New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-11-16
TIL: COURTS.
Eighth District Court.

STATE cS rel. john Dc!hondc -. james
Graham, State Auditorium this case judge
Dibblr yesterday deliver"'. IN opinion
vhcl, concludes as follows:
The writ of na,ii.u,u- only .--ile1 - II
public officer to compel the p.rf"rnE,nc" ot
some neglected duty specially required OF
him ~ law or by the peculiar functions 81
n- place. The courts universally dI@c!a;H!
.inv authority 20 interfere with the ordinary
administration ct the affairs of public OH
GERS. Therefore III" test 10 be applied t"
.lis application i, whether there = anything
III the tan or IN the peculiar nature OF the
office OF Auditor Of Public Accounts which
strikes with !ilc.sal!tv tn" rule "-tabli~ii ii
aforesaid.
The Auditor is the :iltHc.;,i officer and
general accountant OF the STATE. ii" Is re
.;llircd to audit adjust ami settle all citlniI
.gai,i-t thc State except such as may be c>-
pressly required by law t" be- audited and
settled by solnc other officer or person.
tRryi-cd statutes, section 100. In the case
! of claims for work on til. lrvces, the act
herein be fore cited requires the Board of
Public Works to audit and settle. The
President and Secretary OF that Board then
draw upon the treasury for the amount
found To bc due the claimant. Eut the
Auditor i, required TO keep an account with
every fund in the treasury. and no claim can
be paid without his warrant. II. Is required
10 draw such warrant WHEN the money has
| been appropriated in all cases of claims
audited and adjusted. tSrrtlon> l'h and
| 1873 Revised Statutc-j The laws c:,ulatng
the duties OF this ilnr"r'an: oiiic" ..'>t IL
+: incumbent vita large discretion. lie l.
| like the business :HnuagcT ct - co,niurrc!a!
| hou>t. =.
The act of til" respondent, together With
! the Governor and Fiscal Agent, establish
| ing the rule aforesaid. did not violate ANY
! law, and it does not seem {" hr inconsistent
| with u proper aud discreet management Of
the affairs of til. office, 1t j. true that, l>
! II general rule. one who owes claim must
! make uayincnt when t!It. creditor presents
: HIMSELF still this '!Irlc j. often limited to
! special regulations in commercial and tinan-
! .ial houses. For instance. particular con
! Germs have . wen day or hour for the pay
| ment of bill-. These regulations are MOT
considered as Inconsistent with co!uIu"rclal
! honor.
: The rclator aimed 10 ennw that the re
| spundcut had not observed his own rule,
and had paid claimants who's" certificates
! bore date later than those i;.'d herein. III"
! rule was limited hy III" requirement that
! holders of warrant, from fhr Board If Pun
| lie Works should present Themselves within
! .lI.a-"nahlr time. Bat even II II were shown
Z; that the complaint 'taI f"r:i.i;."n there
would still I've no ground tnr nnndan''~: II!
: respondent arts arh;trhr.'I /" til" injury ii
:
damages bur nov tor tnt. Interpolation 81!
tn, extraordinary writ 1T :u"rd mus.
, II j. ordered that t..' wvit 1T mln't!'n1'~
. be- rctu>' q.
John Coleman 4 Co., ~, -.tv -: New Tor
"In>.-I Ia this case plaintiff ~'I., -. aeon
tract for pawn. EamI'Ir; -'r'r'. t"'n-
: Der Of ,rituv,>c, N"i. .,'i., az. a;I.y.l-
,nrnt- we-. .>.s.I ior "tl",-
: Ia" .ttluntio lu>ul:,ir' t"n!i"ny ~. :.
: St,tL,in1,. 4 .iI,,tnr ,.' !r-,ruy. Rev, =
. uur.--A rule ni>! has been i~-Ir'd III th.'
! District Court. calling upon the defendant
:" show cause. "n saturday neat. why an
! injunction should not >-,I. Il. prevent him
From sizing the effects ot said insurance
company. I" >a.i-', claim 81 $500, nrln-
Il ,uN OF I,. per ..u: .tii.gti :" be- '!u,' hv
, said nlt"h STATE, official Upon 'hc tiV .'l'nd
"i the coInpan; inT the year .ndln. july l..
( 1870. amounting /" >6h.,"'. Defendants
alltgr tina, C"ngrr-~ ila- imposed u" ttN
whatever on said din !drnd. and that ne do
! manI for pavIi.Il i without nut.rol;'. "t
! law. and tllat II" threatened >..,r'r. =.
. illegal. etc.
New Orleans anal Jackson ",iir.th ~.
! Samuel Smith IT aI-.-iu .hi .a-. :,.T"iH
luz the right OF the extension "t the I'ch
son Railroad through -. .lo~.j.i. stree! +,
| thu river front. the city OF N.w Orleans.
I through it attorney. yesterday tll"d u l'rtl-
! tion Of intervention. i'll which ii" takes the
! position that the said extension Will greatly
/ promote the interests Of the city and CON
! lucc To- the prosperity ami welfare OF it.
! citizens: that the city has al lnh"r,n aU-
thoritv to confer the privileges upon the
! road OF doing the work contemplated III the
ordinance, and ,,rLys that the defendants be
rnioIned from interfering "v ind-.!n. :h.'
4. work az having the said track. 80.