Baton Rouge tri-weekly gazette & comet. [volume] (Baton Rouge, La.) 1865-18??, 1868-03-17
"a Late dispatches state that

1 W. Late dispatches state that
! President johnson will not appear
in person at his trial before the Sen,
ate Court of Impeachment. Stan
berry had asked for forty days in
which to prepare the Presidents an
swer. This request was refused
and it was ordered that the Presi.
dent answer on the 23d inst. A
motion that the trial commence i'm.
mediately after replication, unless
the Senate granted time on cause,
was carried by strict party vote.
The Court then adjourned to the
23d and the Senate to Monday,
the 10th.
The President is represented by
Stanberry, j. j. Black, VIM. Evarts,
b. r. Curtis and Thos. A. R. Nelson.
Abiding to the inquisitorial pro-
ceedings which have been instituted
Under the guise of impeachment
against the Chief Executive of the
nation, special to the New Orleans
Picayune, dated Washington, 18th
inst, says:
To-day's extraordinary proceed
ings in the impeachment matter are
regarded as decided indication of
the ultimate conviction of the Presi-
dent. The ominious partisan spirit
which was exhibited in the discus
sion of the question of granting the
time asked for by the President,
shows to the minds of his friends a
predetermined purpose to convict
the distinguished representative and
champion of discarded constitution.
SUPREME CoURT.-The case of
the succession of J. G. Patrick was
appealed from the parish of West
Baton Rouge, on a rule to compel
the executrix to render an account of
her administration. The only cues. |
ton involved is, whether or not the |
plaintiff in the rule is a creditor of |
the succession. She bases her right
upon a Judgment in her favor against
the succession rendered by court Of
competent jurisdiction; but the ap-
pellant opposes it as invalid, of no
efect;" for the reason that the note,
the basis of the same, was used
without having been legally stamped,
and in violation of the law. The
record shows that the note was
stamped; but on the trial the plain
lift in the rule, after introducing the
Judgment objected to the introduce
ion by the defendant of the whole
'ecord Of the suit in which it was
'endered, to prove absolute nullity of
aid Judgment, on the ground that
'ollaterally the plaintiff could not 20
behind the judgment and prove facts
o annul the same. And from this
Z cord the appellant contends in this
curt that the nullity of the judg-
aent appears for want of legal cita-
ion of j. G. Patrick or notice to his
representation after his death. The
ecord, We think, was admissible as
ebutting evidence; but it shows
hat, after the cause had been con-
lnued for the purpose of making the
representation of the deceased .
arty to the suit instituted against
:. G. and J. G. Patrick, an appear 4
nee was made, and answer filed by
ounsel for the defendants, and SUBJ
equently an appeal obtained by
i'm on their behalf but not prose- j,
uted. We must presume that the
ounsel was authorized to represent,
is clients, the contrary not being
by oath. =
The judge quo did not err in re.
Using to inquire into the considera- P
on of the note in this proceeding
r the reason stated. The judgment
the court below is therefore :
firmed with costs in both COURTS
:. 0. Picayune, 18th inst. ju
DETEp NIIMEn AN lac na.raxa |