New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-07-21

the city could only undertake to pay cash
for one-half of March, or since the adoption
of the city charter.
Guiding the latter half OF March, was
$500, 900. To have attempted their pay
ment in cash would have made the present
government as hopelessly nonpaying and
bankrupt as its predecessors. Under the
circumstances, believing the pay rolls to
come sufficiently within the term "certif-
Gates of Indebtedness" proceeded to pre-
pare the pay roll accounts to place them upon
the floating debt statement. Although they
were not registered bill, y technically,
held that the originals were already in the
office, and were a registry of themselves.
Besides, the holders or payers could not
present their accounts for registry, holding
no transferable evidences of debt-the ac-
counts being altogether in the hands Of the
city. True, in some cases, certificates were
given Of the fact of their being on the pay
roll, but there was no means of transferring,
except by order and notice to the city.
advertised for transferees to present their
orders, and was met by the presentation Of
mass.
On the other hand, some Of the holders
Of undisputed floating debt claims, such as
city notes, registered bills and warrants,
insisted that pay rolls could not be SO
placed, and threatened litigation. The
circumstances on the one hand, and the
demands on the other that the rolls should
be SO placed, made it necessary that
judicial decision should be had. otherwise
the city would be involved in litigation. l
informed interested parties to that erect:
A mandamus was taken, on the trial OF
which, believing it the duty of defendant
in mandamus to present all legal objections
that could be urged by third parties inter
ested, l did So but the court promptly
decided the exclusion Of the pay rolls un-
constitutional. 1t seems that the very
ordinance creating the registered bills, and
giving them interest, provided that pay
The insertion of registered certificates, and
exclusion of pay rolls by the Legislature,
was violation, therefore, of vested right.
It gave a preference on the only tangible
assets within reach of the present city gov
eminent to pay back debts, the proceeds of
the three million bonds, and this preference
was violative Of ordinances of the city
having the force Of a contract.
The transfers filed showed great irregu-
larities-sOme not naming the month, some
emitting the roll, many covering several
mOnths-here and there were fOrgeries, and
salaries were sold twice in not a few cases.
No proof or voucher Of signatures was in
any case presented. The number of trans
ferred accounts is probably four thousand,
out Of about ten thousand pay roll accounts
before me. The adjustment of these ac-
counts; to identify and secure the proper
parties, and shield the city from response
bility or loss, has been task of a magni-
tude seldom entailed upon any Office. All
the untransferred pay roll accounts have
been sent into the Bank of New Orleans,
which is issuing certificates as rapidly as pos
sible. All the transferred are in readiness,
but am exacting bond and security OF all
trqnsferees who do not bring forward posi-
tive proof of the signatures they hold.
Till the transfers were all classified and
noted. it was impossible to know the untrans-
ferring were who still hold their accounts.
No preference between the transferred and
untransferred has been shown. except as
made necessary by the inherent nature OF
the former, which require proctor security,
involving the delay necessary. The city
may in a few days congratulate itself that
every pay roll creditor is in possession OF a
tangible and easily transferable evidence OF
debt, involving no great loss ii 1t has to be
disposed of before payment out OF the float
ing debt proceeds.
THE FLOATING DEBT.
The duty imposed upon me by the Conn-
ell of auditing the floating debt, has been
one Of great labor. l have had to employ
the best talent to aid me. Every bill has
passed showing the shadow of legal de
feet or irregularity, without submitting the
question to the Mayor and Administrator OF
Finance, whose approval of my statement
was necessary; and in glaring cases to the
whole Council. This has been the case even
where equities have been plainly on the
S'>'~ ' ALFRED SHAW,
Administrator Public Accounts.
Reports from City Officers.
The City Attorney presented the follow
ing report:
NEW ORLEANS, July Is, 1870.
To the Honorable c9, the Mayor and Members of thu
GENTLEMEN-Relative to the resolution
| passed by your honorable body. in reference
| to the action ''Of a former Common Council
in granting twenty.fiv per cent increase
upon the contract price of the eity's portion
| Of the paving of Rampant street. from
| Canal to Esplanade," have the honor t.
| report:
i. At the time the resolution under
consideration was adopted by the Common
Council. not only public interests. but thu
law required i" that all public works
materials, or supplies susceptible O
being put under contract, the costs thereo
exceeding five hundred dollars, should b'
sold by the Controller at public auction t.
the lowest bidder, he giving adequate sc
curity" Revised Statutes, page 32); ant
that statutory provision of the law, then an,
| still in full force, was practically violated
by the passage Of the resolution OF the OLD
| Council.
2. By section SO of the act of the Legisla
ture above referred to, found on page 81
Revised Statutes, it is provided that thu
Common Council shall not have the powe
| to release any contractor from strict com
pliance with the conditions of his contract
except as to an extension of time, and tina
necessary restraint imposed by the law
maker upon the Common Council OF New
Orleans. consider as disregarded in thu
adoption of resolution No. 1467. new series
3. The increase of twenty-five per cen
upon the city's portion OF the contrac
price for paving Ramyart street, from
Canal to Esplanade, amounting, l am III
formed to sum not less than twenty-five
thousand dollars, is nothing more nor less
| than gratuitOus donation of that amOun
| to the contractors, and l am at loss t.
| conceive by virtue of what authority thu
late Common Council of New Orleans, whose
duty was purely administrative, could ope1
the door to the city treasury, and, withou
adequate consideration, dispose OF thu
public funds.
The resolution awarding the twenty-five
per cent increase, is, in my opinion, invalid
| and should not receive the favorable con
sideration of YOUR honorable body.
| have not been furnished by the Council
| with any fact relating to certain evidences
of Indebtedness of the city of New Or
leans. referred to in the resolution submit
ted by the Council to this office, and am
therefore, compelled to express my opinion
upon the limited and only statement
facts which have been able to obtain.
The evidences of Indebtedness referre'
to were certificates issued to cover TN