The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1849-02-19
The First District Court


suitable one for the emission of many pointes
jokes and the display of much grotesque baffoonery
as If they rejoced in the bauble and bells wit
which, by public consent, they have been deco
rated For our own part we have confined on
notices OF the matter, hitherto, to a simple state
fnent OF the facts as they appeared on the record
| or were ELECTED by evidence. We have no emit
against the Judge to crafty, no particular friend
ship towards the Clerk to subserve, and should 10
have said another word on the subject, did not til
difficulties between Judge McHenry and his Cer
| involve some important questions of public law, ant
threaten, by temporary closing of the court to b.
very seriously injurious 10 the public interests.
That courts of justice are, and must be, investe'
with an arbitrary power of furnishing persons for
| contempt of their authority, is certain The peace
! of society, the preservation Of the laws, and the
proper administration of JUSTICE requires this. Blu
this power to punish, although arbitrary, is not I'm
| limited and because it is arbitrary it should be
exercised with sound discretion, and only in those
cases in which the law provides no other means o
asserting its own dignity and that of its ministers
That one who interrupts the proceedings Of a court
who attempts, either by the use of oral or written
words or otherwise, TO bring its officers into con-
tempt and ridicule-who obstructs the due per.
Torrance of its lawful orders, or contumacously
refuses to obey any of its lawful orders-may prop
erly be punished for a contempt, no one ever
doubted. Yet it is not every disobedience to an
order ofa court which can Or ought to be punished
in this arbitrary manner 1t ought never to be
resorted to in a case where the law has provided
another remedy. In a suit between John Smith
and Thomas Brown, the judgement of the Court
orders Rr0Xyp n Smith tho nfo hon
sand dollars. Yet upon Browns refusal TO comply
with this ORDER no one ever dreamed that he could
be imprisoned for contempt for ten days at a time
from time 10 time, until he obeyed. The proper
remedy exists in execution against his property
So in a suit of George Jones against James Thomp-
son, the Court may decide that the property in the
possession of Thompson really belongs to Jones,
and direct the former to deliver it up the latter
yet lor MS refusal 10 do attachment for con-
tempt, and consequent Imprisonment, would follow
The resort would be to a writ of distringas There
are some orders of Court which it is material to
the efficiency fnot to the existence of the tribunal,
should be obeyed on the spot but there are others
which may be given, in which the law presumes
that the Judge may err and has granted delay for
consideration, and Inc right of appeal-and before
Judge proceeds to the exercise of the high prerog
alive OF Furnishing summarily for disobedence
there should be no reasonable doubt that the order
is not one of the latte, kind
Judged by these rules, it seems to us that the
Judge of the District Court was in error in this
proceeding against the Clerk. certain sum of
money was in the hands of the Clerk This money.
or portions of it, had been sequestered in his
hands by several wrs. A certain sum had
also been seized by execution, issued in the suit
of McHenry Us. Stewart ct al The question that
first occurs is, what rights did the seizure of
IcHenry give him, and what liabilities did it |
impose upon the clerk The seizure was made in |
orm and substance under the act of 1882 giving |
o plaintiffs the right to seize, under execution, |
property, credits, etc. of their Debtors in the hands
f third persons it, according to tile terms of that
iw, made Rousseau a garnshee in the case of |
lcienry Us. Stewart, liable for nothing until inter-
ogatorles had been served on him, and Judgment
ntered against him in due form; from which
ldgment, the sum being three hundred dol
irs, he had the right to appeal. The proceeding
execution and punishment was the only one
'hlch the law gave McHenry the plaintiff for the
objection of his debt, and from the final decree in
lch proceeding Rousseau had the right of appeal.
nd all the legal delays attending its exercise This
ase Is, therefore, marked by all those peculiar cir
lmstances which ought to. and do, preclude a
ourt from resortlng to the power of furnishing for
0ntempt-a power so liable to be abused, and the
ouse OF which will, sooner than anything else bring
lie administration ofthe law into disrepue Nor does
make any difference that Rousseau is the clerk
the Court and that the money was deposited in
s hands to be used in evidence against the nor
ms accused of stealing it. 1t was not, as has been
pppStpd in the custoIv nftb o |
e control of the Judge. The laws of this State
} not recognize courts custodians of money or
her property Besides the plaintiff, N!cHenry.
d not pretend to consider the money in possession
the Court had he done so, he must have served
execution on the Judge as the principal person :
imposing the tribunal, and not upon the clerk =
rtainly not upon Rousseau by name.
For these reasons we think that the Judge erred [
the course which he pursued, and we believe Ii
at he VIII think SO himself when he reflects v
lmy upon the subject. But we cannot see anv
lson to attribute TO him any thing but error of
igment, followed b. somewhat too rash execu- IA
n. The evil is not irreparable he can retrace
steps without dishonor, and pursue now the
lrse which would have been proper in the first 10
tance. AT all events, whether right or wrong, IN
public interest requires that his Court should he
'ned and proceed with the transa elton of its bust
IS. The law directs the Attorney General to Or
ng all prosecutions in that Court, and hundreds X
cases are now untried, and others are being daily -
led to the number. The criminal law of the s.
tie must be enforced, or there is no security for a
and property in it and the principal Criminal
Irt cannot be closed because The Judge does not n
or choose to act with his clerk Indeed had y
Rousseau continued in prison, it would have
n no reason why the sessions of the Court should =,
Interrupted, any more than such result would ~
re followed his confinement to sick chamber;
me and the other case he is absent, and in both
duties OF the office may be discharged by his
ally authorized and sworn deputies L,
.oUIsIANA HIsTRIoNIC AssoctATIoN.-We are
to see that the society above named, has
ry approached contamination of its objects, so pre-
as the erection of theatre is concerned With pre-
most untlrlng and interchangeable perseverance. wo
members have proceeded thus far and as there 81