The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1849-06-01

|
seized, which were restored to the defendants on
their giving bond, with Morrison and Deacon as
securities, in the penal sum of twenty five hundred
dollars. The bond is in the USUAL form, except
that it contains the additional clause that the de-
| PENDANTS (Doane and Bosserl shall satisfy such
judgment as may be rendered in the suit then this
| obligation 10 be void, else to remain in full
| force"
In that suit plaintiffs had Judgment against
Doane and BOsser, for $763 SO, with interest and
costs, with privilege on the property sequestered.
Tn j. ia. being returned nuila bona, they ruled
the securities into court, TO show cause why judg-
ment should not be rendered against them, for the
amount of the plaintiffs judgment. The lower
court rendered judgment against them accordingly.
but that Judgment was reversed on appeal, the
Supreme Court deciding that plaintiffs remedy
was by a direct action, and that the proceeding
by rule, in that case, was not authorized by law.
They have now brought the present direct action,
claiming 1863 80, with interests and costs, from
the sureties
The lower court rendered Judgment against the
securities, Morrison and Deacon, for the amount of
the prior judgment which plaintiffs had recovered
against Doane and Bossier. Defendants have ap-
pealed.
twas held by the Supreme Court, that although
the terms of the bond authorize such decree, yet
the bond must be construed with reference to the
law under which it was given. and that the addi-
tlonal condition inserted by the Sheriff. is not bind
ing upon the suretes After quoting art. 279 C. P.
the Court say The legal intent of the instrument
being to secure the presentation of the property TO
be applied towards the satisfaction of the plaintiffs
privilege when definitely adjudged, and the penalty
OF the bond being inserted to secure the perform
ance of that act, upon breach of the condition. the
question is qtdntum ddninifcdtus The injury sus-
tanned by the plaintiffs is the value of the seqnes-
tered property, which, if it had been presented,
would have been applied to the payment of the
plaintiffs claim. A judgment resting upon the
mere standard of the amour! of the plaintiffs claim,
without reference to the value of the property Sc
questered, is therefore erroneous. As we have no
evidence of the value of the properly sequestered,
the suit must be dismissed" Judgment below re-
versed, and plaintiffs petition dismissed, as in case
OF non.suit, with costs in both Courts.
Appeal from the Fifth District Court Of New Orleans.
EUsTIs, c. ]. This is branch of the once ceIe-
brated controversy in relation to the British ship
Aldebaron, which made some noise in this city
three Or four years ago. Plaintiff was the captain
of the vessel, and claims from defendant $4,000
damages for removing him from the command of
the ship, deprvng him of articles of personal
property slandering and calumnjaliDg him. impair
ing his standing a shipnasler, and his character
as man, etc. The lower Judge, supposing many
of the matters at issue had been decided by the SUI
preme Court in the case of Barker Us. York, 3Ann.,
excluded much of the evidence offered by plaintiff,
and he took bills of exception. Plaintiff appealed.
The Supreme Court held that their learned brother
OF the District Court had fallen into an error and
remanded the case for trial, reversing the
judgment below, which was for defendant, on the
verdict of the jury.
RoDEkBURG e. WATTS u.s. GEORGE LYNCH.
Appeal from the Fourth District Court of Ncp Or
leans. .SLIDELL, j.. Judgment in favor of de-
tendant affirmed.
JACOB SCHoCKLER Us. ANTHONY BARRETT.
Appeal from the Fifth District Court Of Ne,uO Orleans
SLIDELL, j.. Judgment reversed, and case re-
manded for new trial. -
ESTATE OF VICTOR LAGLEIsE Us HEIRS OF Ma
THANIEL CHAMBERLIN. Appeal from the Third
District Court Of Jefferson .SLIDELL, j.. .Judg.
ment reversed, and case remanded, the plaintiff
and appellee to pay the costs of appeal
OF Mr.. Lunt, the recently appointed U. S. Dis
trict Attorney for Massachusetts, is the author of
pungent reply to Campbel's Unknown bitter
lines addressed TO the flag of the United States |
The following is Mr.. Campbell's savage epig ram:
United States your banner
Two embiems one OF fame;
Alas the other that it bears
Reminds us OF your shame
The white mans liberty in types
Stand. blazoned by stars
But what's the meaning of your stripes :!
They mean your negroes scars"
And this is Mr.. Lunt's retort:
England a, a., whence e. came each glowing nue..
The streaming red. the deeper blue,
Crossed with the moonbeam's peary whte2
The blood and bruise-tie blue and red
Let Asla's groanng millions speak
The Uhite-it tells the color fled
From starving Erin's pald cheek ~
IT Ap oft