New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1853-07-02
Local Intelligence.

| ~NN- -ANS~~AS SAASs'
| FIFTH DISTRICT CorRr-Hdge .4ugustia-
laliity Of FroV PoIistotYTj+ Transer not Z, b, nm
IrGHytIel-Ghe case Of the Police jury of East BATON
| Rouge against john McDonosh claiming the Of $3.50
Iur Iht Quilting leyet IN the .auds Of plaintiff
cii"d in this court yesterday The suit was instituted
september p s+d Iaintrus alleged in their petition
That the dtrntaut being thu at cartan tract Of
land situated in the Parish Of East Baton Rouge in tho
year lS4O failed and ne ectei thereon ley4e
required by law ard by the police regulations where
| SAID ltvee to be adjudcated to + Newcomb ii .
lowest bidder ut the price OF $3.50 The Iusnrtor OF
Roads and l,veeS tr1 70 notify tie proprietor u re-
CURED by the act Of ls29 The work done necessary
tor the protection Of the land Of the defendant and OF the
Ae"comb having ascertane1 that the Inspector Of Roads
and leNee' Of the parish had failed notify absent
proprietor in the ured by the act Of 1929 con
eetnnS roads and eYtes claimed the amount OF the adj
utilization from tho Police jury and obtained against
taem Judgment which was affirmed appeal aud was
| Afterwards satisfied
This action instituted the intiuatiun Of the SUI
preme Court IN that case that the absent proprietor
| liable On gtHJilIa Hisfut tie amount he had been
benefited by the work done The defendant answered
by general denial and pleaded appeal the rrpsoriI
ton three years and contendt that as Ike
Plaintiffs subrogued the rights ct Newcoulb they
were uJrci 10 TN same Exceptions which might have
| been urged against him
u w- hulI in the ruer case that TIE adiuiis,tiau
wts Illegal from the want Of proper uuce to McD8nogh
aud tie notice required by the ef ls-I, not shown in
! ' case u have been given The Supreme Gould held
mat as the fantliis were plaintiffs only IN num~-the
taxpayer. Of the parish being tine uurtip- in interest
luAt 'd7 case shou" By mdndei iOr further sr1
| n ~ 81 t.;.4,..s.,
tin gave th4 following reasons Us
This case was reuan4-d in Nav I-44 hv tbp Sfrstr,
Court The plaintiffs not having mad their case
that high tribunal in i audabc shirt Of
for the Ia PAYERS Of Baton Rouge sent b,L b e In
order enable the plaintiffs to shGg-
That the drfudautwas liable upon a .t4,ga 5,.r,t
and that he had been benefited by the ,gork and
70 enable the plaintiffs to coutrovert tho ptea Of r.
scrption
me teSlm0ny taken in Nay 1851 Alfred Dupantier
aaa yn = NlraP+irF es%olnaf, beyond cavil the
49, 49, lSout n''l y il't "gtA uohs BY order o. the
s,t le "a = -, tuste anu "A Aaii arpents
- - - - - "l- SUI alteAes along the
-. - - - . Dn.3H FtNPet'yt measuring iouI teen
IL ~ 4y t'Agu a. AlrlI ~ Of Henry
WI ~ =, - ,la'es shAt me %ofd
W Eu'iny necessary lAr Ihs preservation OF d.
rtiI. rr IN ns a Sot.t tns n3J,ernt pro
tha a.. ya of no n,flIi. Tho i,,,E - =, =.
iaS, If 81 lpya, AID norton ~ II HI fii y ~ ~
river Philip icEpy tesips that he vorB was abeI,e
necessary
There can o. ne question that tlI. defendant Ia Nv
benefited BY tits work by The preservation his land
RON lHuh4at'oa. BY Tie tte4tlcs q communication
Nt1u "'ls ". 50,i 10y me EnFE On The road and 70
am h5 "t w, lE'lt'HJh WINCH be found therein
hdHtf 3saaH AiH on ne P9it N me y1re pot,fftl mr.
js ~ g'.s a.9, q it,l5lt kF+s
The I'LL. If I,rp..ri,,rf.n ~ ~; ten.ta,
atIfy q tbis dase II. pj,s if J p W. no.
h. ,5J,.J - 49,. t5J ~ tt9' I''t7' tI's"
4, Vi, ,i,, E, f5, ,aoj 4 l y, 9s5' ~ t'"'rl
placed t6eIn.aIyg. baf re- M Is f,rt ~ b ~ my
agg C5t,Irtt, uu.Tt,lan Ia 'i ~ ~. 'i'tIr q
fit Of defendant acting in the exercise Of their man
late Tor the benefit and protection Of their constituents
ms action can not be prescribed by the lapse Of ten
years which period OF time had not expired when notice
81 TN. prosecution was iirst served on the dfenlnt 1t
is therefore ordered sdiuiged and decrecd that plaintiffs