New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-06-23
AN IMPROVEMENT YET TO BE MADE
POLICE JURISPRUDENCE.

1t Is more IMAM prOD8Dlo tAaV tAo noe'
considerable nuisance existing within the
happy precincts of New Orleans consists
of the inevitable ditch lying and being in
and through the centre of Melpomene
street, excavated long ago for drainage
purposes. Its venerable depths send out
numberless reeking odors, excepting when
washed, just washed in shower-like the
famous rose of song. On such pleasing
occasions it is flowing stream, pouring
lakeward with the velocity of the old Father
of Waters himself. In our younger days
we have stood on its sublime banks and
mourned that the jurisprudence of police
did not admit of the unrobing process
and of our plunging into its sto-
RED depths for long swim, a
strong swim and swim altogether. 1t
would, if such stream were perennial,
afford unrivalled scope for numberless
floating baths, and, as q nuisance, would
be more tolerable for such compensation.
But in the stagnant and fetld state
familiar to peregrinating nostrils in the
season of drouth and heat, the Melpomene
street canal admits Of no comparison with
any other excavation Of modern times. On
account of its situation in q populous and
fashionable section of the town, it pos
sesses advantages for becoming at times
absolutely intolerable over any other
known ditch. 1t was probably this con-
sideration which, in 1857, led Certain in
habitants of Melpomene street to
invoke the legal jurisprudence of the Com
monwealth of Louisiana for their re-
Lief. The acknowledged NEsToR
of that field of learning was
retained in the cause of its judicial
abatement; and we propose to resort to
the record of the case, in view of its judi
cial failure, in order to prevail at this time
with the non-judicial jurists of the city
government, administering its police, to
apply the remedy then sought and shown
to be practicable, profitable and needful;
as to all of which no denial was urged,
nor doubts inspired from first to last, in
either pleadings or proof.
Mr.. Roselius brought such suit in the
old Sixth District Court, calling it: Ger
tain inhabitants, etc., vs. the city of New
Orleans" The petition was fled in August,
1856. Its allegations correspond with the
testimony, which we propose to collate,
and are recited in the reasons for judg-
ment which We partly give below. The
witnesses were of the most unexception-
able character, several of them having been
members of the City Council, and one
during eight years Mayor.
Hon. A. D. Crossman, now dead, testi-
fed that the canal was nuisance, and
that he, as Mayor, had repeatedly recon-
mended its abatement as a general benefit
to the city; that it would greatly enhance
the value of taxable property. Mr.. W. b.
Avery and DR.. H. Edwards, both also
dead, and both at that time ex-Aldermen,
affirmed its offensive character, its injury
to the public health, and the expediency
of converting it into sewer, covered and
foored. It was common receptacle of
dead animals, which, in heavy rains, were
carried with its flow and deposited upon
its sides, to remain for days. A. D. Grief,
in his testimony, related some facts touch
ing its condition during the memorable
epidemic of 1858. He is an exception to
the painful rule prevailing with the wit
nesses in this cause, and lives to re-affirm
his statements. He then resided within
fifty feet of the canal, on Apollo street.
He complained to the Street Commissioner
repeatedly, that summer, Of endless de-
posits along its sides, of dead animals.
All these witnesses describe it as
a nuisance. They had known it from
twenty to thirty years. 1t takes
up in its width two-thirds of the street.
Two vehicles can not, on either side, pass
abreast. Louis Surgi and L. NJ. Fox, both
civil engineers, and both likewise dead,
testified to the practicability Of sewer;ng
the drain by means of brick or wooden
work, bottoming it with brick or stone and
walled on the sides, covering the whole
so as to make an unbroken surface of
pavement between the two sidewalks.
No estimate is made of cost, beyond the
conjecture that the enhanced amount of
taxes for one year would pay it.
We might here pause for reflection
apropos of life's mortality. Of these wit
nesses, examined in 1857 before Judge
Howell, now on our supreme bench, but
one lives. They were all well-known and
valuable citizens, familiar friends of many
of our readers, leaders of the people; and
it is difficult to realize that their greeting
does not await US still at our fresides, in
the streets and places Of public sojourn-
that they are forever departed. Who can
realize their departures in the sense in
which we miss lost horse, or dog, and
believe fully that they no longer know,
feel or participate in our anxieties for the
general good, or aid US in its attainment ?
Let US cover the suggestion with hopeful
perhaps, and leave the meditation to be
INDUCED by each of US apart.
Upon adjudicating the case Judge How
ell said: From the testimony the canal
is a nuisance; it works inconvenience
and damage, obstructs the free use of the