New Orleans daily crescent., 1866-06-06

NUMBER sUTY-EIGET.

j Whilst treating 0 the former important eues
Il ton Of the batture case, we have not vet had oc
casion to state, that subsequent decisions of the
supreme court Of our State seem to have settled
the doctrine that, notwithstanding any incorpora.
ton of suburban properties the acoreuons or bat
ture forming in after time may be rightfully
claimed by the immediate front proprietors, or, as
they are called, proprlstaires rigera53a--that is.
| bordering on the river. This doctrine, which at
first sight might seem very right and legal, vet in
our humble estimation should undergo some varia-
tion with regard to such property as is situated
within the limits Of incorporated cities, Or their
suburban adiuncts, and who have had to SUPPORT
all the expenses of maintaining the lsyee, enclo
sures, etc., necessary for the protection of the
whole communal property, and at the same time
aiding in the Of these additional grounds
or front river banks 1t is self-eVident that if no
compensation is allowed TO the incorporated cities
for their constant outlays and charges those prop.
erty owners fronting the first line towards the
river acquire by this doctrine an undue advantage
over the rest Of the real estate owners On the
other hand, it is equally true that by the dsposine
OF the batture property for erecting buildings
thereon, the first front proprietors find themselves
carried back from their position as first
in the line towards the profitable river
trade, and may well, under this consideration
claim part of the proceeds Of the sale Of these
newly acquired domains, as some indemnffcation
for their diminished local position of Importance.
Under this variable aspect, we think that an
equitable scale, between the cities as the corpora
ton, and the immediate front proprietors, ought
to have been laid down, and that by establishing
what is called an assessment the proceeds in such
cases should have been ordered to be divided be- |
tween the respective parties. As it is the front
proprietors have the sole disposal of this property
and, in consequence of this doctrine the batture |
lots above Delord street have been taken posses
sion Of, by various parties and been built thereon
as may be seen by going to those localities. With /
respect, however to the former Gra7ier batture I
ground, the covenant entered into by the several
parties still holds good, and we have thus far seen
that the newly laid out squares and lots are to be
sold for the benefit of all concerned, the heirs of
Gravier included, who ever they may be- by the
authority and under the superintendent of the
city Of New Orleans, as represented by the mayor
and city council now in office. After reviewing
This case, which, no doubt to our readers must
appear of very great importance in our State and
upon our river where the changes of the river banks
and battures are Of constant occurrence we must
now add some other considerations, which in the
course of this interesting investigation have oc-
CURED to us, and which we beg leave to suggest
for some further reflection. We stated in the
beginning of this legal inquiry about the Graviers
batture, that under the colonial French jurispru-
ience their claim could not have been sustained.
We will add now, that neither under the Spanish
laws nor even under the colonial code of the In.
dies although in some respects very favorable to
the colonists-eould claim have been set mp to
bav IL Az
he fundamental doctrine of all these Iegislations
consists in the axiom that this soil of public do.
mains belong to the monarch or sovereign. This,
indeed, is the understanding of the word sover-
9ignty. meaning the ground, the soil, the rivers,
orests, lakes-everything, above and below in the
irst instance, belongs to the king or monarch O
Now, if this same doctrine should be applied to
epublic commonwealth or a State, it would fol. q
ow that these battures might be claimed by our i
State authorities but here evidently our inrispru-
lence-ouT supreme eourt-took different view, I
md substituted the front or riparian proprietor
. the king or sovereign in monarchical States. E
rms seeming variation, according to our sense has
7 very deep meaning, most important bearing
y constitutes in fact the actual possessors or real
country. a
A@' "a oiden times weuldbe called the free n
mat Is to say the actual owners of the -
ssII,i;s ssla'ss' 90 compose the mass of our
! epuphcan soyereigns. Hence, also this other p"
uee,sion y our supreme court, that when publio
ROAD no longer Is required by public psage il e e
reyerts 70 tne domania owners or holders of The ~
vichage, These several decisions are based as Re
every one may see, upon the absolute ownersbir Il
Of real estate with regard to the former o.
of moparchcal supremacy or rights of soyereiSn W
ship and hence form a somewhat Chinese wo1ii vi
around these thus protected freeholders. Now Il
should in these times of social mutations and poB. h
teal conyulsions, the order Of society be really s.
threatened, it may be well to recur to these views
Of absolute ownership in order . couuteract the Y
very pernicious doctrine Of the Jewellers, /,