Sidebilder
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]

In the inventories made by defend- “An act authorizing the Seneca ant the conditional contracts were Nation of New York Indians to included as assets.

lease lands within the Cattaraugus Presumably, defendant can and Allegany reservations, and to protect himself against loss on the confirm existing leases.” U. S. contracts by resorting to his legal Sess. Laws, 1874–5, 330. On remedies for collecting the install- Nov. 30, 1875, plaintiff assigned ments due thereon as they mature, said lease and transferred possesor by retaking possession of the sion of the land on which were property

then a house and barn to defendJudgment affirmed.

ant, in consideration of $1,100, to Opinion by Smith, P.J.; Barker

secure payment of which defendand Bradley, JJ., concur; Haight, ant, on the same day, executed to J., not sitting

plaintiff a mortgage upon the house and barn and also upon his

interest in said lease and all buildINDIANS. LEASE. MORT

ings then on said land or thereafter GAGE.

to be erected thereon. Defendant N. Y. SUPREME COURT. GENERAL continued in possession, and in TERM. FIFTH DEPT.

April, 1878, default having been Michael Sheehan, respt.,

made, plaintiff commenced this

action to foreclose said mortgage. Xavier Mayer, impl’d., applt.

The action was tried in May 1881, Decided Oct., 1886.

and in March, 1884, judgment was. The mortgagee of the improvements on

entered directing that the premleased Indian Reservation lands and of ises be sold ; that the purchaser bethe leasehold thereof has the right of re- let into possession; that the pronewal of the lease under the act of Congress of Feb. 19, 1875. It not appearing ceeds, or so much thereof as may that such renewal was not made, it is be necessary, be applied to the presumed, under the circumstances of payment of the amount unpaid the case, that it was made.

upon the mortgage ; and that the Appeal from judgment on decis- deficiency, if any, be paid by deion at Special Term and from fendant. Subsequently, defendant. order denying motion to modify moved at Special Term to modify the judgment.

the judgment, and particularly In June, 1872, Redeye, a Seneca to strike out the provision that the Indian, residing on the Allegany purchaser at the foreclosure sale Indian Reservation in Cattaraugus be let into possession. County, executed to plaintiff a Henderson & Wentworth, for lease of a piece of land on said res- applt. ervation for the term of 13 years Ansley & Vreeland, for respt. from Nov. 1, 1872. Said land was Held, As we apprehend it, appelin Great Valley, one of the villages lant's argument is that the lease. mentioned in the act of Congress was void at its execution, and at approved Feb. 19, 1875, entitled most was made valid by the act of

Feb., 1875, for five years only from does not concern defendant. He the passage of said act, and that as had not been disturbed in his posthe five years had elapsed before session when judgment was enthe trial, the court erred in hold- tered. His only right to possesing that the mortgage was then sion was under the lease assigned a subsisting lien upon the preni- to him by plaintiff. The right of ises.

the Indian Nation to possession The act made valid all then ex- at the expiration of the five years isting leases of lands within the was subordinate to the right of the boundaries of the villages therein owner of the improvenients to a named, in which Seneca Indians renewal of the lease for twelve

, or persons claiming under them years thereafter.

years thereafter. Plaintiff's inwere lessors, for a period of five terest, as mortgagee of the imyears after the passage of the act, provements and of the leasehold, except such as by their terms ex- gave him the right of renewal pired at an earlier date. The act under the act, and from the fact also provided that at the expiration that his assignee continued in posof a lease the Nation should be session under the lease it may be entitled to the possession of the presumed, if necessary to support lands and have power to lease the judgment, that the lease had them. It also made such leases been renewed. renewable, at their termination, Judgment and order affirmed, for periods not exceeding twelve with costs. years, and provided that the per- Opinion.by Smith, P.J.; Bradley, .sons who might be at such time J., concurs ; Barker and Haight, the

owners of improvements JJ., not sitting. erected upon such lands should be entitled to such renewed leases,

MISDEMEANOR. JURISDICand to continue in possession of

TION. such lands on such conditions as might be agreed upon by such own

N. Y. SUPREME COURT. GENERAL ers and the councilors of the

TERM. FOURTH DEPT. Seneca Nation, or, in case of their The People ex rel. Eliza Miller, disagreement, by referees to be applt., v. Allen Cooper, sheriff, chosen as provided in the act. respt. The lease in question, if invalid

Decided Nov., 1986. before, was made valid by the act. Defendant is not in a position to

The recorder of the city of Elmira has exraise the question whether the

clusive jurisdiction to try a charge of

misdemeanor in keeping a disorderly lease had expired. Clearly, it had house, subject to the right of the accused not expired when this suit was be- to apply for a certificate under SS 57 and gun, as that was within five years

58, Code Crim. Pro. after the passage of the act. Wheth- Appeal from order of county er plaintiff had availed himself of judge remanding relator to the the right of renewal under the act / custody of the sheriff.

March 13, 1886, relator was authorized to hold Courts of Special arrested on a warrant issued by Sessions and exercise the powers the recorder of the city of Elmira, and jurisdiction of such courts, as. charging her with keeping a dis- regulated by the statute. Elmira orderly house, and taken before charter, Chap. 370, Laws of 1875, the recorder, whereupon she $104; Code Crim. Pro., $ 63. Secpleaded not guilty, waived an ex- tion 44 of the charter of the city amination and demanded a trial provides: “The justices of the by jury after indictment, and off-peace within the city shall have ered bail, which was refused on and exercise all the powers, authorthe ground that the recorder had ity and jurisdiction, and discharge exclusive jurisdiction to try her. all the duties, and be entitled to The trial was adjourned to March the fees and compensation of jus19, and in default of bail to appear tices of the peace of the several for trial she was committed to jail. towns in this State, except as modi

Relator obtained a writ of habeas fied by this act.” corpus from the county judge and Section 104 provides: “The resought to be discharged on the corder of the city shall, except ground that she had a right to give in case of his absence therefrom, bail for her appearance to answer or inability, from sickness or other to an indictment and therefore cause, to act, have jurisdiction exwas illegally imprisoned. The clusive of any justice of the peace county judge held that the record- or other officer therein, except er had exclusive jurisdiction to try judges of courts of record, to issue relator for the offense charged, all criminal process, and to instiand remanded her to the custody tute all criminal proceedings, of the

sheriff. The offense which a single justice or two juscharged is misdemeanor, tices of the peace in towns are enpunishable by imprisonment in a powered or directed by law to issue penitentiary or county jail for not and institute; to hear and entermore than one year, or by a fine oftain all complaints and conduct all’ not more than $500, or by both. examinations in criminal cases and Penal Code, s 15.

proceedings; to hold Courts of Charles A. Collin, for applt. Special Sessions, with all the pow

Edgar Denton, Dist. Atty., for ers and jurisdictions of such courts respt.

as regulated by statute; to try, Held, That the order is correct. convict and sentence all persons That the recorder had exclusive who may be guilty of any offeuses jurisdiction to try the relator for which are or may be triable by the offense charged, subject to her | Courts

Courts of Special Sessions, and right to apply for a certificate to commit for trial all persons who directing that she be prosecuted shall be charged or be guilty of by indictment, pursuant to $8 57 any offense not triable in said and 58, Code Crim. Pro. The re- court. The Court of Special Sescorder of the city of Elmira is sions, held by said recorder, shall

a

*

*

sen

have jurisdiction of and power to meanants had been established. hear and determine all charges for Chapter 769, Laws of 1857 ; Chap. every misdemeanor committed or 467, Laws of 1866; Chap. 530, charged to have been committed Laws of 1872. The sentence in within said city. * * Said the section last quoted, “except recorder shall have the power to that such justices shall not have let to bail persons charged with jurisdiction to try any person for crime before him in all cases of any offense not heretofore triable felony where the imprisonment in by Courts of Special Sessions," the State prison, on conviction, conveys the idea of a broader juriscannot exceed five years.

* *

diction in the Courts of Special The said recorder shall have and Sessions when presided over by possess the exclusive jurisdiction the recorder than when presided of all the offenses within said city over by a justice of the peace, specified in this section, except as

and if such was not the legislative herein before stated.” The

intent it is difficult to see why tence last quoted is very broad.

these words of limitation were inNo specific offenses are mentioned serted. in the section, but offenses are The language of the charter of classified as felonies and misde- the city of Elmira is much broader meanors. In felonies the recorder than the language in the charter is given power to take examina- of the village of Hornellsville, and tions and let to bail when the

pun- the case of People v. McDonald, ishment, on conviction, cannot ex- 26 Hun, 156, does not support the ceed imprisonment for five years

contention of relator. in a State prison, which are the Order affirmed. only offenses excepted from the Opinion by Follett, J.; Hardin, exclusive jurisdiction of the re

P.J., and Boardman, J., concur. corder.

Section 106 of the charter provides: "In cases of sickness, ab- TAXES. ARREARS. REDEMPsence from the city, disability or

TION. inability to act of the said recorder,

N. Y. SUPREME COURT. GENERAL his powers and duties are hereby

TERM. FIRST DEPT. conferred and imposed upon either of the several justices of the peace

The People ex rel. William J. of said city so designated, except Haddock et al., v. Artemas S. Cady, that such justices shall not have

Clerk of Arrears. jurisdiction to try any person for Decided Oct. 15, 1886. any offense not heretofore triable

An owner of land in the city of N. Y. sold by Courts of Special Sessions.”

for the non-payment of taxes has two When this charter was passed years from the date of the certificate the policy of conferring exclusive given to the purchaser in which to re

deem said land, and such certificate jurisdiction upon Courts of Special

should hear the date of the time when Sessions to try specified misde- such purchaser paid the purchase price

per cent.

into the city treasury and not the date appealed, relators claiming that when the sale took place.

under $ 918 of the Consolidation Taxes upon real property in the city of N. Y. which are not paid within 60 days

Act they were entitled to redeem after the entry thereof in the records bear upon payment of the tax with interest at the rate of seven per cent. seven per cent. interest, and the from the date of such entry up to the date

clerk of arrears claiming that, of the certificate of sale given to the purchaser thereof. After the date of such

since more than two years had certificate of sale and up to the time of elapsed since the date of the sale the delivery of a lease to the purchaser and a lease had been executed, rethe owner of such lands, in order to re

lators were not entitled to redeem, deem them, must pay to the clerk of

even upon the payment of fourteen arrears the purchase price together with interest thereon at the rate of fourteen per cent. interest.

John C. Shaw, for relators. Certain real property in the city John Townshend and E. Henry of N. Y. owned by relators was Lacombe, for clerk of arrears. sold for the non-payment of taxes Held, That the statute gave the on May 7, 1883. The purchase owner two years from the date price thereof was received by the of the certificate

of the certificate of sale in clerk of arrears from the purchaser which to redeem the lands, ģ on May 29, 1883. The clerk of 941, Consolidation Act, and that arrears subsequently advertised it seemed to be recognized that that the property had been so sold the date of sale and the date of the and that, unless the same was re- certificate might not coincide, and deemed within two years from that it was implied that the certifiMay 7, 1883, the date of the sale, cate should bear date as of the a lease thereof would be delivered time when the purchaser paid his to the purchaser. On May 8, 1885, money, for if the certificate bore no redemption having been made, the same date as the sale although a lease was executed to said pur- the money was not paid until afchaser. On December 24, 1885, terward, then the purchaser in relators tendered to the clerk of case of redemption would receive arrears the amount of the taxes fourteen per cent. for money which with interest at seven per cent. to he still had in his pocket and was the date of the tender, which was using for his own purposes until refused by the clerk. Relators he paid it over to the city. That then made an application for a it must be assumed, therefore, that mandamus, which resulted in the the certificate must be dated as of granting of a peremptory man- the day when the purchaser pays damus commanding the clerk of his money. That the notice in the arrears to receive the amount of case at bar required the owner to the purchase money with interest redeem 22 days before the time at fourteen per cent. from May 29, allowed by law, and that it was 1883, and give a certificate of re- therefore void, and the provisions demption. From the order grant of the statute

of the statute requiring 42 per ing such mandamus both parties cent. to be paid upon redemption

« ForrigeFortsett »