The New York herald., 1879-07-02
THE COURTS.
Corporation Sales for NOn-Payment Of
Taxes ard Assessments.
CONCEDING HIS MARRIAGE.
Progress Of the investigation Against
Commissioner Davenport

The Supreme Court, General Term. yesterday
handed down number of decisions in argued
at the last term of the Court. Very few Of them
however, were in cases Of any special public in
terest. The most important that in the case of
the petition OF Whiteman. executor. to vacate cor
poration sales of lands belonging to tho estate OF
Edward Jones' which will be found specially inter-
esting owners Of uptown property and purchasers
tax sales. The petitioner applied to the Court at
Special Term vacate certain sales Of property made
by the city for the non-payment of various as
sessments. including that for opening
nue. st. Nicholas and Morningside Park. 1t
appeared. however. by the papers submitted that
the property had been purchased at the corporation
sale Of 1874 by s. A. Gahun. dealer in tax titles.
that the city had delivered to him lease for the
term OF 1000 years of the premises in question. 1t
was contended by the Corporation Counsel that as
no notice Of the application given to the pur-
chaser who thus held the title that the proceedings
should be dismissed. although it conceded that
the sale itself irregular and void under previous
decisions Of the Court Upon application made in
Brunt. at Special Term, dismissed The peti.
tion and from his order this appeal was taken.
The case was argued at the May General Term by
James A. Deering for the appellant and j. A. Beal
Assistant Corporation Counsel for the city. The
General Term reversed the order of Judge Van
Brunt and vacated the sale entirely. 1t reafiirms
the decisions In previous to the inva
dy of the city sales and holds that the
right of the owner of land sold to have the sale
set aside in summary manner upon petition is abso
lute that the purchaser at such sales is not entitled
DO OF the the n far t their IF after
these cases. the Court say 1.-THE owner of the land
has no relations arising from the proceed
ings of the character mentioned with
the city of New York. 1t is that body
seek such remedy as he may have for injury
tanned by him against it growing out of their unau-
thoriZed assumption of authority. 1t would be un-
just to impose upon the owners of the land the obl
cation OF resorting to q more formidable and
pensive remedy. involving the pursuit OF the unlaw-
ful lessee to remove an unjust and unlawful cloud
upon their title. The buyer of property upon sale
tor taxes and assessments must look to it that the
sale is authorized by the law of the land otherwise
he buys ut his peril
Among the other decisions one in the suit of
Samuel Schiife against John g. Dietz involving some
curious questions. Dietz few years ago sold
Schiffel some land for $12,500 the former being at
the time unmarried. The interest was paid regu-
larly on the mortgage given. Schiffel subsequently
learned that Dietz had been twice married
and was seeking divorce from his
time of the sale. The defendant then demanded q
cancellation of the deed and the return of the pur-
dover by the wife of Dietz. Upon refusal suit
brought, and in the suit for divorce brought by
Dietz the ground of adultery he defeated and
counter allegations Of similar characte! have been
made. The question was then brought before the
Court of Appeals whether the wife. having been
also proved guilty of adultery could claim any
dover rights. In the Special Term the suit by
Schiel proved successful. and appeal to the Gen
eral Term the opinion given YESTERDAY by Judge
Daniels confirms the decision of the court below
holding that Dietz was guilty Of fraud in not dis
closing bis marriage, and that the contract was
therefore void.
DAVENPORT, DEVENS AND BLISS.
The Davenport investigation resumed yester
day before United States Commissioner Lyman. being
the twentieth day of its continuance. The proceed
lngs Of the session entirely devoted to the con.
ali NJ fha
as United States Commissioner and Chief Supervisor
of Elections. United States District Attorney Wood
ford and Attorney General Devens prior last
tion. 1t was claimed by Messrs. wingate and Ander-
son. counsel for the prosecution. that the corre-
spondence shows that Davenport knew he act
ing illegally when he issued his warrants for the
arrest parties attempting to vote the natural
ization certificates OF 1868 Counsel was very
emphatic in his denuncation of the official conduct
OF Mr.. Davenport in this connection. Mr. Anderson
said-'I charge him tDavenport) with having
issued warrants for an unlawful purpose. charge
that he is not safe man to exercise these judicial
functions. Here letters written at the time which
show the discussion which he had with other officers
of the government and that he talked the over
with them; that United States Attorney General
Devens expressed his dsapproval of the that
Davenport proposed to take with regard to these
arrests and pronounced it unlawful. Here. con-
tnued counsel, is the Attorney Generals letter to
Woodford this subject. II we show by Davenports
subsequent action that he acted in fragrant dis
regard OF the rules that ought to decide
a magistrate we are justified in our claim that he s
not safe man to be intrusted with the powers of
nagis trate." Mr. Bliss, counsel tor Commissioner
Davenport objected to the reception evidence of
letter written by Devens, whom he characterized
rs "a certain gentleman named Devens,' because
1t merely the expression OF opinion by an in
dividual that should not be issued in that
way. Devens, he said. was not Davenports su-
perior. Mr.. Wingate contcnded that Davenport
knew he was acting in opposition to the expressed
opinion of the Department of Justice to his pow
eis under the law Mr. Davenport had goue to
Washington for the advice of the Attorney General.
and yet his return here he acted contrary that
advice. After q heated discussion between counsel
the admiss bility of the letters Com miss oner
Lyman reserved his decision and adjourned the
till tomorrow morning.