The Bossier banner. [volume] (Bellevue, Bossier Parish, La.) 1859-1952, 1869-05-29


not required by law to be is
sued by the Parish Judge; that
for such services said Clerk of
the District Court shall have
such fees as are flow or may
hereafter be provided for such
services in Doth ordinary, pro-
bate or criminal cases, or pro-
ceedings; and that the clerk of
the District Court or his depu-
ty, shall always be in. atten-.
dance on the Parish Court, and
all its terms and sittings, and
be always ready out of term
time to perform any of the ser
vices required of such clerk by
the parish judge"
This section nor any provis-
ion in it shall not apply to any
proceedings in cases of appeals
from Justices of the Peace
Courts to the Parish Courts; in
alls such cases the Parish Judge
shall be his own clerk, and is
sue all such orders and writs of
any kind pertaining thereto
and shall be entitled to all fees
resulting theTefrom, the same
that are now fixed by law for
clerks or may be hereafter so
fixed; and provided further, that
Parish Judges may perform the
ceremony of marriage, but that
all marriage licenses shall be
issued by the clerks of the Dis
trict Courts in their respective
parishes. .
The act of the 4th of Sept,
1868, No. 81, entitled an actto
organize the Parish Courts, SC,
of this State was obnoxious to
constitutional objections forthe
reason that it violated the arti-
Gle So Of the Constitution in
not giving the Parish Judge
any fees of Office, and again by
uniting two offices, that of clerk
Of the District court and clerk
of the Parish conrt-the latter
office created by this act-in
one person in violation Of arti-
Gle No. 1T. The act of 1868
above quoted, was intended tc
obviate these objections, and
we think it has done so. The
defendant, however, claims
that the act of 1869 is equally
lin violation of the article III o
the Constitution-that TO con,
cede the demands of the rela
tor would be to allow him Il
exercise two offices at once
that of clerk of the Distric
court, and clerk of the Parisl
court-but we do not conside.
this position well taken. Tn,
act of 1865 distinctly abolishe
the 4th section of the act o
1868. by which the office @
Parish clerk was created, an,
does not re-establish that office
bat abolishes it absolutely an,
assigns the clerical duties az
: : pertaining to the Parish court
to the several clerks of the Di;
trict courts. There is no lor
: ger any such Office as clerk {
: the Parish court, but by th
! ! act of 1869, additional dutie
are imposed upou the clerks
the District courts. We al
: unable to see in this, any viz
| lation Of constitutional prime
4 pies. gr
0 The defendant further claim
that under article Sc of ii
D Constitution, he has himse
=. the right to perfom any and .
i, clerical duties arising III b
II ct}ilrt, and to receive and enjo
:: the fees therefor. In suppo.
e 81 this petition, he cites Il
is case Of A. Bonauchard, Judg
q &C., vs.. CD. Hebert, clerk, 81
d i ease decidedly the Sitpren
If Court oil appeal from the Di
IS trict court Of Point Coupe
e. We have not had an opport
IF nifty Of perusing this decisio
5, and are quite ignorant. of t
q points therein decided.
Is The article 86 of the Cons
ri tuition provides that the Pari