New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1853-12-29


ism, or any Of those democratic movements,
which arc to carry ne about the world, raising
np Tho = down trodden,' lead US, if not into
Aboltionism If We are to set the world free,
My should not the world retaliate upon us,and
mt our negroes free! No, no We shall have
{ to quit all that trashy stuff, that babble Of
rights which mean noting for us but our de-
struction and nothing for any body but subver-
sion and anarchy and d final military tyranny
quit ii, We Jay, and adopt if We would be either
! safs 81 respectable, . system, theory and ideas
sof Rights and Liberty more il harmony with
the reality If our own social state.
II LEGAL OPINION BROUGHT TO
LIGHT
I & The law quoth Lord Coke, g is the perfec-
ton Of Reason = which being certainly 90, and
+ Judge Cotton the perfection Of Law, how can he,
tie great Cotton, be any less than thrice the
perfection Of both Reason and Law ,reciprocally
multiplied and magnifed into each other, with
out end a.
The very strongest eyed human Reason, new
ertheleas, will occasionally wink /; the very
eurest- footed human Law will trip, at times.
must, at least once IN his life, pay his tax to err
ror, his tribute to folly; and thus it comes that
even Cotton, transcendant as he is, who from
his pie poudre which means bare-footed1 court
hath erected his pretorian sceptre to snite
down all law and reason but his, hath fallen
into mistake. Wherein it is, we will proceed
esreverently to explain. @
y Not sufficiently considering that there is a
certain majesty in darkness, certain obscurity
which best agrees with the sublime, and that
the works Of Minos, Lycurgus, Scion, Numa,
and other great legislators like himself have
bcen LETT Nnedited, and are for that probably
only the more venerated, he has committed his
late great work Of jurisprudence to writing, and
has thus not only lot himself down to the level
Of vulgar lawyers, but even exposed himself to
the proclamation Of commentators.
In another column we have done what we
can to preserve this great monument Of legal
science, and we will further do some little to
hand tdown with such slight calculations as
may enable future times somewhat to compre-
bend it.
We give, it will be perceived, the opinion ut
large. Yet for all that is in controversy, we
have to do with but 50 much Of it as relates to
the question Of the constitutionality Of the late
act for levying Railroad Taxes, and Of the ex-
tent to which the law as once ruled by the
Supreme Court, binds all inferior Judges to con-
form to such decision.
It will be recollected that originally Judge
Cotton held that he was bound to set aside the
judgments Of the Supreme Court, whenever his
conscience 50 commanded it.
This doctrine he has more wisely than hon
estly omitted, in the present statement Of what
7 was his charge to the jury.
Indeed. he does not conceal the fact that this
isno faithful version Of his charge, as originally
given, and that he has endeavored, as far as he
could, to mend it; Of which, intruth, there was
much need. 5S
It ID needless for us to enter into an argu-
ment with him who has none. The trivial
reasoning which he attempts to employ has
been all long set aside, by the Judgment Of tri-
bunals Of high resort, or is upon its face too
futile ever to have been urged in the law. In
word, it is upon his authorities alone that
Judge Cotton need he answered. For his mere
opinions are, as such, worth no body's attention
We have, then, taken up in regular order,
the authorities to which he refers; and we find,
little to our surprise, that there is not one Of
them which is not decisive against himself Not
having to-day space for all of them, we will
give at length that which is the longest, the
most comprehensive and the most in point of
them all namely, that Of Judge Porter of the
supreme Court, in the case Of Breedloye persus
Turner. We place it at foot Of Judge Cotton;
who followith here, printed with his own spell
ing, punctuation and grammar, as closely as our
copyist could transeribe him:
By Cry or NEW oaIEANs VS. Mr.. AND Mrs GaA,LuE-
The pitts have moved for new trial on the follow
FrstThat the Judgment Is erroneous in not allowing
the AsEstant Attorney OF the City Orleans the ave
per csntum claimed for collecting the amount Of Judg
ment.
the charge the Judge and the verdict
Of ths y their opinion that the Statute of
M passed Feb lth 1872 giving power to
stock Of corporations undertaking works Of internal i'm
proyemeuts and the ordinances Of Cooperation
cising sid and providing for the payment and dis
posa Of esd stock, Unconstitutional null and void
he charged that the Supreme Court Of
.na state Of Louisiana had passed upon their censtu
Of this cause did not reduce my charge to the Jury to
AZ was not requested of by either OF the
counsel eagAgsd but the whole question: brought
before IN such shape thac1 can give my opinion
upon this vsry interesting and important ease, win
checrfuy assume the responsibility give the Law
~ what conceive to DO the proper and egit
mate construetion-In this Judgment shall give the
substance q charge to the Jury and adopt as
tgoes a. the Judgment on this notion-then the first
4ueson g be determined in this is leaving out of
view ths Constitution question: the two Rail Road
gompanss recover the amount alleged be due them by
Defendann y ths present Action By referance to the
AZ e aafsa Il 1872 the Corporation Of to
supscrise LOT ths stock in majority Of the real
estate Holders Of hssoeans dectr through the Ballot
Box that thsr wish to take said Stock when this
Subscrpen dne tbs City Of Newreans receive it and
gay r.. ,I n, Testimony d WmH
Stock Aad psa to the respective Companies
week That the City in way bound for any Of tic
Subscriptions snpaidThat the City of NewOrlsaus M
no interest vhstever IN the amounts collected and paid
to said GompAniesThis suit Is brought by and In the
name Of the City Of NeEOreans the Bills made out In
favor Of tho Rsil Road Compines against Mr. and Mrs
Hrahs then under these state Of facts how City
Of Nsw0siaaas, SOD 10 judgment How can She re-
cover i ~ Individual Capacity, . claim, in
which she A intafest uhaevsr Whom she sits forth
IN tho petition that the Claim belongs to the Rail Road
Companies she does not the Agent of the Company
but sus y principle " Cooperation Of Ne~orleans