The New York herald., 1878-11-23
THE COURTS
Alleged Violators Of the Election
Laws Seeking Liberty.
THE COLES ESTATE.
Numerous Fines for Violating
the Excise Laws.

The five in Ludlow Street Jail awatin
their trial for violations Of the Election law were be-
fore Judge Blatchford yesterday writ OF habeas
corpus obtained by Messrs. Wingae and f. Anderson.
who appeared behalf of the General Committee OF
Tammany Hall The first case was that of William
Williams OF No. II sullivan street. and Mr.. Wingate
claimed that the name of the man was James WILL
iams and that he not the person whose name ap-
peared on the register of voters.
District Attorney Woodford said that II it was q
question of identity there no indisposition on
the part of Commissioner Davenport to obstruct the
ascertainment of that fact.
Judge Batchford ordered the to be referred to
Commissioner Belts to take testimony in reference
thereto.
The next that Of John Brown. Of No. C1
Thompson street and it was alleged by Mr.. Anderson
that that was not his name and that his correct
was Archibald Rollins.
The Court ordered this to be referred also to
Commissioner Belts.
In the case of Peter Coleman. Of the Second Assem-
bly, district. which up habeas corpus and GER
torar proceedings Mr. Anderson moved to strike out
from the returns which Commissioner Davenport had
and the commitment. This the Court refused
to do, and counsel asked for time to traverse
the return, and this was granted. Counsel
withdrew for about two hours for consulta-
tion and. upon returning into court Mr. Anderson
presented the traverse, which stated that Coleman
was arrested upon the affidavit OF Stephen Mosher
on November g. 1875 at half past six in the morning
on warrant of Commissioner Davenport, and that
the Commissioner had no power to issue the warrant
such affidavit; and that Coleman was u German,
did not understand the English language, had no
counsel. and was nervous and confused when before
the Commissioner, and was deprived of his personal
liberty without having had proper examination;
that Coleman citizen OF the United States at the
time of his arrest that he obtained his papers in the
Superior Court and that he was minor when he
TO this country
After objection had been referred to by Dis
trct Attorney Woodford time asked for to enable
counsel for the government to prepare a replication
which granted, and at five O'Clock District Attor
new Woodford filed on behalf OF Commissioner Daven
port and Marshal Payne the replication, in which 1t
stated that the traverse was objected to on the
ground. among others. that Coleman was not q Ger
man, but subject OF the Queen Of Great Britain and
Ireland and that the record as to his citizenship in
the Superior of the State record of any
judgment as to naturalization.
Judge Blatchford ordered the cases to be referred
for the taking of testimony to Commissioner Belts
and is understood that this reference will be opened
to-day at eleven A. M.
THE COLES ESTATE LITIGATION.
One feature of the old litigation in relation to tho
trust Of the late John d. Coles which has been
frequently noticed in tho HERALD. presented be-
fore Judge Van Brunt. in Supreme Court, Special
Term, yesterday. The suit presented for the de-
cision of the Court one brought by Mr.. Coles
Morris to compel Mr. Frank c, Hollins to account
for the proceeds Of o small amount Of property in
New Jersey which Mr.. Morris claims he conveyed to
Mr. Holins on certain conditions. Mr.. Morris was
the trustee Of the estate OF the late John d.
Coles, in which he had one-fourth interest,
aud the remainder he held in trust for various other
parties. of whom the mother of Mr.. Hollins,
the defendant in the Mr.. Morris says the prop
erty in question was mortgaged by Thomas Gslney
him 400, and by him held in trust for Pene
lope A. Morris to whom he had advanced . large
amount to meet interest The mortgage fore
closed and the property conveyed to the defendant
plaintiff says with the understanding that he would
account for the money advanced on the property.
No such accounting, plaintiff alleges has been had,
and hence the suit. few years since there
public rumor that Mr.. Norris had become embar-
rassed in his trust and the trial yesterday both
parties the suit seemed exceedingly anxious to rip
up all the transactions of the trust the defend
ant insisting that the plaintiff had at the time
admitted his embarrassment, and the plaintiff insist
ing on the opposite and his right to demonstrate 1t
by ss-exaininaton but, except few questions
and answers both sides, the Court ruled out the
testimony. The defence to this particular suit
that there such agreement US that alleged by
the plaintiff and that this and other property had
passed into the hands Of the defendants mother on
condition that she would meet all claims against the
plaintiff. The case Is still on.