New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-06-23
THE COURTs.
Fifth District Court.

Fifth District Court.
Ship Island Canal Company vs.. Board o
Drainage Commissioners.-1n this case 8
rule has been taken by Messrs. Hays & New
on Moses Eastman and others, to show
cause why they should not be punished fol
contempt, in appropriating $1,000 as attor-
neys fees, for the purpose of illegally re-
tanning themselves in Office. The fees to be
paid to the attorneys are stated to be as fol-
lows: Roselius & Phillips $1,000, Alexander
Walker $500, and ]. Q. A. Fellows $500.
The rule is fixed for trial this morning.
Eighth District Court.
George A. Sheridan vs.. F. C. Mahan.-In
this case the plaintiff claimed the Office OF
State Tax Collector for the First District of
New Orleans, by virtue Of his appointment
incumbent, claimed by virtue of an election.
The decision of this court being against
Mahan, he has taken an appeal to the Su-
preme Court, sitting at Monroe, returnable
on the first Monday in July.
The Civil Rights Case.
In this case, wherein C. A. Weed
is under examination on an ap-
plication before Judge Durell, in the
United States Circuit Court. The time of
the court was occupied yesterday in reading
the testimony. The matter vas continued
over until to-day.
Seventh District Court.
Antoine Peltz vs.. the Crescent City Live
Stock Landing and Slaughterhouse Com
pany ct als.-Answer, call in warranty and
reconventiOn.-The following is q sample of
the answers filed in one Of the forty two suits
brought in the Fourth and Seventh District
Courts:
To the Honorable the Judge Of said Court:
Now come the defendants, William
George, Thomas Isabelle, A. Raynal and A.
8. Badger, defendants herein, and for
answer to said plaintiffs petition herein,
deny all and singular the allegations in said
plaintiffs petition contained.
And further answering, they say that all
OF said defendants above named, except the
said A. S. Badger, are duly appointed mem.
bers of the Board of Metropolitan Police
and Police Commissioners; that the said
Badger is Superintendent of Police in and
for the said metropolitan police district;
that they are police officers charged with
the duty of maintaining order and enforcing
all police laws and regulations within the
said district; that SO far as in their power
lies, they have in all things faithfully done
and performed such duty; that they have IN
no respect acted in malice or disregard of
their strict, lawful and public duty as laid
down in the statutes of the State and the
writs and mandates of competent courts to
them directed.
That on or about the third day of June,
A. D. 1870, in the suit of the said Crescent
City Live Stock Landing and SaughterA
house Company and the State of Louisiana
VS.. the Board of Metropolitan Police and
others, No. lls of the docket Of the Eighth
District Court, for the parish of Orleans, the
said Eighth District Court, at the instance
of said plaintiffs in said suit, and having
full and complete authority in that respect,
did order and grant q writ of injunction
against said Board of Metropolitan Police,
and caused the same to be Immediately
served thereon. The said writ commanded
said Board of Metropolitan Police, among
other things, to so administer and exercise
its said powers, as to prevent and prohibit
the sale, or the offer at sale, in any of the
public or private markets of the city of New
Orleans, any meat or animal food, not in.
spected before the slaughter thereof, as
required by law; that said Injunction is in
fullforce and effect and issued by court
of competent authority.
That in the lawful obedience of said writ,
and in accordance with the commands there
of; the said police force has, since the date |
of the service of the said writ, prohibited |
and prevented, according to the best of it's
ability, as in law bound to do, the sale in
the markets in the city of New Orleans, of |
any meat or animal food intended for human !
consumption which had not been duly in |
spected and certified as fit for human food |
by the proper officer, and inspected before |
the slaughter thereof, and attested by the |
proper certificate. That in 80 doing, the said |
police were protected by the writ or order of |
said Eighth District Court, and were but |
performing their sworn duty under the law |
and statutes of the State.
And these defendants say that they have |
no knowledge whether the said plaintiff |
herein was ever prevented from selling any |
meat or in any manner affected thereby, |
and, therefore, deny all of the said plaintiffs |
allegations to that effect. And they further |
has in any manner been interfered with in |
the sale of any meat or animal food. he was |
80 prevented by the effect of said injunc. |
ton, and for the lawful reason that all such |
meat was offered for sale as human food |
without inspection, as required by law.
And they further say that if any damage |
has accrued to said plaintiff for which he is
in law entitled to recover any judgment
against defendants, that the same has re.
suited from the legal effect of the said writ |
of injunction, and said coerced obedience
SO sued out of said Eighth District |
Court by the Crescent City Live Stock |
Landing and Slaughterhouse Company, and |
which said injunction the said Board of |
Police are not in law permitted to question |
OF ulSODey.
;. Wherefore said defendants pray that d |
copy of said answer may be served on said |
Crescent City Live Stock Landing and |
Company, and that said |
company be cited to respond to the same,
and warrant and defend said defendants |
herein, and in event any judgment for costs !
or damages is rendered herein against said |
defendants, or any of them, that the defen- |
dants have like judgment against said Cres- |
cent City Live Stock Landing and Slaughter |
house Company.
And assuming the character of plaintiff in |
reconvention, said defendants say and show |
unto the court, that the said plaintiff here |
in has unlawfully combined and conspired |
with one Paul Estaban, and large number |
OF other evil disposed persons; and that all |
of said conspirators, with their attorneys, |
well knowing that the said defendants were |
not free agents in the matter complained |
Of, but were by compulsion obeying the |
lawful orders of a court of competent |
jurisdiction, conspired together and con- |
tributing funds aud employed counsel to |
harrass said defendants with q multi |
tude OF unappealable petty suits, insti- |
tuted with the direct intent and. object |
TO 30 hsrrass said defendants as to coerce |
them into disobedience of the lawful COM |
mands of said lawful writs of Injunction. |
That in furtherance of said unlawful scheme,
said plaintiff has conspired with said CO.
conspirators and taken steps to cause said |
defendants to be arrested on some shadowy |
and frivolous pretence Of violating the Con- |