New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-08-25
THE COURTS.
Eighth District Court.


defendants, a firm composed OF &. E.
Girardey, Nicholas j. Hoey and Thomas S.
Macon, doing business in New Orleans, as
auctioneers
The sale realized $23, 1925, which was paid
to defendants in city notes. Defendants
refuse to pay the money to the city, and the
Mayor, Benjamin +. Flanders, makes oath
that he fears defendants may dispose OF
these city notes during the pending Of this
suit, and the petition asks that they be
sequestered.
1t is further alleged in the petition that
defendants have threatened to sell the notes
at runous sacrifice. An injunction was
asked for, and granted by Judge Emmer-
son, acting in the absence OF Judge Dibble
BARLEY, johnson g. Co. VS.. Britton Il
Neweu.-In this case plaintiffs have filed
petition, in which they pray for an attach
lnent against fifty barrels of whisky,
branded Nelson county, stored in the Lssfay-
cite warehouse, corner OF Magazine and
Laiavette streets. Plaintiffs claim an al
legged debt OF $3.50 "a
State ex rel George Alban VS.. j. Graham,
State Auditor.-In this case respondent has
filed an answer, il which he says that he
could not obey a writ of mandamus, order
ing him to admit a certificate OF indebted
ness to- the amount OF one Thousand dollars,
issued by ex-Auditor Wicklitfe in favor OF
A. J. Olivier and George Alban, as part of
the floating debt, and payable out of the
floating debt liquidation fund, even if said
mandamus were made peremptory.
Fourth District Court.
Fatio Marks g. Co. vs.. L. E. Baker ct al.
In this case the petition was originally filed
III the United States Circuit Court and
withdrawn.
The petition sets forth that the plaintiffs
are commercial firm doing business in the
city OF New Orleans, and Is composed Of
Domingo Fatjo, Isaac n Marks, Joseph IL.
Marks and John Brumaso, all residents of
this city except Joseph II. Marks, who re-
sides in New York.
Petitioners show that L. E. Baker and
John Young. residents OF Yarmouth in the
Province Of Nova Scotia, are indebted III
solidO TO them in the sum of $1,000 for this,
to-wit:
That on the ninth Of August, 1870. the
petitioners, through their duly authorized
agents tMessrs. Goldenbow 4 Kelley, of
New Orleans, entered into contract of
affreightment with &. G.. Hilton, master OF
the brig Ann NJ. Young, and the duly author
lied agent, acting for and i'll behalf of said
l.. E. Baker and John Young, the owners OF
| the brig, by which contract it was mutually
agreed and understood that petitioners
should furnish a full cargo of lawful
| merchandise to the said brig-that they
should be allowed ten days from the first of
August, within which TO load the same,
the brig TO be ready to receive the cargo,
or any part thereof, on the ninth day OF
/ August or thereafter, until the expiration
| of the ten days.
The master OF the brig was TO sign bills of
lading and the merchandise to be trans
| ported from New Orleans to Havana, in
Cuba, without unnecessary delay, to be de-
livered to consignees named In the bills OF
| lading. The ship was to have ten days,
| after landing in Havana, to deliver thccar-
90, and the shippers were to pay the round
sum Of Sl400 III gold, upon the delivery OF
| the cargo.
1t is alleged that Hilton. the agent Of the
vessel, represented that she was 345 tons
| British and 33l American tons burthen, ca
| pable OF carrying $500 barrels.
Pursuant to contract petitioners pur-
| chased sufficient 70 make up the cargo, and
! sent portion of ii to the brig for shipment,
| but c. c. Hilton, the master, positively re-
| fused TO receive the cargo or any part.
| immediately thereafter. on the eleventh
| of August, petitioners sent written de-
mand TO Hilton, requiring him to receive
| themerchandise and informing him that they
| were ready and willing TO perform their
! part of the contract, and in case OF his
! failure to do likewise they threatened to
| hold the vessel and owners for damages.
| Hilton persisted in refusing to receive the
merchandise and declined to take the yes
\ sci to Havana. and announced that he would
| take her to Liverpool
| 1t is alleged that in consequence OF the
| failure OF Hilton to comply with his con-
tract, petitioners have suffered damages IN
| the sum OF 5000.
Petitioners pray for writ Of attachment
against the vessel for Judgment in the sum
of $4,000 as damages, and for lien and privi-
| lege on the property attached.
Third Distric. Court-Judge Emmerson
Presiding.
| This court was in session yesterday for
| the trial of several cases OF no interest to
| the public.
| Fourth District Court.
| Judge Theard held court yesterday for
! the hearing Of rules and orders of no special
! interest.
! seventh District COurt-Slaughterhou
! Stock in Court.
Jonas Pickles vs. F. j. Pratt-The plain
| tiff sues to recover the amount of alleged
| depreciation in the market value ofsOme 3OO
| shares of Slaughterhouse stock, which, he
| claims. were wrongfully withheld from him
| by defendant for several weeks, during
which time the stock fell eight dollars per
| share. The petition reads as follows:
| The petition of Jonas Pickles, resident
OF IniS Guy. respectfully represents tlId1
| Franklin j. Pratt, also a resident OF this
city, is justly and truly indebted to your
petitioner in the sum Of S2l53 49 now due
! and owing, for this. viz:
| That on the thirty first day of March,
| 1870, your petitioner was indebted to
| said defendant in the sum of three thou
sand dollars, evidenced by a certain prom
issory note drawn by your petitioner to the
| order of said defendant, dated New Or
| and do Ia fUn
months after the date thereof.
| In order to secure the full and punctual
payment of said promissory note at the
| maturity thereof, your petitioner did
! pledge and deliver (by act under private
| signature) unto said Franklin j. Pratt, 300
| shares of the capital stock of the Crescent
| City Live Stock Landing and Slaughter
| house Company, which stock, to the knOwl-
| edge of the defendant, your petitioner
bought, sold and traded in as an article of
commerce.
That said defendant deposited for collec
| ton, in the Louisiana National Bank OF this
| city, the said note of your petitioner, where
| the same remained until it became due and
| exigible; that your petitioner was duly notl-
| fed by said bank that his said note matured
on the third day of June, 1870 on which day
| your petitioner paid and took up his said
note; that by reason of the payment OF said
note your petitioner became entitled to the
| return and possession of said three hundred
shares of stock pledged for its payment as
| stated above
That after the payment Of said note, your
| petitioner demanded from the defendant
| the return and delivery to him of said stock
! thus pledged to defendant, and the de-
fendant, without any sufficient reason, neg
| 1ected and refused to deliver said stock to
your petitioner as he was in duty bound to