Year: 1875

Il having been arranged that the counsel should set


tie their order yesterday in the matter Of orfeltng the
bail Of william NJ Tweed, there was, OF course, quite
number OF people hanging around the outskirts of the
Dyer and Terminer Court room, evidently ON the
Tanxious seat. Mr.. Charles L. Devln and Alfred B.
Sands the two interested parties, failed to make
an appearance however for the reason, doubt that
they were fully OF the ultimate disposition OF the
matter Promptly at halfpast ten O'Clock Assistant
District Attorney Lyons walked into court closely fol-
lowed by Mr. Sparks, the Eentlemanly clerk OF the
Court of Oyer and Terminer After few minutes Mr.
Dudley sraced the by bis presence, and the


Mr Field. on behalf OF Mr.. Charles T. Dcvlin ana
Alfred B. Sands the suretes on the forfelting recogn
xances, presented the form OF order which he wished
10 have signed by the Court recng the facts of the


Mr. Lyons said the proceeding was an parte ono on
lhe part the District Attorney and the balls had
standing in Court and no right to bo represented by
counsel to notice the proceeding He protested
against the recital in the order OF facts which must
necessarily the writ of error and he pro-
posed for adoption the form prepared by the Clcrk


Judge Donohue agreed with Mr. Lyons 20 far as to
strike the statement that certain facts not
disputed by the prosecution, for the Court declared
they not real objections and there no need to
dispute them As TO the recital OF the deences raised
and which the order declares were all overruled, he
thought should be retained and that the balls under
tho spirit OF over and Terminer proceedings,
were supposed TO be under notice. The balls make
objections and the order should recte them The
order as settled upon was signed by Judge Donohue





Immediately afterward writ of ceruorar removing
the whole matter the General Term for review


On this application Mr. Field submitted seven AM
davits relating the recognzance each OF the
seven criminal indictments The aihdavits are similar
In each and substantially that the decision
OF Judge Donohue erroneous on various grounds,
Of which that the recogniZance was for appear
the Court Of General Sessions; that 1t was not
nled there but the Court of oyer and Tcrminer that
the indictment in oyer and Terminer, and that tho
People prevented the appearance ofTweed all OF which
Ia moro fully set forth in the annexed papers





the ball. pending the decision Of The General Term.


WAR BETWEEN TWO CHURCHES.


In the case Of the Rector OF the Church OF the Re-
demption, appellant, against the Rector OF Grace
church. respondent, judgment rendered yesterday
The matter came up on appeal from judgment re-
covered in favor OF the defendan trial Special
Term. The plaintiff was religious corporation in this
sty 1864 and the defendant had been religious
corporation since 1909 Both claimed title a lot OF
land situated Fourteenth street. between Third and
Fourth avenues and the church cdince erected it.
Tho plaintiff was excluded IRON its possession and
occupancy in the year 1868 by the defendant, and
brought action for the purpose OF procuring ad
ludication con6rmatory Of its title and for formal
conveyance OF IL by the defendant In 1859 the land
conveyed by deed the defendant and since
then has claimed to be the legal and equitable
the property and such entitled to exclude the plain
from its possession. The land purchased and the
title 10 acquired for the purpose Of erecting upon i
church edifce 10 be used Episcopal free church
And it has so maintained possession from the compile
tion OF the edcc, IN the 1851 10 tho time OF the
Incorporation Of the plantn, in 1885, and substan-
TALLY until the time OF the plaintiffs expulsion from
IT, The defendant also claimed title by purchase in
conjunction with the plaintiff The action not
brought for conversion OF the property but for
counting in equity. The Court held that the fact that
the church edifce destroyed by FIRE in December,
1872 did change the legal aspect OF the in any
respect The most that could be claimed by the
plaintiff was that the insurance money should be ap-
piled rebuilding the edihce and replacing the organ
and church furniture for the and convenience OF
the congregation. The appeal taken from the judg
ment could not be sustained. The judgment should
therefore be affirmed, with costs.