OF New YORK. And further ap
view OF the proceedings and judgment herein do hereby
order that all proceedings herein until the
uination by the appellate Court sal writ
j. u. DfKMAS. Judge OF Supreme Court
rnE GENERAL TERN.
The appeal viii DO heard before tho General Term Of
that should hasten the preparation Of case with
lbe utmost diiigcncc, order that It might be heard
the nrst possible day. II tho General Term denies
y trial The counsei for Case will doubtless carry
the TO the Court OF Appeals and, the prisoner
will probably be able to procure stay until the final
appeal Is heard, Case Will remain In the Tombs
several months This being the nrst instance in
which the courts have been called upon to
the forms and afidavits required by the Insurance
prisoner entitled a stay OF proceed ngs until the
court o last resort has rendered It's decision.