New York Daily Herald from New York, New York • 5

MA YOB HALL. The Proceedings Serene at the Turbulent at the Close. A BOMBSHELL EXPLODES IN COURT. The Great Plasterer, Gar ey, Appears. UM if the Dneipeeted Apparition Upon the hiaitiatcd, Defendant'! Gomel and the Pnblie Generally.

WHAT 8ARVEY KNOWS ABOUT TWEED. iafcew J. Gives His Testimony About That Little BE Defendant's Battery, "Objection," Again Opens and Silenoes the "Qarvey" Battery for the Day. The Action To Be Resumed This Morning. NINTH Yesterday was the ninth day of the proceedings ha the AAflh nf the Pennle nf t.ha Pmnire Star a aaninat Hail, the Chief Magistrate of the Empire CMy.

Ho public trial ever held in this city lias created a deeper or wider felt interest than this. To Me eesnal spectator or witness of the proceedings this interest perhaps wonld not oe manifest, unless. Indeed, he noted the array of able counsel that is engaged on the side of the people and lor the defence. The court room is uot besieged each morning fey crowds such as are drawn together by a morbid curiosity excited by the trial of some tragic actor on tne criminal stage of actual lire. The class of society always present on Buch occasions are noticeably absent, and from no portion whatever of tne spectators which every day flu the court room ef tfee General Term of the Court of common Pleas, wfeere the trial, taken from the General Sessions, to belntf held, can any other expression, or act, or took be than that which reflects an earnest and Intelligent interest In the proceedings; In further proof that the trial Is not of the sensational stripe, and that the Mayor is not such a hero as he might himself imagine, the court room has not been once graced by the presence of one of the fair mau The earlier proceedings yesterday were more tban doll up to tbe boor of recess, and when tbe Court reassembled after the brief adjournment there were fewer persons present tban at any other stage of the trial.

Bat the counsel for the prosecution bad a surprise in reserve, wblcb, no doubt, they deemed would be tbe COUP DB GRACE to the defence, or, at all events, drive tbem from their lines of intrenchments in tbe way of objections. and compel them to meet tbe prosecution on ha merits in the open field. The unexpected call lor and sudden appearance of AKDRKW J. GARVEY, the great Swiss traveller, and erstwbtle plasterer at the new County Court House, was indeed a bombshell which the combined legal acumen and reeeorees of counsel for tbe derencc were not prepared foi. Bnt when "Andrew" was called it was thought to be a joke, or as near something of tbe with it was puasiuie lur tu? junior counsel (recnanm) to attempt iq the face of the Court and in the presence of his superiors in the prosecution.

But when Peckbam called a second time, and. not waiting for the cabalistic "third and last," Andrew did indeed appear, not as an apparition, bat only, reduced a little In corpulency, it was seen that the solemn Peckbam was serious, and was as guiltless of a Joke on that oeasion as he ever. was in his lire. Of course Andrew on the stand was the cynosure or all eyes, while his own were directed to the frescoed ceiling above his head, which he hlmBelf had plaoed there, and, oh, ingratitude of republics had been the cause of bis exile and his present position. Andrew Is not the Andrew of old.

He has grown thin, and has more of the "snow of winter" or of the mountains, on his head than when he skedaddled. He was very nervous, and when answering the questions put to him spoke like a man out of breath. However, he was not put through a verv severe catechising ordeal, as counsel let the defence, alter they got over tneir first surprise, again opened their uattery of arguments, silencing completely the GABVEY BATTERY the prosecution ttll the hour of adjonrnment. When the Court was assembled a hope 01 shortening the trial was presented by a suggestion or Mr. Mteughton that objections should bo passed on by the Conrt without discussion nnttl the final summing up, but Judge Daly was unwilling to rule on any question without thoroughly understanding tt, ne as to nave, by any misunderstanding on his part, a fatal exception.

(Julie a discussion arose as to bow this difficulty should be obviated, Mr. Tremaln being quite willlag to leave the defence anv legal rights. Mr. Htonghton finally announced that they wonld not discuss any exception unless the Court desired uiciu iuu auuvu uu vigutu iu air. ourriu a sctcu exceptions.

Neither Mr. Tremain nor Judge Daly was quite willing to accept Mr. Stoughton's suggestion. Chief Justice Daly classed Mr. Burr ill's objections In two that the warrant was not good as secondary evidence to show the original claim, and, Becond, that it was not good as primary evidence, as not tending to snow that the claim should not have been other words, to the effect of It as evidence.

The court overruled the objections, and admitted 11m warrant in evidence. The warrant has already been printed in fall. Toe examination or the witness WILLIAM COrBLAND was then proceeded with. The prosecution offered in evidence the entries on puree 303 and 364 in the Audit Booh No. 9.

Mr. Burrtll objected that tne prosecution could only put in evidence the entries In regard to this particular warrant. Mr. well; we oniy offer those particalar entries In evidence. Mr.

moment. The evidence being thus restricted, we object further that Mr. Dynes Paring testified that the entry was simnlv a copy or the warrant, it is not proper evidence. The warrant itseir covered the ground, so far as it can be covered. The evidence was, "the warrant gives all the information that the Anult Book does." Mr.

stated that tne ntimher in the margin wan taken rrom the claim. The number in the book, as Yonr Honor will perceive, Is altogether different lrorn the number of the warrant. He never made the number iu the book until he had the voncner before him. Tne Is sufficient to make It admissible. Mr.

Burrlll and Mr. Tremain then each read copious extracts from the stenographer's notes, after which Mr. liurriil objected tnat this evidence was not admissible, since the book was not unuer the control oi the defendant and never had been. The Court ruled against the objection. Pmaltv, both parties agreed to take evidence tor the present and merely note objections, reserving the argument upon tnem until the witness bad concluded his testimony, mt.

Peckham then read the entry as the column under the head Audit are the figures no, and the line resds to whom," a. j. Garvey, for labor and materials for the new Court House, December amount $41,602 42; number of warrant, 2,507. Mr. Pcckham offered to let the Jury themselves we tne entry.

Mr. Burriil objected book being shown them, hot consented that tne entry itself snonld be copied off and handed to them. The court ruled tnat the book itself could not be shown. The witness then continued. At'l? c'08e of your examination you stated watyou had examined some oi the vouchers of that were on file in tbe Comptroller's State now man; yon examined and what amount or examination you save them.

this ottered as secondary evidence the contents of theae lost papers Mr. sir. The would be Impossible to state the namber. raise an objection to tnis evidence, uho rndletmont is for a soectdc otTenoo. The understood i.dat by tu itual vent all objections were to bo reserved.

jjx-Hecwuer i wajyp 149 matter, Jpj I XT3W MTM of MMOMMO, bat it la a coarse 1 can. not approve of individually. The vouchers of Oarvey I examined bad tne certificate of tbe Board of Audit together with tbe order of tbe Comptroller to draw tbe warrant attached to them. Q. By whom was the certificate or the Board of Audit signed A.

Br the Mayor, Comptroller and tbe President of tbe Board of Supervisors, a state the names? a. Hall, Connolly and Tweed. O. Do TOO know their hand writing a. nail's and Connolly's only, aa tney write a peculiar hand that 1 oouid easily distinguish.

Was there the County Auditor's stamp on the Touchers A- Yes, sir; I cannot say Die exact words It contained, however. q. Look at the sump on that paper and say lr It Is the same A. Yes, sir. q.

Read Hf a. city and connty of New York, Department of and round correct; Connty Auditor; and tnen there a space to be filled with Mr. Watson's signature. Witness then Identified the Manx for the onuide covering of the bin, the blank for the certificate of the Board of Audit, the blank for the order of the Comptroller to draw the warrant, and the biauk of the warrant itself. q.

Were those blanks filled up In the casee yon audit certificate and the order for the warrant A. They were filled np and signed la every case I examined. Q. Was the name of Mr. Tweed written on any other part or the papers except at the bottom of the audit certificater A.

Yes. sir; in some cases the name was written across the face of the bill. Was this form of affidavit attached to the bill filled inr Mr. oblect that it is not competent to show the contents of the particular documents covered bv the indictment by evidence showing the nature ana contents of ocher vouchers; The thought all those objections were to be reserved. Mr.

Peck mink a rale once accepted ongbt to be enforced. The proaeoution seem inclined to let ns go on nntil some question arises likely to pinch them, ana then they assert the right to reopen the objection and argue It all over again. Ttie tnink it would do Detter to let tne evidence go on and then discuss It as a whole when its betring and nature are clear, rather tnan raise objections on each separate pieoe of evidence as it is presented. Tae question was suspended for a while, and Mr. Peckham proceeded.

Q. Was the receipt filled up? A. Yes, sir, with the proper signatures: Q. Was there a single Instance In all the vouchers of Mr. Carver tbal you examined where the voucher did not contain ail tne papers you have seferred to and identified a.

No; the papers were ail the same that 1 saw. V. Was there any circumstance that caused you to make any particular examination of these vouchers Mr. liurnll objected to the question. The has stated the fact, and the accuracy of his inspection Is wholly immaterial on His direct examination, it would become a propor question on the re-dlrect examination, if any doubt of the fact were raised by tne defence.

Q. What was the condition of the blank affidavit This was the question wnich had given rise to a previous objection and was argued at some length until the recess. The examination of this point was briefly continued alter tue recess without eliciting any matter or interest. The nrst grand sensation of the trial was then created by Mr. Pecitnam calling, la his stentorian tones, "ANDREW J.

OABVRV. Is A. J. Garvey in Tnere was a murmur of expectation and mystlflcation amoug the audience, which increased when there was no Immediate response. Alter about hall a minute, however, "ANDY" himself appeared npoa the scene, looking much tninner and older than when he and his wagon were last familiar sights to New Yorkers.

All eyes were directed towards him, and irom the moment he appeared on the stand till the adjournment the people pdssed Into the court room until It could hold no more, and the corridors and approaches which so often resounded to Andy's tread were blocked np. Andy sept his eyes dlreoted to the ceiling, as li he was pointing attention to his frescoes as a claim UDon the cratitude of his Manilas when arraigned In the forum pointed to the capital he bad saved. The application, however, did not apply, and Andrew had to tell all bo knew about Tweed and the Board of Audit. his examination. Q.

Where do you reside? A. No. 7 East Fortyseventh street; have resided there since October, 1870; was forty-three years of age in December last; am a builder, plasterer and decorator; have carried on that business here in this city since 1 was twentyone years old. 0. Are you acquainted with the defendant? A.

Tes, sir; have been on speaking terms with him about six years. "DO TOO ENOW mr. tweed Q. Do yon know Mr. Tweed a.

Yes, sir; have known him for twenty years, o. And Mr. Connolly A. Yes, sir, for ten years, q. Had you business claims against the city In 1870? a.

Yes; sir. q. Is that yonr signature on this warrant? a. Yes, sir. q.

Did yon receive the money? a. Yes, sir, and deposited It the same day In the bank. q. What bank? a. The Broadway Bank; the amount deposited was larger than that.

q. You soy the deposit was larger than that? A. Yes, sir; I had other warrants cashed on that day, amounting In ail, including this deposit, to $166,901 26. Mr. Burrlll objected that the witness ought only to answer except In regard to the present warrant.

The objection was sustained by the ruling or the q. Where old you first receive this warrant a. in tne room directly under chamber of the Board or Supervisors. q. llad you previously to that presented an account against the county A.

Yes, air. q. Is that a copy of the account? A. Yes, sir; It Is a very fair copy or it. q.

In whose handwriting was the account? A. In mine. q. in whose handwriting was the calculation in red ink of the Interest A. In that of Mr.

Watson or Mr. Dynes, probably. Tne following is a copy of the bill referred The county of New York to a. J. Carver, 68 Third avenue.

December 16, tabor and for the New Court Houee For olaeter work, 8,795 days' work, at 85 $13,976 00 For laborers, 3,918 days' work, at 88 8,739 00 For scaffold builders and riggers, 683 days, at $5 3,660 00 For cartage of scaffold, material and rubbish 2,580 00 For 1,376 days, ornamental workers, at 86 6,876 00 For material for lime, plaster, marble dust, Ac 6,479 48 For uie of scaffolding, ropes, ties, nails, Ac. 426 ou 940,288 48 Interest (In red Ink) 1,829 94 Total 48 Q. is this also (presenting a paper, or which the foregoing is a copy) In your exhibits a. Yes, Bir, including the red ink. Q.

To whom did you present that account? A. I gave that account, with some oiuer bills, to E. A. Woodward, Deputy Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. q.

How long have yon known Woodward A. About 8even years. Q. How long had he been Clerk of the Board of Supervisors? A. All the time I knew him and longer; I presented the bill to him in the room of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.

Q. How many bills did you present to him at that time A. Three in all. q. How loug afterwards did yon receive the account? A.

About two weeks; it might have been a little longer than that. (j. At the time yon received the warrant was It AlfuAhorl ta aMiop rianAPd 9 A Vou olr rhawA three other certificate of the Audit Board and Mr. Connolly's order for the warrant. Witness identified blank forms produced as being similar in character to those be had seen filled up and attached to the warrant.

Q. Were any other papers signed at the time you received the whom did you receive the warrant? A. From Woodward. Did you give a receipt for this bill A. Yes, sir.

O. is that the form of the receipt? A. Yes, sir; the blank is the same. Q. You gave a receipt In that form, signed It and gave it back in return for the warrant A.

Yes, sir. 0. These papers, were they all pinned together A. Yes, believe so; the warrant was pinned on and the others might have been mucllaged on nr aitwriipil in some war: I left the hilniM nf th? papers with Woodward, o. Is tbls acconat an honest and Just account Objected to by Mr.

Rurnll. Mr. Tremaln said he proposed to show that the wnole of tbo account, with the exception of perhaps thlrty-flye per ceat of it, was fictitious and fraud lent, having no loundation In justice, honesty or truth. The defence hesitated a few moipents, and the prosecutiou impatiently exclaimed, "Is there any objection Mr. yes.

Mr. Mtouxbton said one wontd suppose that a person wno had read this indictment and was laminar with criminal law or the purpose for which criminal prosecutious were instituted could not be serious in offering evidence or this character. He would not say that the effort to make it, however, was unexpected alter the extraordinary opening they had been Indulged with. What was tuts supposed offence, as charged by the Indictment and defined by lawf The Indictment was framed under section 38 or the Revised Statutes, which read that every wilful neglect of duty in cases where It had been enjoined by law upon anv public officer and where no special Srevision for Its punishment had been made should accounted a misdemeanor. The indictment was procured under the supposition that there was a certain duty enjoined upon the defendant by the act of May 4.

1870. on page 878, section 4, volume or the session laws of that year, It was provided that "all claims incurred previous to the passage of this act shall be audited by the Mayor, Ac." His Honor would observe that the duty which it was supposed came within the provision of section 38 imposeuP upon the Mayor, in connection with two ottior officers the duty of auditing these claims. All these claims having probably oeen passed and allowed by IDe HOUro 01 BUPVrriaurn, ik wuai caBur stood how it nappened that the Mayor his associates considered that their dntics were substantially ministerial. All claims so passed by the Hoard or Supervisors became fixed claims, that Hoard being the only competent tribunal that had power to say what claims were liabilities. But the Mayor's duty was judicial, and lor the exercise of tnat he was as irresponsible to the law as tils Honor was (or the exercise of his dunes on the Bench.

The nature of the duty thus (Deo. wm? judicial, and, in ORK HERALD, FRIDAY, the Absence of fraud or malice, he was as in ibatpoattion and Ilia Honor anting on tbe Bench, and subject to no action on the part of the people except in cases of fraud or malice. Tne indictment charged ine Mat or with baring wilfully, unlawfully and oorruptly neglected to audit certain papers which nad been lost. That constituted the enure brat count, and the aecond count, in bis opinion, recited tbe same oflfenoe exactly, with the exception of certain circumstances wnlch were mere surplusage. Tbe words "unlawfully and corruptly" might be excluded, as tney added nothing to the offence, and were not averments, but conclusions.

There was no allegation that the ciatm was unjust or Octluous, or Utat the Mayor had reason to suppose so, but simply that he wilfully neglected ana iciubcu ui auun EciMiu accuuum. more wua uu allegation 01 (rand or complicity with any human beiug, or that the claim was not a juat liability of the county. It had already appeared that this account was audited. This duty was Judicial. Could His Honor say upon what proof the auditors were to allow or disallow claimst What would that be but creating an offence In the nund of the court and defining it instead or leaving it to the statute The argument Is addressed to me on the presumption that the claim was auaited Mr.

btoughton said that, although that was not exactly the argument now, It womd be prettv soon. In generally reviewing the case, bottling was better settled than that no Judicial action of any officer would come within the statute unless fraud or malice were alleged. SupDose this indictment, had been preferred by Mr. Uarvey hknsclt, that tho Board nad refused to hear his claim. That would have been competent proof under this indictment provided always that under this fourth section tue Mayor conld be charged with an offence under tlon 39 ol the statutes, snd this question he would argne later.

Bven In that case His Honor would have said that the Board were acting Judicially, ana had fail discretion to say upon what they would or would not act. It would be monstrous to allow testimony lute that now offered to be received. If this claim were lraudulent that was utterly inconsequential in deciding whether the claim had or had not been audited. In courts juries frequently allowed unrighieuus and unholy claims, and yet no stain was reflected upon them or upon the Court, it would be necessary, case of fraud being alleged against the Mayor, to show that the Mayor had, knowing the claim to be fraudulent, audited and passed iu The me to say that In 6th Mordaunt It Is laid down that ai the common law any public ofilcer Is indictable for misbehavior In office. Mr.

Stooghion said there most have been tome doubt about it, or the statute to wnich the Indictment wonld not nave been passed. It being now late Mr. Stongbton postponed the remainder of the argument on his objection until to-day, and the Court adjourned till eleven A. M. Mr.

Oarvey was Bnrronuded with a group of quondam irlends and acquaintances, bat seemed somewhat nervous and agitated, and could not be enticed Into an indiscreet conversation. To all questions Ue returned polite, but monosyllabic answers, and quietly withdrew from the scene which his presence nad so greatly enlivened. THE COURTS. Interesting Proceedings in the United States, New York and Brooklyn Courts. Farther Adjournment in the Jamel Ectate CaseAlleged Forgery of Fatent SuitViolation of the Internal Revenue Law? Business in the Court of Oyer and False in the General Sessions.

UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. The Collision Between the Nteamers Plato and St. John on the North the Government Collectors nre Paid. Washington, d. March 7, 1872.

131. ou joun vs. naHuroucn? Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Southern trlct of New was a case of collision between the barge Ulster County, owned by the apJellees, and the St. John, the property of the New ersey steamboat Company, on the Hudson BJvcr, in November, 1804. The barge was In tow of the propeller Pluto, and the answer alleged that the propeller was chargeable with the collision, as she dlo not have a competent crew nor a competent pilot; was out of the proper track of boats going up the river, the course of the propeller; did not heea the signal of the St.

John and did not stop or back when the danger of a collision became apparent. The District Court found the St. John at fault for not having a proper lookout and for attempting to pass to the eastward, or on tue starboard side, of the propeller and her tow Instead of passing to the right. The decree was accordingly for the libellants. It Is Is here Insisted that the observer of the forward lookdut haa nothing to do with the collision, that the Pluto could not have been discovered by such a lookout sooner than she was, and that the manoeuvring of the steamer was Justified.

The point of the negligence of the Pluto, made below, is also Insisted upon nere, C. Jones for appellant, c. Donohue lor appellees. No. 129.

United States vs. to the Circuit Court for the Northern District of The question in this case was whether or not Ballard, as Collector for the district of Cuyahoga, Ohio, was entitled to retain for his own use, without paying It Into the Treasury, moneys received by him from the owners of steamers and tram engineers and pilots, under the act of 1852, by virtue ol the act or June, 1864. The Insisted that by this law he was to have a fixed salary of $1,000, and In addition thereto the fees collected, provided the aggregate compensation of salary and fees should not exceed and that he was therefore entitled to retain the Bums demanded by the Department, as his compensation did not exceed the limits named. The Court so found, and the Judgment was tor the defendant. The government here urges that tne special tees demanded by the Department, collected under the act or 1862, were by that act to be accounted for to the United states, and that they are not, therefore, included among the lees which the Collector mav retain.

A. U. Riddle for Ballard, B. H. Bristow lor the government.

No. 128. Davenport vs. Lamb et from the Circuit Court for the District or Is a controversy concerning the title to block in the city ol Portland. A partition suit was instituted by Lamb et aL, in which Davenport was a defendant, ne being the owner of the property, as claimed, by a direct line of conveyances irom the owners of the Portland Land Claim, and be was the only detendant who answered.

Upon the trial the decision was in favor of the plaintiffs, except as to a small proportion of the property which was adjudged to Davenport, it Is here Insisted that the Court erred in taking jurisdiction to try the adverse claims ol Davenport In a suit of partition, and that he should nave been adjudged to be entitled to the whole of the property. W. w. Chapman for appellant; George 11. Williams for appellees.

UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COUNT. The Petit Jurors Discharged Until Monday Next. Before Judge Benedict. Yesterday Benedict took his place upon the bench at the usnal hour. There being no criminal case ready lor trial the petit jurors were discharged until Monday next.

TBI JUMKL ESTATI CASE. If Mr. Palen. one of the Jurors empanelled to try the case of George Washington Bowen vs. Nelson Chase, and who was sick when the cause was last called on ror hearing before Judge snip man, be well enough on Monday next to occupy his seat in the jury box the matter will be continued; out If then Mr.

Palen should remain Indisposed. Judge Benedict will, in ail probability, roceed with tne clearing ot the criminal calendar, the event of the Jumel case going on Judge Kenedict cannot hold his Court in the Federal Building; for there Is no accommodation lor him in that edifice, which is very badly suited lor judicial purposes. There are but two coart rooms for the Judges. Judge Blalchrord uses one ef tuese, and any Jndge sitting in circuit occupies the other, as Judge bhipman lias done during the trial of the Bowen and Chase case; so that Judge Woodruff, who is hearing causes without a Jury, Is obliged to dispose of them lu his uot very comfortable apartment. In the rear of tne building.

Distillery Alleged Forgery. A case, showing the iollowing circumstances, was disposed of before Judge Elian had been a distiller In this city. He gave a bond as security that the business of his establishment would be conducted properly and according to law. The name upon the bond was that of Jacob Flschcl. The collector of the district in which the distillery was situate alleged that certain Irregularities as to distillation had been committed by Elian, and proceeded against Fiscnel to recover the amount of theboud.

Flschel declares tnat, though his name Is upon tho paper, be never slgued it, and that the signature purporting to be his is a forgery. It Is further stated that the person who forged Mr. Flschei's name cannot now be found. The decision of toe Judge is in favor or Flscnel. A Patent Malt.

Judge Woodruff was occupied during the greater portion of the dar in hearing a continuation of the argument In the patent suit of H. Wheeler vs. The Clipper Keaper and Mower Machine UNITED STATES COMMISSIONERS' COURT. Charge of Helling Washed Kevraae Before Commissioner Shields. The United states vs.

P. A. defendant, as already reported in the Hkkalo, had been charged with selling, or offering ror sale, washed revenne stamps to Morns 8. aullivan, an officer of the Secret Service Department, through whom the pteoeot accusation has been made, uoodali alleges MARCH 8, that be got ibe stamps from person who cannot be found at present, and ae ihe production of this person is deemed of Importance for the defence trie eommlaaionur allowed au adjourn inent for that purpose if It possible to oflbct it, COURT OF TERMINER ArralanMent and Pleas for en la for Bel ore Judge Ingranam. This Court met at eleven A.

M. yesterday. The only business transacted was reoelvlng the pleas of various parties indicted for murder and manslaughter. Most of tbe pleas were made through tbeir respective counsel, Win. P.

llowe and wrP. Kintzlng. Jeremiah fcivans, obarged with the murder of Roger Betts. bv stabbing, on the loth of November last, plead not guilty. John Costello, Indicted for manslaughter in the alleged killing 01 John Class on tbe 22d of last January, the Injuries resulting in death having been inflicted at toe dining saloon, No.

100 Nassau street, plead not guilty. Daniel Marrow, Indicted for manslaughter In the alleged killing of Charles Mass on tbe 9th of last January, also plead not guilty. Patrick Malone. against wnom a similar Indictment was found for tbe alleged killing of Thomas u'connor on October 0, 1871, made a similar plea. Jonn Morrison and Robert Perkinson, jointly Indicted lor manslaughter, in the alleged homicide of Michael on December 17,1871, entered a like plea.

John Peck, charged with manslaughter, through tbe alleged killing of Victor Clemens on December la, 1871, was the last party arraiguod. He entered the same piea of not guilty. After the above arraignments and pleas tbe Court adjourned to next Monday. SUPREME Verdict ef Against Wreckers. Before Judge Barrett.

John H. Doty vs. John H. this case, which was an action for damages for non-fulfllltng a contract In raising a sunken vessel, the particulars of whlcn have been published in the Hkkald, a verdict was yesterday awarded giving tbe plaintiffs $676 83 damages. SUPREME About the Ciilody of a Child.

Before Jndge lngraham. In re Frederick the parents of the relator, who is six years old, a suit for alvorce is pending, the lather bringing the suit. Upon tbeir separation the rather retained custody of the relator and tho mother oi their other chdd, a daughter. Application was made on behulf of tno mother for the custody of the boy, on the ground of alleged unfitness of the father, by reason of his violent temper, to nave the care of a child of such tender years. The Court refused to interfere In the case, as sucn interlhrence might prejudice the pro( AAflinurn In l.h? milt.

DmIiImIi Chamberlain vs. denied. Comstock vs. granted. Reference ordered to Murray Hoffman.

Sloan vs. Franklin Manufacturing Company vs. Motion granted. Todil vs. In ttie Matter of ttie Recelveratiip of Bowling Green Savings to A.

C. Bradley. Ely vs. granted. SUPERIOR TERR.

Decisions. By Judge Sedgwick. Metzler vs. granted on paymemt of $15 costs. in tiie matter of tne application at Catnarine granted.

Hagan vs. Kimball vs. Same. COURT OF COMMON TERM. Alleged Mercantile Frauds.

Before Judge Robinson. Stout vs. Wilson and applied lor ali uiuci ui auoob tuu uvicuuaiiw upuu davits setting' forth that the pialntitr was a merchant in Barclay street and Lcith applied to him to sell goods upon a promissory note of defendant, Wilson, for the snm of representing that the note was a legitimate business note of the Arm of Brcl'tiaupt A Wilson and given to him ror value; that he sold the goods upon this representation. The affidavit further stated that Wilson had given Keith promissory notes to the amount of $6,000 to $10,000, to raise money by the purchase of goods, and then selling them at less than cost price; that Wilson was at 25 Thomas street, where the goods were stored, and saw the plaintiff's property there, which consisted of canned goods; that, also, the notes were protested at maturity, and that Wilson Is now insolvent. The charge was one of fraud and conspiracy.

An order was granted, lleeluraa. By Judge Robinson. Van Vllet vs. adjudged In contempt and ordered to pay $100 fine and $146 84 costs and expenses. Anna M.

Burrell vs. William H. of referee confirmed and divorce granted to the plaintiff, with the custody of the children. Wain bold vs. memorandum.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS-PART 2. Assault and Battery Case Turned Out of Common Pleas. Before Jndge Van Brunt. Last term an inquest was taken before Jndge Loew, when the jury rendered a verdict lor plaintiff for $3,000 for injuries sustained by him in Jones' Wood In June, 1870, at the hands of the defendant, a lager beer saloou keeper. The inquest was subsequently opened, and the case came on for trial before Judge Van Brunt yesterday, when His Honor said that troin his experience of assault and battery cases be did not intend to try a case of that description in tms or any otner Court, and that it was in the discretion of the Conrt of Common Pleas to send all such cases to the Marine conrt under the statute.

MARINE COURT-CHAMBERS. UeCMMM. By Judge Joachimsen. Hoyden vs. Metropolitan Fire Extinguisher overruled, with leave, Ac.

Wise vs. Kearney and Scott vs. to vacate. Attachments granted. Siraonds Manufacturing Company vs.

Motion to open default granted on terms. Woloach vs. granted. Goodliart vs. to open default grahted on terms.

Drake vs. for plaintiff for $443 OA. Strange vs. for plaintiff for $416 21. French vs.

for plaintiff for $605 61. Schwarf vs. to vacate attachment denied. Orary vs. for plaintiff for $334 83.

Miles vs. for plaintiff on demurrer, with leave, Ac. Storpe vs. open default granted on terms. DorC vs.

for plaintiff for $61. HirsctUeid vs. McRiroy, Lowcnihal vs. Kosemaun ana Itooney vs. granted.

COURT OF GENERAL SESSIONS. Kerore Recorder Hackett. A MOTION BY MR. UOWB QUESTIONING THE l.ROALITY OK THE TWO BRANCHES OK THE BES KOACII," AN ALLKJMP TICKPOCK KT, ON TRIAL. The first caso preseuteu for consideration by ine jury yesterday In tins Court, by Assistant District Attorney Stewart, was a charge of larceny from the person against Mary Ann Leonard, alias Mother Koacb.

He lore the trial proceeded Mr. Iiowe rose ana said that he did not wish to impede, but to furiher, the administration of justice by interposing an objection to the case proceeding bcrore that Court as at present organized, lor the reason that the present term of the Court of General sessions for this county was being held heforc Hon. Charles P. Daly, one of the Justices or tne Co urt of common l'leas, on the trial of a very high omcia 1. His Honor (the Kecorder) was possibiy aware that a bill was now beiore the Legislature lor the purpose of sanctioning two branches of this Court being in session atcne time: and, therefore, It was donotful as to tne power of this Court to hold two branches or there would nor.

nave been the necessity for legislative interierence in that respect. i he Recorder overruled the motion. Lrdla Lyons was the complainant against Mary Ann Leonard, and stated mat, ou the 7tn of February, she tooK a Rroudway stage at the Staten Island ferry, and when she reached Prince Btreet found tnat her pocketbook, containing $45 was stolen. The prisoner sat near her, and no other person conld have taken it but tier. An hour after tier pocket was picked Miss Lyons returned to the Battery and lutuid Mother Koacli there and had her arrested, but no money was found upon her.

Before the Jury left the court room there were eleven for conviction and one lor acquittal, and later in the afternoon they had not agreed. The Kecorder discharged them from the further consideration of the case, and directed the Clerk to summon 100 Jurors for Monday to try the case. AITKMPTKI) BUKGI.AKY IN A CRIMINAL LAWYER'S HOUHK. Charles Woods, John Wilson and James Dnfff, youths, were placed at the bar charged with attempting to break, into the residence of welt known criminal law.vor, on too 7ih 01 February. District Attorney Oarvln stated to His Honor that the complainant, overflowing with the milk or human Kindness, pleaded (or mercy tn tnetr behalf.

The Keconlor said that the youthrm criminals showed irrcat audacity in conceiving the purpose of committing a crime upon the of a great criminal lawyer; yet Ills Honor, being assured that It was their nrst oilence and that they were respectably connected, suspended judgment. AN ACQUITTAL. Frederick Fchmcckpenpcr was tried upon a charge of receiving lour boxen of caudles which SHEET. were stolen by two nays, Harrison and King, tnm uie store of Abraham Jackson, with a guilty knowledge. That essential fact not being established the jnry rendered a verdict of not guilty.

Thomas Nolan, a yontb, IncHeted tor assaulting Joseph McBorron on the vdtn of February and robbing tnm 01 a gold chain, pleaded guilty to petty larceny from the person and was sent to the State Prison lor hve years. UHULUIH. llcnry Co wen (a boyi, wbo attempted to burglar toufily enter the of B. M. Clara, in Bast Forty-ninth street, on tue fltii or Keoruary, pleaded gulltv and was seut to the Pemtenuary lor six months.

George Uramer offered a similar plea, the indictment charging that on toe 2Ud of January he. with a confederate, broke Into the store or Friedman A Laniezlng, 14 Warren street, and stole worth, knives. He was sent to the State Prison lor two yeani and six months. Dennis Brady, charged with being concerned In robbing Albert Boruonsky ol a watch and diamond pin in a liquor saioon, corner of Kast Broadway and Clinton street, was convicted of assault and battery. As there were mitigating circumstances the Recorder sent Brady to the Penitentiary for three months.

Jaines Wiley, wbo, In conjunction with two confederates, broke into the premises or Theodore Linnlngton. No. 216 Front street, on the night or ttio 2d or February, and stole $90 worth oi cigars, pleaded guilty to an attempt at burglary. Two years ana six months in the State Prison was the sentence. John Williams, jointly indicted, in whoee possession two boxes of the stolen cigars were iouud, was sent to the Penitentiary for six months.

James Walker, who was charged with forging a check tor $24 in order to procure medicine for a sick relative, pleaded gouty, and. on motion of the Assistant Distriot Attorney, tne court suspended judgment. BROOKLYN COURTS. SUPREME TERR The Agricultural College Lssd Cue. Before Judge Gilbert.

William Woodward vs. Ezra caso was reported In the Hkkald a row dayB since. It Is gn action to recover alleged to be dne plaintiff in connection with locating Agricultural College lands in the West, which bad been given to the btate of New York by an act of Congress, then transierred to the Cornell University and subsoqueutly purchased by the defendant Cornell, wbo, as claimed, employed plaintiff to assist hiin lu locating the lands. The trial of the case was set down for range county, but on Monday last counsel for deience moved to have the place of trial changed to Tompkins conuty, on the ground that the greater number i of witnesses lived there. Yesterday ml ire (iiloert rendered a decision denying tbe motion, witii $10 costs.

Declaloin. Knnson McKwen et al. vs. William Wrignt. Motion to change place or trial denied.

Ten dollars costs to abide event. Antonio U. DeGorgorza vs. Knickerbocker Life Insurance case settled. Julm Ktnu vs.

Tboiuas to VAcate order to file security lor costs denied, without costs. Maria J. Umttli vs. Itebecca C. Davison et Motion to set aside sale dculeo, with $10 costs.

Owen Mosier vs. (iodfred Crossman et to change venue itranied; $10 costs, to abide event. Edward Doyle vs. William C. sustained: judgment lor plaintiff, with costs.

Emina U. Ilruce et ai. vk. Marietta M. Fuller et a I uiintu.inna I CITY COURT.

1 A Court Itooui Wanted. Before Jndgo Neilson. Since the reorganization of the oily Court, Increasing the namber of Judges to three, Increasing the Jurisdiction of the Court, business has increased so rapidly that the Court has been divided into two parts, held in separate rooms. The second part has been held in the County Court room when that Court was not in session. Frequently when Judge Moore has been holding County Court his room has been wanted by Judge McUue to hold the second part o'r the city Court in; consequently the business of the latter tribunal has been delayed.

This was the case yesterday morning. Jndge Moore was engaged in the countv Court, and there was a large calendar of rue Cltv Court to De disposed ol by Judge McCue. Judge Neilson was engaged in tne First Part In the suit of the widow Jane Madden against tue Staten Island Ferry Company. Judge Neilson called the calendar for the day and found that there was a large namber ot cases ready tor trial. All parlies, including udgc McCue, were in attendance and ready to proceed, but there was no court room to be had, ana Judge Neilson, I therefore, announced tnat the cases must stand over until Monday next.

Perhaps the mine, while making the announcement, perpetrated a joke when he said that it had been suggested by a member o( the oar that tney should endeavor to obtain possession of the Long Island Club House (the headquarters ol the democratic club on Clinton street) to bold court In. The Court added, however, that some gentlemen seemed to dount the propriety or doing uo 1 BROOKLYN SurRKMB Nos. 49, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 107, 109 to 117, inclusive. City calendar to-day, In view of the fact that the- Woatlield case will occupy the balance of tne week, and, as there is uo room for Judge McCue to hold Part 2 in. the following is Monday's 31, 35, 47, 61, 62, 64, 55, 56, 58, 67, 73, 74, 89, 94, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 106, 108, 109,110, 111, 112, 114, llo, 117, 118, 119, 122, 123, 125, 127, 128, 129.

JUSTICE AND THE JUDGES. The Judiciary Committee in ol the Charges Against Judge Up of the Case Against Judge Curdozo. lite investigations that are carried on In parlors andO or the Fifth Avenue Hotel by the Judiciary I committee are becoming decidedly monotonous, ad nattiing ho far has been brought to tight or any startling nature against the Judges who have been arraigned before this learned body. It was given out on Wednesday evening that the case against Judge Barnard would be commenced at noon yesterday, and at that hour the accused and his counsel, Rnlus Andrews, presented themselves before the committee and announced their readiness to take into consideration the several charges that bad been preferred. It appears there are about half a dozen charges against Judge Barnard, the first of which accuses him or having formed a corrupt association with Fl sk, Gould.

Sherman and Fields and others, for the purpose of gaming possession of the Albany and Susquehanna Railroad; and that with this object In view the Judge had granted injunctions upon motions of Sherman and Fields, who had not been empowered to act In the matter by the executive committee. This appears to tie the most important charge, and Messrs. Sherman, Stirling, David Dudley Field and Dudley Field were suupunacd as witnesses. Another of the charges is that Judge Barnard has made use of abusive language from the Beuch to members of the Bar and others. At noon yesterday everything was In readiness 10 proceed with the examination of the charges, but unfortunately none of the witnesses appeared, and consequently business remained in statu quo nntil their arrival.

Judge Barnard and his counsel, Ruins Andrews, promenaded around, naturally a little dialed at the delay, on questioning the Judge as to bis opinion or tne charges brought against mm, he said he was oerlectiy satisfied wltn the whole matter, and thought mat the conduct of the judiciary should always he subject to tne most searching examination if there was the slightest proof of any corruption, and added mat it was tne tioundcn duty of any citizen who had any proofs of corruption against a member or the Judiciary to apptQK and make aflldavii to the same. It was nearly three o'clock before a witness arrived; but at last Mr. Dudley Field nut in an miu uiu cuuiiiiiuix imiiiuuiaioiy wt'iu to work upon the Albany and Musquchanua cnargc. Mr. Rulus Andrews was the only counsel tor Judge Barnard present, as his associate, Mr.

Faucher, is on tne sick list. The committee kept hard at work upon Mr. Dudley Field nntil five o'clock P. when they adjourned the further investigation of the charges against Judge llarnard until ton a. m.

this morning. The result of their labors yesterday appear to have been rather unsatlsiactory, as Mr. Dudley Field completely upset this charge, proving thai the Arm he represented nad authority to act as counsel tir an agreement wltn the Executive Coinmittee of the-board of directors of the railroad ana also by the written Instructions of tne same Executive Committee, (several witnesses have been subpoenaed to appear to-day on the Judge Barnurd charges, and among them are Fred. A. Lane, llenry L.

Barker and James Coleman. Tne committee met last evening at half-past seven to conclude the examination or witnesses in the Judge Cardozo investigation. Mr. C. E.

Jordan, a gentleman connected with the legal profession, was Urst pnt on the atand and examined to aome as to some documentary evidence tending to rebut the evidence produced on the part oi tne liar Association. Judge cardozo was present, accoiii panted by hfs counsel, Judge Fullerton, and associate. Mr. Owens. Snortlv nelore nine P.

a JJgWo. was called, but was only kept a few mm- Mr. Sparks, clerk of the court of General Sea- siona, was also present with a large of nail I bonds and recognizances of people discharged on 1 habeas corpus after huving been convicted in (he I i Court of Special Sessions. This testimony was pro- I i (luued on behalf of Judge Cardozo, to anow thing bad becu transacted In perfectly regular I manner. The Judiciary Committee sat until shortly i before eleven P.

M. ft hi understood that the Investigation or me charges has now terminated and the i couiiniiiee win devote their attentiou to day to Judge tiaruard. I THE REAL ESTATE MARKET. Feeling Among Dealers specting Its Future. Effect of Past Operations on Fifth nue and Madison Avenue Property.

THE LOGIC OF FIGURES. Who Constitute the Heavy Buyers and How They SOLID MEN TO THE FRONT. Projected Improvement on the Corner of Broadway and Dey Street. Napoleon and New York Real Estate. Particulars of the Sale of Park and Boulevard Lots To-Day.

fhe article In yesterday's herald respecting a now movement la real estate created quite an excitement In real estate circles, and was a principal subject of discussion among tbe crowd coltcoted at the sale of tbe boulevard and I'ark lots, as well aa In brokers' oftlces generally. Tbe weight ot opinion was with the correctness of the conclusions there set forth, and many reader contributed bis quota oi Individual knowledge to sustain our judgment. Others contended that while a period or renewed tiviiy, bevond question, was close at band, in whlcn former seasons oi excitement and heavy operations would be repeated, yet tbut tbe market was In an mconule state as regarded this result, and had not yet recovered the uee led spring and buoyancy to justify full confidence. In otner words, the effect of the recent stagnation is atill upon the market, and checks the speculative ardor which would otherwise stimulate free Investments. This is certainly true to a great extent, judging from the record ot public dealings; but there are numerous transactions daily occurring In private, In which the heaviest operators are engaged as principals, which furnish the needed assurance lo justify our anticipations.

fifth avenue property. The single case of tne sale of tbe lot on the corner of Filth avenue and Elgluy-tlitli street ou Tuesday to W. P. Douglas, for $47,500, affords au opportunity to illustrate tuts. Mr.

Douglas hassince becu offered an udvuuce ol upon Ins purchase. The lot adjoining this, on Filth avenue, sold in November, 1809, for $17,000, und lias only recently been refused. This rapid appreciation Is but the natural result of the comuetitiou among buyers that has prevailed in the interval to hold ol tills kind of property, a competition that has been quietly curried on, so thai when a public sale takes place the advance upon former prices is startling. Among lite heaviest buyers of this kind ot property lor years tins been Uriilltn Howe, who is said to owu or control almost the entire Finn avenue Iront Irom Filty-nmlh to Ninetieth street. The influence or these investments is also visible in tne rapid appreciation of MAPISOM AVENUE HR1PBKTY and property adjacent thereto, extending all the way from Forty-second to loom street und bounded by Fourth and Fntu avenues.

The improvement of tins district has been almost marvellous wnnin the lust couule ol years. Whole blocks of nouses have been erected on the cross streets, wnilc ou the line ol Madison the Improvements are of the most stately character. For lots ou tne corner of airamin und Sinranrv.llinrl HM'DPt whlp.h sold respectively three years at and 13,000, they are now asking fcoo.ooo. The interence is that the same me a who by their uueratlona gave the impetus to the Filth avenue and neighboring property have now trunslerred their operations to ine Boulevard. The east or the Park having reached a limit beyond whicn there is not much profit to be looked lor without improvement, they have directed their attention to the west side as offering a iresh held lor successiul speculation.

By speculation here we do not mean speculation In the sense ol the Stock based upon fictitious values, but speculative investment looking to a future rapid appreciation. Among THE HEAVIEST REAL ESTATE OPERATORS, whose presence In tne market is the certain indioation of genuine activity, are John 11. 1 ower, Amos K. Kno, L. J.

Phillips (Mr. Phillips is said to be a heavy buyer on the west side). George H. Peck, Benjamin Cohen (both Mr. Peck and Mr.

Couen bought lrceiy at recent west side sales); Griffith Kowe we have already mentioued, whose greas specialty Is Filth avenue property; W. P. Douglas, Adou Smith, John Lewis, s. M. Peyser, Sylvester Brush and J.

lilumenthal. These are only a lew, however, of the number who give real estate the preference in meir investments, and are exclusive oi the numerous operators in west side property who were more or less associated witn tne "ring." The future of the Investments made on that account present a somewhat puzzling problem to real estate men. but while tho improvements projected by Its members, and upon which they tlxilp nnt wn An hnnr In Inrsnnl inn IJOOCU U1VII pmvujwwo, VH It can remain a problem without detriment to the intercuts of other real eBtate owners. We have also omitted the name of a once distinguished investor In Mew York real estate, THE KX-EMPKKOR NAPOLEON III, who, it has beuu oiten stated, owns or owned siderable property 111 this city. The ex-Emperor on one occasion assured the correspondent ot the Hkuald that sucti was not the case, but in view of the distress ol mind he was then suffering from it Is quite possible he may have lorgotten the piece rcierrod to below.

I NO I PENT OP A LATE TRANSACTION. It will Uouotless be recollected bv the readers ol tne 11 eh a Lb that I)r. Evans, an American dentist, became warm personal lrlend ol the ex-Emperor, then in tne zeintu or his power. Ho close and confidential became the intimacy that tne Emperor entrusted Dr. Evans with the onerous task of investing large sums in Americau property.

Among the real estate purchased la this city lor the Emperor wan a piece of uropcriy situated on the northwest corner of Dey street and liroad war, the Broadway iront extending about lliiyfive icei, with a depth in Dcr street of 150 feet. This estate cost the Emperor the purcuase being effected in Dr. Evans' name. Of late the Western Union Telegranh Company has been hard pushed tor room In its present headquarters, aud several utiempis have been made by tha mfiiiairnmonr tn ntifftln nnnllinp unil mnro nr. punitive locution, In onlcr to be as close as possible to ibe new 1'ost omce a bid was made some time ago lor tne Astor House.

Tno oiler was not accented. Finally tue company resolved to purchase the Bioadwav and bey street property ol tne exEmperor. The handsome sum or was paid to htm, through br. Evans, lor this propcryr. thus diverting tutu Louis Napoleon's private purse the very satisfactory margin ot $.100,000.

on the 1st or May the building at present on the property will be torn down to make way for the new headuuarters. 1'he promised structure will probably be one or the most splendid, as it will be one of the most complete, buildings on tins continent. It will be tne great telegraphic heart 01 the country, where the electric current will pulsate night and day iroin and to the extreme tin's of the earth. The announcement by the company of its Intention has caused a brisk demand lor oriice room in the vicinity. tub sack OF PAHK ANP SOtd.BVARD yesterday, belonging to the estate of Wushingtoa M.

smith, deceased, under a decree in partition of the supreme Court, attracted a large attendance to the salesroom, comprising many of the prominent real estate tnen 01 this city, who watched the progress of tne sale with much interest, The terms were somewnat varied iroin the usual course, the sale being made from a marked tnap upon which was set down opposite to eacn lot the amount ol cash that would oe required ol the purchaser independent of the prico olTered. In the subjoined report or the sale both figures are given. The first lot put up was oue ou Seventy-sixth tronL north side, about the middle or the block, between the Boulevard and renin avenue, which aold for $4,600 cash. following this the Tenth avenue lots were pui up. Tne one on the corner of Meveuty-seveutu street, 25.6j?xlio, being the sostli west corner, brought $4,500 cash.

The adioiuuig low, sou ill on the avenue, brought $4,600 and respectively; $4,000 cash on eaclu The six lots on street, south side, beginning niuetv leei west of Tenth avenue, each sold as flrst two nearest the avenue, $4,760 each, and the others suoces. si voir for $6,000, $0,200 and $4,600 cash on each. Toe Boulevard lots sold as Corner 01 Scveniy-seventu street and the vard, gore shape, 26.4'; front, U0.4 on Seventy, teventh street, $18,100: cash $10,000. ng, same iront, ineau depth loo.fl, $1 Lot oiunig, mean depth ua teet, $12,360. Lot adjoin, ng; mean depth 87.6.

$12,100. The cash paynent required on each of tnese was $8,600. The buyers were John B. Dyer, J. o.

Wright, IV. iiackus. J. Bluinenthnl and J. R.

Smith. The other traiisacilous at the Kxchange were uninoorniuu.