The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1848-12-06
DeolsI0ns q De supreme o0uri.

came the surety Of James Duplessis appointed
clerk of the bank in February, 1870 The bond by
which Dupesss and bis two sureties Ledoux and Durrve
bound themselves jointly and Seueray is for the of
s12 0O0 and bears date 18th February 1870 Dupessis
bezzled from the bank amount exceeding s12 000 and
the present action brought from Ifdoux the
amount OF tho bond with interest from judicial den aud
The petition admits that the FIRST embszzed by Du
pessis taken on the Both day Of March, S4 and
time commended therefore, that the bond the de-
PENDANT not liable because at the date of the m detaca
annual office and that bis suTee bound for
only If the place to which Dupesss was thus appointed
annual office there might be pausbity in the
conclusion invoked BY defendant II we look merely TO the
language ofthe bond obyious that the contracting
ties did contemplate duration thus limited On the
contrary points to the expected continuance OF Dublessls
Directors But said that surees the favones OF the
and though the words of the bond may indefinite
period, yet if by Of the Legislature the records of
ten must be understood as referring to office so limited
We are not prepared to recognize the doctrine applicable TO
places which may properly be denomnated public,
tending unquahedy TO appointments like that in question
The argument presented is mainly deduced from the pro
the bank shall be annually elected But IT does not follow
that the clerks and of the corporation should
hold Their appointments by the same tenure They are the
clerks and servants OF the oorpOrallon there Is nothing IN
the bylaws OF the bank limiting the duration OF the place
of note clerk, and his appointment itself general The
views here stated rest upon hsh authony Inc snDIect
considered in the Of Anderson LangdOn. 1
the upon HERS bond who had been appointed
without specific duration OF his office having been fixed
BY the charter the Directors TO be elected annually II
held that the cashier office limited only by the du
bent BY the Directors and that be necessarily an
annual officer. The d0ctIne maintained in the
Much stress has been laid bg counsel upon the expressions
Esed IN The 3h section Of the charter If The LeglsaluT9
beappOnted annually that the duration Of their offices should
be for only is surprising that this should have
Dteh e 70 mere nIcaon II sald IN ts case There was
disappointment Of Dupesss, and the counsel rely to show
Directors themselves the charter. upon entry in the
minutes Of the Board under date of Sd March 184 1t is
lpseF hat he and
clerks Of the bank be confirmed in their respective situations
which agreed TO unanimously" This resolution is
fully susceptible Of being construed into expression OF the
will Of the Board that the clerks and ants of the bank
should continue approval Of past appointments and
not new appointment Such indeed The fair import of
the language and the opposite interpret alton Is strained IT,
however, could be treated as an appointment and nor an
approval was an unnecessary and superluous act Du-
plej would have remained in office without IT, and il
not be considered especaly under he broad expressions
used in the bond, destroying the liability Of the surety
In the case OF me Dedhan Bank already ced these sue
ceSSiye Teeccf0Rs OF the cashier, expressly so deDOml
mated the minaes took place but the point was con
kinson. East, 5Q7 Lord Arlington Muricke Segn-
United States Bs Kirkpatrek Ieadey u.s. Evans Bing-
ham, 30; Bgelow Us. BiHdye, Mass, 26,
discharged from all liability the plaintiffs because the
bank although called on by the defendant TO take legal steps
seopd The defendant relies on the Article 5000 Of the
Civil Code, which the the Article 2I OF the Ma
poeon Code Under the Roman law, it that the rep
the creditor upon the request Of the surety would
raj language Of the Article 2057 G. NJ and he correspond
ing Article Of our Code would require an act OF the eedi
discharge the surety nder the circumstances OF the
present case there has not been such omission would
authorize 70 consider the surety discharged Our Code
has made very liberal provision for surety and has put
into bis hands enlarged means OF sepToecton Art
1926. very liberal Interpretation Of the provision
| given in CougOt rs. FORMER. Rob. 422
The next ground Obedience that Ledoux has been dis
charged from all liability the bond consequence of the
neglect of plaintiff to perform the conditions, expressed
and imp led, which incumbent them and which
formed the consideration o. his contract surety We
think 10 be satisfactorily proved that the frauds OF DupeS
and searching vigilance had been exercised by the monthly
aud semiannual Committees. The question then remains;
of fha
principles of law affecting the contract the absence Of mi
mute vigilance the part OF the Directors unaccompaned
| by fraud. discharges the surety.
Ieoux bound Huns; for the honesty of Dupless and be
has been uniaithul To say that the obgee has exe
csed as rigid surveillance him there might have
been is to inerpolaie in the instrument clause which the
though had been guarantee that Durlessis should
be honest oa gpa n a o IS sV saeb Il bdT5 When
he appointed Note Clerk, can be supposed for mo-
Is therefore decided the judgement of he Court below
in favor Of Amazon edouN be reversed and that the plain
thousand dollars with interest thereon from the 18th Of Oc
/ tOber, 1874 until paid aud costs.
| MUNICIPALITY No. ONE, appellee BLINEAU &
CoRDER appts.-EUts j.. The Council Of the First
Municipality directed the Blneau soap factory in St Ann
street, to be removed within twenty days unless should be
put such condition 10 be nuisance and ordered
further that the expiration of said twenty days, the
complaint Of three inhabitants, under oath that if SAID
factory continued TO be nuisance the said Bneau
persons interested therein should pay fine Of fifty dollars for
each and naCton Of these resolutions CordeT was
condemned TO me OF nifty 0Odi5 Ol
resolutions aud appealed The power of the Council to i'm
pose fines for the violation Of Municipal ordinances is
ceded but urged that the imposition OF fine must be by
that individuals cannot be affected by the ssolu
peS instance fbe could be no objection on the score Of
legality ordinance imposing lines persons carrying
ous 10 the public health but designate individual
establishment and subject its owners to punishment, ap
judgement rendered oT the defendant, with costs Same
! N asses 0e9 1890 and Il3l
MAYOR, ALDERMEN AND INHABITANTS OF THE CRY
| OF LAFAYETTE, appees. JOHN GUMMINs, appL-
G. Eustis, j.. This appeal from judgment rendered
against the defendant BY Justice OF the Peace for fifteen
dollars the amount OF municipal tax due b. defendant
of his occupation and trade butcher The tax
imposed by ordinance for the year 1871 which lays
an annual on trades aud professions mentioned therein
Besides these trades enumerated there several Others
principally those of mechanics and also other professions
and occupations winch are consequently not taxed, ,
Council of Lafayette TO lay taxes real estate and slaves
empowers them TO lay taxes upon all kinds OF property,
for the of said city, and the imposing and collection Of
which may be inconsistent with the Constitution and
laws of the United States ami OF this state Defendant
keeps slaughtehoue in Lafayette wheehe kills his cattle
for The New Orleans market his cart is taxed and he pays
high tax for bs stan IN the marKetbq these buitenS
afford ground for the nonpayment Of the tax here sued
for Judgement appealed from affirmed, with costs.
JAMES BURBANK ct a., appts, n. Q. LANE tutor,
appee-Rost d. The defendant appointed tutor Of
the minors George A. Burbank LOrnda Burbank and Jas.
Burbank after the death Of their father whose succession he
appears to have administered as tutor In September lo45
he filed final account OF his administration OF the success
SION and at the same time resigned the tutoship which
resignation was accepted snd his account approved and ho
moogated James Burbank Of age and he together
with his sister and her husband representing George A
Burbank call upon the defendant to render to them an &C
Of his tuofshp under the law, and particularly under
Art 355 OF the Civil Code, and Arts. w and luz 81 the
Code of Practice The District Count dismissed ts PLAIN
n tin petition and he Appealed. There Is no error IN the
judgement The defendant appears TO have acted ana re-
signed the trust IN good faith and there Is nothing M e
rec0d 10 raise doubt that justice has not been done be-
tween The parties The Judgement affirmed, win costs
PLANTERS BANK OF TENNESSEE, sppt., Is. K H.
BYRNE, appee-stdeil. j.. On notion the Court below
dissolved the attachment issued this The correctness
OF that judgement the only question before The Code
Of Practice requires that The attaching creditor. pre-
requisite to obtain the give bond in favor Of the
defendant, for sum exceeding by onehaf the amount
which he claims with surety etc. security for the pay
meat of such damages defendant may against
him. in case should be decided that Che attachment was
vrouefuy Obtained &C. P. 2459. The amount of bond
must lie controlled BY amount OF debt This pre-