New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-10-23
THE WEEKLY REPUBLICAN
THE COURTS.

Judge Duvigneaud and Judge Theard
were the only two judges who appeared
upon the benches in the civil courts yester-
day The former was engaged during
most of the forenoon in the naturalization
business, which is being pushed forward
with considerable activity in this quarter.
Judge Theard was listening patiently to a
ease of contempt, in which a certain party
has refused to pay over moneys in his pos
session upon an order OF court. Messrs.
Thsot and Buddecke & Upton were the
counsel opposed to each other in this case.
The audience consisted of Colonel Crane,
who sat deeply immersed in a copy of one
Of the morning journals, his special friend
Colonel Wagner, the polite and able minute
clerk, the sedate-loOking deputy sheriff,
who was never known to be guilty of a
smile, and q nervous looking darkey who
had entire possession Of the lobby. Alto
gether the scene was not lively one, and
we left disgusted early in the action.
Sixth District Court.
In this court Judge beaumont recently
rendered the following written opinion ::
."After careful examination of the authori-
ties referred to in this case by counsel, the
court comes to the following conclusion ::
That it has no Jurisdiction in cases of adj
miralty and maritime Jurisdiction, when the
proceedings commenced by said suit are pro-
ceedings il, rem; that is, a suit in which the
vessel or thing is proceeded against is i'm
pleaded, is seized itself as the defendant
and the defendant alone and any State law
authorizing the court to act in this manner
would be disregarded as unconstitutional
and void.
But otherwise, it is when the party brings
q suit against the defendants personally
. and prays that their property may be at
tached, or sequestered. or Professionally
seized during the tendency of the suit;
that proceeding is not a proceeding an rem,
and, as such, specially reserved to the suit
Ors under the saving clause of the act of
Congress of 1789-in Wallace, p. CAS-. The
Supreme Court says: When properly
brought, the suit is against the owners of
the vessel, and in States where there are at
tachment laws, the plaintiff may attach any
property not exempted from execution be-
longing to the defendant. The vessel is held
under the attachment as the property of the
defendant, and notas the offending thing,
az in the case of a proceeding IN rem.
Again in fourth Wallace, page 427.
The distinguishing and characteristic fea-
ture of such a suit lone in REM, is that the
vessel or thing proceeded against is itself
seized and implicated as the defendant. 1t
is this dominion of the suit in admiralty
over the vessel or thing itself which gives to
the title made under its DEGREES validity
against the whole world. BY the common
law process, whether of mesne attachment
or execution, property is reached only
through personal defendant. And then
only to the extent of his title. The same
doctrine, in different words, is held 6y the
Supreme Court of the United States in the
case of A. d. Hine VS.. M. Trevor, decided
in 1866. In the case of Bermin VS.. steam
ship Matanzas, referred to by the defend
ants, if this court looks only at the
decision OF the Supreme Court of the
State of Louisiana, as reported in the Nine
teenth Annual, page 387, it may be misled,
because all the facts of the case are not re-
cited in the decision; but through the cour
tesy of counsel for plaintiff, the court has
been put in possession of all the record OF
that case, and by mere examination of
the petition in the case, it discovers that
it is a proceeding in rem. The ship is i'm
pleaded, is sequestered, is made the party
defendant, and is condemned. In the case
at bar, apersonal Judgment only is asked
against the defendant and the ship is no.
wise mentioned, except as the property of
the defendant and for the purpose OF exc
cution with preference.
1t is, therefore, ordered that the rul
taken in this case be dismissed.
Eighth District Court.
In the Eighth District Court we noticed
that Messrs. Semmes and Thomas, repre-
senting Mr. Joseph Herdandez in the matter
of the claims involved in the Coleman con-
tract certificates, have filed supplemental
petition, praying the court to strike out
more, If not all of the positions; assumed
by the City Attorney, Mr.. Lacey, wherein
he attempts to set up certain irregularities
and fraud in the mode of the issue of said
certificates.
The position assumed by relator, as we
understand, is abandoned. He contends
that he bought the certificates, which have
all the marks of genuineness, in good faith,
in the open market and that he can not,
even should there have been Irregularities
in the city government which he is willing
to admit, be held liable for them, as he was
in no way party to them. He contends,
also, we understand, through his counsel,
that the Legislature was fully cognizant OF
all of these Irregularities of the city govern
ment at the time the bill was passed to alb
sOrb the floating debt.
AS this question involves no little amount
Of money in the aggregate, although in this
particular case only about four thousand
dollars are involved, the case, when argued
on Tuesday next before Judge Dibble, upon
the point to compel the Administrators to
place the amount upon the tableau of the
floating debt, will doubtless attract some