New-York tribune., 1879-04-15
IN FAVOR OF TANMANY,

THE INJUNCTION RESTRAINING The SOCIETY FROM
INITIATING THE ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY
SEVEN NEW MEMBERS REVERSED by TIE sU-
PREME COURT, GENERAL TERM
The Supreme Court, General Term, rendered its
decision yesterday on the motion for an injnnc-
tion brought by Hubert o. Thompson TO re-
strain the Tammany Society from initiating
the 147 new members alleged to have been fraudu-
lently elected on the evening of December 81 1873
The former decision of Judge Barrett. IN Chambers,
granting the injunction is overrued, Judge Daniels
writing the decision. He says that the main ques-
ton Is whether the injunction, has been sustained
assuming that the election was illegal. Tho pro-
visions Of the societys amended charter of 1867 are
recited, stating Is benevolent purpose TO " AFFORD
relief TO the INDECENT and distressed; also the
statute giving the right OF complaint against an He
gal election in incorporation. The only excep,
tIOns TO this right are III the cases of incorporated
libraries. religious societies and moneyed
corporal lions, whose charters were passed.
renewed or extended after January j, 1873.
The statute IN question gives tho right to the SUI
premc Court to examine into the truth OF the allega-
tions of illcgdty in the elections, and IN case they
are proved, to order now election or 10 give such
other relief as right and justice may seem To re-
qure The remedy was also extended to the nght
10 disputed franchise when the election was silcn
affected It, Among such franchises was included
that of membership.
The present case, it is held, comes within
the scope of this law. The Court Therefore
concludes that an action for an lDJunctiOh
was not the appropriate remedy Judge
Daniels says further that there Is no PROOF
that the plaintiff would suffer pecunlary INJURY
the only apprchended injury that hls controlling
ability as a voter would be diminished. That, now
ever, would not certainly follow, for Ii was not
shown that these newly elected persons were sure
To vote the other way. 1t was not proved that the
plaintiff stood III danger of any act on their part
that would produce injury to INN, or hat they were
about to do any act IN violation OF his rights. one
or the other required by the statute to enttle
HIM to injunction. The order continuing the IN
junction was. therefore, reversed.
Judge Potter gives separate opinion. lie says
that he is not satisfied that the statute referred to
by Judge Daniels applies to an election to mem
bcrship IN a social club or benevolent society lie
agrees, however, with Judge Daniels that an m
junction should not be granted IN tins ease. lie
SAYS: Upon the case as presented by the papers,
it would seem that one member assumes to restrain
the action of the society Of which he IS "A member.
Ii is practically the case of a single members at
tempt to control the body of which he Is but one;
If the election of tue 1f7 members was illegal
that can be determined in the due course OF pro-
ceedIngs and the Illegltimate members eJected, or
the society can refuse to initiate them. ! there
fore think no sufficient Is made for an lnjunc-
tiOn, and concur in the result that the injunction
shall be dissolved"