The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1870-05-12


The dtNN ndan1s charge that the Sale was
ILLEGAL HII 4 that In the manner In which Il
was ccninctcd there was frand and they
refer p the record proceedings and tesfi-
mony u the said cause as part OF this an
swer, and the testimony 10 be taken in
further proof thereon. But while this case
was still on trial In the said court. and be-
fore the testimony of the New Orleans
Jackson and Great Northern Railroad Com
pany had been completed, the said MeComD
In the contempt Ofthe injunction that had
been procured from the court by the city
appeared at the buildings Of the said COM
pany. either voted upon ar attempted 70
vote upon she said stock as the owner there
of and had B. +. Flanders. the Mayor OF the
city, to act in conclusion and concert though
| the city had renounced the contract.
These defendants charge that neither IN
| der the original charter nor the amend
ments thereto had either the state Of Louis
| lana or the city of New Orleans the right or
power to vote with the private stockholders
in the election for directors; that no officer
| of the State or the city had the right 10 cast
| the vote at the elections, and that the acI OF
the Legislature of the 18th day of March,
| 1860 authorizing TO do so, violates the con-
stitution Of the United States as impairing
| the obligation of the contract between the
State and the city in the acts creating the
corporation and the subscription OF STOCK py
them.
/ But that if there was any color of title to
do So by an act of the General Assembly
| approved 10th March, 1869. amendat ~ OF
1 the charter of the said com pany, and accept
! ed by the corporation as part OF the same,
| by vote of three-fOurIhs OF the stocknold-
ers, including the State and the city Of New
1 Orleans, the right was released and all
power to do SO renowned.
These respondents aver that the said act
| is in full force and effect, has never been re-
pealed or set aside.
Thatft is a recognized principle that the
statutes passed by the Legislature have a
binding force and obligation upon the Exc
cutive Department, and have to be faithful-
| Iy executed, whatever their individual opin-
| ion may be.
That all courts are bound to respect them.
until their conflict with the superior law of
the constitution is deliberately ascertained
| by judicial sentence, they cannot assume an
| act TO be unconstitutional and void till jul
dicially before them so decided. But that
the said McComb has undertaken to deter
mine that the binding effect an operation of
this enactment can be superseded and des-
troyed by his Judgment both as respects the
State and the city stock, and that he, upon
an incomplete and disputed contract, can
exercise powers the Governor of the State
could not perform nor deceutly attempt to
perform if the State had kept the stock as
''set apart and irrevocably pledged for the
payment of debt that has never been paid,
and is now held by protesting creditors of
the State, who hold the bonds accompany
ing this pledge.
And the same averments apply to the
municipal authority OF the city of New
Orleans. These defendants, therefore, aver
that the allegation that the plain tiff has any
right, title, claim, to hold the office, is net
true in substance or in matter of fact; that
the Injunction awarded was improviently
awarded; that the remedy sought, to try
their title. is contrary to law ana the prac-
tice of the court; and they claim in recon-
ventiOn damages, for the Illegal vexatious,
wrongful proceedings, $500,000 and their
costs of suit, and they pray jury trial.
CAMPBELL SPoFFORD q CAMPBELL.
Attorneys for Defendants.