New-York tribune., 1879-01-28
TIE QCARREL ~ TAMMANY.

TIE QUARREL ~ TAMNANY.
ARGUMENTS OVER THE NEW MEMBERS.
FLOOD OF AFFIDAvITs FROM BOTH sEDEs-DEFlN-
ING THE POWER TO INITIATE NEW MEMBERS
THE ARGUMENT TO BE CONTINUED THIS MORN
ING.
The suit brought by Hubert o. Thompson
to prevent the initiation AZ persons elected De-
ceGbcr 81 as members of the Tammany Society and to
declare their election void yesterday before judge
Barrett in Supreme Court, Chambers motion tOcon
tinue the injunction against their initiation. The
complaint and affidavit on which the orig
ina Injunction issued relate at length the acts
under which the Tammany Society has been organized
beginning with that OF April O. 1905. and ending with
the Act OF April 23 1867. The complaint gives the con-
stuon of the society, and its rule for regular meet
ing on the first Monday OF each month. It states that
the uniform custom time has been TO call special
meetings by advertisement IN The star and The E1pess
that the plaintiff relied this practice that there were
differences OF opinion TO the management OF the
society, IN which plaintiff and others were opposed to
the course Of tho present officers, and es-
pecally their policy OF rapid increase OF membership
that they resolved attend the meetings and III
lawful way the election OF other officers next
April The complaint then alleges that the meeting OF
December 81 held unusual time without notice
10 a majority OF the members, without publication In
the usual papers and without any publication of notice
for January g. 1879 six days later. The plaintiff says
that fearing some surprise he had previously applied
specially the secretary for notice Of any such meet
ing.
In his appended affidavit Mr Thompson declares that
since his complaint TO he has been shown
weekly paper designated The Ne,c-IOrk Mercantile
Journal and Merchants and Manufacturers and Bdnk-
eys' Ledger OF December 28 1873, containing the call
He saws the paper is one generally known, and he
was not aware before OF its existence though IA
mar vita newspapers, and that he believes he publ-
cation Of the call there part Of plan to conceal
Edward McGuirk and John Y. Savage made aiIidavits
supporting the plaintiff in regard to the position OF the
newspaper Douglas Taylor states that the former GUS
tom Of the society 10 elect new members only az
regular meetings. Notice OF all meetings given in
Tie star and The Express Casper c. Chlds, Charles B
Cornell and thirteen other members Of the society con-
firm this statement.
Nelson j. Waterbury the orderly election OF IA
members according the usual forms would have
cuped from 73O p. to 3 a. Of the next day, and
that the number is greater than be remembers 10 have
been elected in any one year; He added in supple
mcntary affidavit that over Eighty, ana he believes
majority Of the members Of the society, dsapproye OF
the holding OF that meeting VIM. Alrow>mlth states
Oh information tnat the meeting was begun before
ana finished before halfpaSt o'clock and h9t neither
the Grand tcnem nor the Fdiher oi the Grand Council
Dut Joel o. stevens tHe stcre |! Pt-''fl' "It % % Cl
ther X Alderman acted secretary and that less thdn
In answer the affidavit of Henry /. Clinton Thomas
Dunlap. John Kelly. Henry A. Gumhleton, Nathaniel
Jarvis IT,, sidney T. Nichols Edward kearncy John j.
German, Memo Dleiendorr, Chatlts II. hdsWelI anu
Bernard Reilly, all sacnens denies that there Was any
thing Illegal in the meeting, and ayers that was called
by the Grand eaclem Auguslls censl, aLter ude le-
Gues and that each acted IN good faith. with the desire
TO elect members to retain HIM Office. John Kelly,
nenry \. GumbletOn, Thomas Dunlap and Henry ID.
Purr0y separately tnat they signed the call for
me sPeyl a Kpsindv and Henry b. PHrrSy derire
] sN...r flf- lff
was separately voted for aud each received the vote Of
a icgal quorum Of members, namely thirteen.
T0el q. stevens. the secretary or the Idmmany So
cety, says the bylaw relating to meetings as fol-
section Of Chapter 3. "AHd be it Jio'ther cnaete9
That il shll the duty Of the secretary to give pu3c
Iolce in one or o; the newspapers printed 10 tins
city OF the annual. stated. special and eytraordu lry
meetings 0t this society at least two Gays previous 20
the time OF such meetings, and which notice shall be
wordcd and dated the following manner unless other
wl,e rendered necessary and advantageous by chcum
NAT ii OPCuI'
mr adds t6at on notice Of a special meeting from the
Grand Sachem he selected OF MS own accord as was s
right, the paper III "hlrh IL suoud ne upshel lhdU
II mas not been uniform rule 10 publish IN two par
ticular papers though t mas been uSuly done lie has
caused on some oGca the holct' 10 pr pul III Lh
NunddY Times. He denies any promise TO the paDtlH
of any special information to meetings He says the
Attendance at the meeting oI Drormorr 81 WuS Over
thirty and about average meeting. ON February II,
1876 AZ - not larger meeting l36 new members, IN
cu,ling pla!ntin were elected As a rule, the bulk Of
the new members elected AT one meeting In l-l2
IsOncw members were elected ll6a AT one meeting. In
1873 DPS new members were elected. 10 al single
meeting. IN 1876. lj9 members were elccrcd. l32
"A
had posed at previous meetings the larger Por
non lou before The proceedings orderly aud were
fulv approved ~ the regular meeting January o. l~19
M which there large attendance. including the
uyiufiH adds there ABOUT GOO
line rolls of the society. OF about 900 living
and members Of the society. Tbey not All residents Or
Nrw-York; they are OF different ana diverse pOlica
cieeds and fltn the majority however bong members
of the Democratic party vet large nunUcr are inrln-
hers az the Republican party and s another portion
have no healthy political status or position IN any p0lt-
cal party processing tO be Democrats. tuey usually
coalcsce and unite with the Republicans against Tue
Democratic party
MIR Allison IN behalf OF the plaintiffs argued thar this
WAS no answer the complaint. The policy OF the law
required that all the members OF society OF this KIND
sL6uld have their rights preserved The bylaws, rs
brv them preserved the right Of each nem
DO 30 in words long Of practice was IN Itself
bylaw and could not De violated To Tie deception oi the
members.
Jn,lge Barrett said he clear that the wording Of
bylaw could not protect an act which was IN Iact
fraud the members.
John D. Townsend argued at length. IN answer that
IN the bad faith fraud could be imputed 10
those who had acted in accOrdance with the bylaw
The answer uf the defendants dclcd every mputatiOn
Df had fi.th. and showed thdt the action OI the
defendants IN harmony with the practice
OF the society, and was IN perfect good falth.
But before reaching that point he raised the question
that the plaintiff could not bring the suit single
memrcr coud not to restrain the action Of corpor-
alIOu Again II he could MAINTAIN the hult the Othcr
society necessary parties To IFS de-
termination and must BE- brought IN. The plantf ala
MOI show tuat civil right or pccuagy interest Of hs
was lmpcril,d. That necessary element 10 such
mt ana the society having fu power over the admls
son OF lis members such Injunction should not be
granted