New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-12-08
THE COURTS.


Eighth District COurt-Thc Hunsaker Ha.
| beas Corpus Case.
| In the case of D. S. Hunsakcr, applying
for writ OF habeas corpus, Judge Dibble
| yesterday decided that he could not dis
charge the prisoner. He had come to this
conclusion reluctantly, but such was the
law. As to the objection that Judge Marks
had no right to issue the writ of arrest be-
| cause his successor as Parish Judge had
been elected he was still Parish Judge until
| his successor (Dr. Smith) should bc quail
| fed. With regard to the exception that
O'Maher, Deputy Sheriff of Ascension,
| could not execute writ of arrest in the
| parish Of Orleans, that ground was unten-
| able, as criminal process may be executed
! anywhere in the State.
| He assumed the position that it was not
| necessary that the particular crime charged
| should be set forth at length in the warrant.
| The warrant itself was evidence that the
! Judge who had issued it had examined the
affidavit upon which it was based, and was
satisfied with the same.
The objection raised that Judge Marks
could not issue the warrant because his sue
cessOr had been declared elected by the
board OF returning officers, and because he
had received his commission, would not
hold, because the law provided that an Off
| Ger should hold over until his successor has
at the point where said office is located.
In this case it had been shown that Smith
was in New Orleans, and had not been up
to take his office in Ascension at the date
when the warrant for the arrest OF Hun
saker was issued by Marks
The Judge also ruled that the objection
| urged that the Sheriff of Ascension could
not make service in the parish Of Orleans,
would not hold under the law. A sheriff of
QJ,ay ha 10 q
in any parish of the State.
Judge Dibble, in closing. said that the
accused must be delivered over to the
custody OF Deputy Sheriff OMaher, and
that he must refuse the writ. He had
come to this conclusion reluctantly, be-
cause the whole matter of the arrest was
wrapped, it seemed to him, in mystery.
1t seemed rather strange to the court that
in these outlaying parishes, where the COM
mission of capital Offenses were of frequent
occurrence, and no parties arrested or trials
had, that SO much parade would be made
| in dcspatching officers OF the law all over
the State to arrest IL man who was charged
with having torn up a registration paper.
Mr.. j. \. Brickel attorney for the defend
ants, then asked that Sheriff Masicot be
required to produce into court the body of
Hunsaker.
1t was here announced that he was ont
upon $500 bail.
Well. said Mr.. Brickel. let his bondsmen
| produce him, or let the bond be declared
forfeited-although, continued this attorney,
suppose, as usual, the bond lis ef no ac-
count.
Judge Dibble remarked that BECAUSE a
bond had been given it did not follow that
it was not good: the presumption was that
it was good bond.
Mf. Brickel replied that he had never
known bond of this character to be worth
anything
1t was here announced by the clerk that
the security was one of the reporters of the
New Orleans REPUBLICAN. Shortly after
ward the security was produced in court by
the Deputy Sheriff, and being presented to
the court, asked until tomorrow morning
to produce the accused. which request was
granted, the bond in the meantime to hold
good.
Shortly before the decision of Judge Dib-
ble was rendered, the accused was at the
courthouse. but left just before the opening
Of the cOurt.
The sherifrs Office Difficulty.
The matter Of Sauyinet VS.. Maxwell came
up for trial.
Mr.. Dick, chief deputy of Mr.. Maxwell. on
the stand, said he was making every otfort
to deliver over to the incoming Sheriff the
property OF the Office, and found it impossi-
bic to do so until an inventory had been
made.
Judge Dibble remarked that Mr.. Maxwell
should turn over all the effects anu money
belonging to the office.
Mr.. Alfred Phillips said there was no III
tention to commit a contempt of the author
ity of the court.
Mr.. Dick, in continuation. said that he
did not know where the money of the ofiice
was. There is money in bank, deposited
on account of litigants, but he did not
know how much. He took from the Sher
IFS Office only such papers as were neces-
sary to complete the unfinished business
He had delivered over to Mr.. Sauvinet more
than $500, 600 worth of property belonging
to the Sherit17s Office. He thought he had
not had time to deliver the money belong
ing to the different liticants.
He had devoted all his time to carrying
ont the order of the court He thought the
fee dOckets he had taken awaywere not
public records. If the incoming Sheriff
had shown a disposition to have the bus-
ness settled, it might have been done long
ago.
Mr..Wurzburger, on the stand, said: He
was long time Deputy Sheriff. 1t was
the custom OF the outgoing Sleritfs to re-
tain The papers for the purpose of settling
up the business The money was retained
by the outgoing Sheriffs for the purpose of
settling up. Each case had to he settled
separately. Turning over the effects in
bulk, still makes the outgoing Sheriff re-
sponsible.
Mr.. w. L. Murphy on the stand-Was
Deputy Sheriff in the parish OF Orleans
from 1884 to lS4s. The custom was for the
Sheriff to retain the papers for the purpose
OF settling up the business.
Judge Dlbble said that Mr.. Maxwell was
preparing list of the property. and did not
appear to be in contempt.
In conclusion he said that it seemed to
him absurd that an officer could retain pub
nc moneys aftep he lad gone ont Of Office.
Here was an order of the court. If Mr..
Maxwell showed a disposition, as it seemed
that he did, to turn over the effects, there
was 10 contempt committed. The court
should not seek to make out a contempt
unless it was clearly proven. The question
OF turning over the cash balance could be
tried upon rule
The inventory would be concluded and
then the question of contempt would come
mp. Mr.. Dick said the inventory could be
taken in fifteen minutes. The motion was