New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-12-18
THE COURTS.
Rishth District Court.


State of Louisiana ex rel F. L. Jewell, \
vs. the State Auditor.-Judge Dibble yes
tertiay rendered the following decision
The relatOr asks for the writ of mandamus
against the State Auditor to compel him to
issue a duplicate warrant upon the State
Treasurer for the cum OF $500. Affidavit
is made that relator was owner and posses
sor of said warrant, issued to him June 3,
1869, but which has been lost, stolen or mis-
laid, wherefore he seeks to replace it in du-
plicate.
There is no statute that makes it the
duty Of the Auditor to issue duplicate war
rants. 1t has never been the custom of the
office, but, on the contrary, the courts have
sustained officers in refusing to issue more
than one warrant Of the same tenor.
Therefore, mandamus will not lie. These
instruments have from usage come to be
considered in the nature Of negotiable
paper, transferable by delivery when in-
dorsed in blank.
If in this instance the original has passed
into the hands of an innocent third person,
it would be manifestly unjust for the State
to meet his demand at the treasury that he
can not be paid, because duplicate war
rant has been issued by the Auditor and
taken up by the Treasurer. The relator
must seek relief, as others have had to do,
at the hands Of the Legislature. Let the per-
emptory writ be refused.
Divorce Granted.
Judge Dibble granted divorce in the
suit OF Gustave Martinelle VS.. his WIZ Hor-
tense Huet, in which adultery was the
| charge preferred against the woman.
Suit Against an Insurance Company.
Mr.. John A. Turnell, tutor of the Blakely
| minor children, has brought suit against
| the KnickerbOcker Life Insurance Company
| for 5000, the alleged amount of a policy Of
life insurance issued by the company,
| through their agent in this city, to James
q. BIakeley, in March, 1869, death ensuing
| excuses made by the company to the de-
mand for payment, are not founded in
reason or jus1ice.
Suit Against the State.
The old Board Of Assessors of the State
| have brought suit, in the Eighth District
| Court, to compel the Auditor to issue war
rants in their favor for some $780, amount
| alleged to be due upon an assessment made
in 1863, in the case of some special tax.
The State Auditor takes the position that
the accounts Of the assessors have been
settled and closed, and can not be reOpened.
PostpOnenent of the Mcl;intv Injunction
| Suit.'
The rule nisi granted by Judge Dibble
upon the petition of John McGinty, pray
| ing for an injunction against Governor
| WarmOth, thesPresident of the Citizens
Bank and thesPresident of the Board Of
Public Works, to restrain them from allow
ing certain bonds OF the $3,000,000 appro-
! priatiOn for levees to be used until his
claim Of S7l 900 in warrants is paid, which
was to have been argued yesterday, was
continued over until Wednesday next.
John Kirwin VS.. city of New Orleans
| In this case the judgment is for Sl7S5 for
| repairs done by plaintiff to the engine-hOuse
OF No. l3.
Jacob Strauss vs. Southern Bank.-In this
case plaintiff obtained judgment against
| the defendants, commanding them to bal
ance the handbook Of the plaintiff, and to
| omit from the balance the check known as
| the "Wicklitfe check" for about $500.
From this Judgment defendants applied for
| an appeal, which Judge Emerson, then pre-
siding, refused. A mandamus to the Su-
preme Court was applied for and granted.
! The appeal was yesterday allowed by Judge
Dibble, under an order from the Supreme
| Court.
H. Sofford VS.. T. L. Maxwell-This is an
! application for an injunction restraining
Sheriff Maxwell from selling certain prop
| erty under q feri facias. Injunction made
perpetual.
Seventh District Court.
| Mccarthy and wife VS.. Spalding g. Bid
well.-The plaintiffs agreed in September.
| 1866, to give entertainments, to be paid
|
| a town, defendants to take one-third Of the
receipts on benefit night, it being cOntem-
plated that they would have one benefit a
| month, and that hand-bill weod cuts would
be finally turned over to the plaintiffs.
After faithful performance Of seven
months on both sides, defendants undertook
| to hire out the plaintiffs to the keeper of a
saloon at lO7 St. Charles street, known as
the Oxford. Plaintiffs refusing to perform,
| the defendants declined their services.
The contract provided penalty of $1,000
for breach of performance.
| Held that the Oxford was place of enter
tainment at which no respectable man
would enter, much less allow his family.
! That the defendants had no right to hire
out Mccarthy and his wife, especially on
the same night they were compelled to ap-
pear at the Academy. The exaction was
| eXtortiOnate. The law presumes the en-
| gagement made was not for services which
should be low, immoral and disreputable.
As the contract was partly performed,
though other circumstances are to be con-
| sidered, Judgments rendered against q. X.
| Spalding and David Bidwell, IN solidos for
$3l2l, with interest and possession Of the
| wood cuts.
Sixth District Court.
Heron vs.. Harris-In this case an excep-
| ton was taken yesterday to the jurisdiction
| of the court by counsel for United States
| Senator, Harris, in suit brought by Cen
eral Heron, ex-United States Marshal for
| the District of Louisiana, for certain sums,
borrowed money, amounting in the aggre-
| gate to some $500, alleged to have been
| loaned, to be used in etfecting the election
of the said Senator to his seat in Congress.
| The exception is, that Senator Harris is not
a resident. Of the parish Of Orleans, but Of
the parish of Concordia.
Among the witnesses before tins court was
Mr.. Packard, the present United States
| Marshal.
In this court was fixed also the case of
Arthur Hart VS.. the city OF New Orleans, in
which he claims some $4,000, as crier's fees,
| in some four thousand tax suits, instituted
| by the city against delinquent taxpayers.
| A Correction.
| In our report OF the decision of Judge
| Dibble in the lettery case yesterday, we
| made him say: 'The State might have
| passed laws prohibiting the sale of lottery
| tickets, and the Supreme Court of the United
| States would boldly set the law aside as con-
| hicting with the fourteenth amendment"
| What Judge Dibble wrote was: "The SUI
| preme Court would hardly set the law
aside" etc. The idea conveyed is quite
| different.
Philadelphia Press ON Governor War.
| moth.
IL r. ~. N.Y. A.