The New Orleans crescent. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1866-1869, 1869-03-30
THE DRAINAGE QUESTION AGAIN.

The DRAINAGE QUESTION AGAIN.
If the ex-drainage commissioners continu,
to write cards they will soon lose all tn,
sympathy that, by the persistent misrepresen
tations of their supporters, they have beer
able to enlist These gentlemen seem to have
very little conception of the force of words
and no conception of the force of facts
They rush into the fray with all the temerity
of men who suppose that they have no antag-
onists to encounter, and seem to be so little
skilled in the use of the weapons which they
adopt that they cannot keep them out of the
hands of their adversaries 1t was a very
good piece of advice-that which was given
TO an ambitious Roman cobbler-to stick to
his last. It does not follow that even then he
would have produced good shoes; but at
least he would not have made himself ridicu-
lous. The ex-drainage commissioners would
have done well to recur to this judicious coun-
sci, by sticking. for the time being, to the
drainage business. They do not succeed
very well, even at that, but they could not
make so fiat failure as when they write
cards, and have the temerity to publish them.
On Sunday last these gentlemen published a
card, replying, or attempting to reply, to an
article which appeared in the CRESCENT of
Saturday, and in that card they say that the
article referred to contains "not single as
sertion that is correct in relation to the
injunction which prohibits the commissioners
from drainage"
To prove the correctness of their own as
sertion they introduce what they call evidence
to show that the CRESCENT erred in saying
that notice of injunction had not been served
on them, and then proceed to relate the cir
cumstances connected with the issuing of the
injunction, which, as far as the commissioners
recite them, corroborate precisely what the
CRESCENT said. The article was written to
show that the commissioners were response
BILE for the cessation of drainage operations in
the second district, for the reason that the
injunction had been dissolved SO far as it ap-
piled to that work. Of course if this state
ment is correct, and thus far the commits
sioners agree with the CRESCENT, it was a
matter Of no consequence whether notice of
the injunction had been served or not. But
the commissioners repeat the story about the
bond which the court required and con-
cluded by saying: ''That portion of the
second draining district above Toledano street
was thoroughly and effectually drained before
the injunction was issued; and as soon as the
Injunction is removed Internationally the
work of drainage will be promptly commenced.
All the inhabitants of that section can testify |
b the effectiveness of the drainage two weeks |
ago. and would be so now were this injunction |
not in the way"
Now, we might ask why, where the safety |
Of property is concerned, these gentlemen,
who profess so tender regard for the inter- |
ests of their fellow-citizens, should refuse to |
conform to an ordinary legal requirement. |
Why they should assume that they ought
TO be permitted to snap their official
fingers in the face of the court and the
law? why they should demand exemption
rom legal accountability, before consenting
% do the work which they say it is their duty |
o do, and which they declare to be SO
,ecessary2 But it is not requisite that we
'hould insist on asking these inconvenient
md embarrassing questions. The fact is that
hey were Immediately released from the re-
Iuirement to give bond; that they obtained
he exemption which they demanded; that, as
10 the Fourteenth street drainage machine
he only machine operated by the commits
injunction was Internationally
removed, and that the injunction does not
Itand in the way.
II, therefore, the commissioners refuse to
70 on with the drainage of the second dis
'rict. it is simply because they do not want to
Drain and if they do not want to drain, it is
because. they are attempting to shift to others
he responsibility which rests on them. 1t
may be said in their behalf, that the injunc-
ion restraining them from collecting funds
till stands in their way. They did, indeed.
intimate this more or less directly, a few days
lgo, but they abstain from insisting on it in
heir last card, since the CRESCENT directed
attention to the fact that they ought to
nave enough money on hand to run the Four
zenith street machine. II this supposition is
they have no funds-let them
ny 90, and we have no doubt that they win
be permitted to collect enough for this pur-
pose.