New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-08-18

received any rents or profits during the period
in question from this property, because Il
was, when purchased by the city, cypress
thorittes had ditched it and drained it that
r. became susceptible of habitation, and it
was then. while vacant land, divided into
snnares and lots and sold out to various
purchasers.
2. The only property alienated by the
city, for which it may possibly become
liable in warranty consists OF that portion
of the Blanc tract above described, pur-
chased in 1884, and afterward sold by the
city. This tract of land consisted of lbs
arpents, and is bounded by the Bayou St
John, Canal Carondelet, Bellechasse and
DorgenOis streets.
3. In view of the decree entered by Judge
Bradley, and the rights of the city there
under. as shown above, it is hardly neces
sary for me to say that consider the ex-
hibit annexed to the petition Of Mrs.
Gaines as incorrect in every particular and
mythical.
4. You desire to know whether it is better
for the city to compromise or take her
chances at law.
In view of the uncertainties attending all
| litigation, and considering that Mrs. Gaines
may possibly succeed in recovering. judg-
ments against parties who purchased from
limited means, l would not deem it I'M
proper for the .city to purchase its peace,
and quiet the titles of the property referred
| to; provided, the sum to be paid should not
exceed the amount of the principal received
! by the city from the vendees and from the
best data | have been able to collect, do
not think this sunAwill be found to exceed
| SI5O,OOO, as it is notorious that the sales of
| 1886 were cancelled, and the property
thrown back upon the city, and !afterward
resOld by the city at very low figures in
| 1916 and 1913.
S. Justice to the interests of the city
| REQUIRES me, in this connection, to call your
| attention to the suit brought by the city
| and other defendants in the Second District
| Court of New Orleans, to revoke the decree
| of probate of the pretended will OF 1913.
believe that this suit will result III es-
tablishing the defense that Daniel Clark
did not make or leave the alleged will of
1918, and this would procure recall of the
order of probate The revocation of this
order of probate would certainly and abso-
lutely end this litigation. The opinions of
the Supreme Court of the United States,
rendered in favor Of Mrs. Gaines rest en-
tirely upon this decree of probate, which
they admit was rendered er parte, but when
attacked there, as it was by the defendants,
that court held that as the courts OF the
United States had no probate jurisdiction,
the defendants must go into the Second
District Court of New Orleans, and there
bring an action of revocation.
This the defendants have done, as above
stated. This suit is now pending, and this
action by the defendants, who are i'll posses
sion Of the property sued for. in my opinion,
is not prescribed.
Having as briefly as possible answered the
questions submitted, l beg to refer you to
the more elaborate opinion of my colleague
and myself, addressed, about twelve months
since, to the Finance Committee, and the
then Mayor of the city.
1t is manifestiy impossible, III case of
such Importance and magnitude, where the
issues are so numerous, and the reasons so
varied, to do more than state a few of the
points, without extending reply to unrea-
sonable limits.
We can only say, therefore. that we will,
with pleasure, at any time you may desire.
submit our views upon any points you deem
j. MCCONNELL.
The following is the letter of Mrs.
Gaines:
To the Honorable Mayor and Board OF Administra
tors of the city of New Orleans;
GENTLEMEN-I respectfully withdraw my
petition to your honorable BODY, asking a
settlement of my claim against the city of
that the documents pertaining TO the same
may be returned to me.
Very respectfully,
August 16, 1870.
The report was received and adopted, and
with the communications enclosed was or
dered to be printed.
The Mayor also reported as follows:
of Births, Deaths and Marriages, to have
room assigned to him in the City Hall, re-
port that there are no vacant rooms in this
building, except such as are required for
the administration of the city government
pure and simple.
BENZ. F. FLANDERS, Mayor.
Adopted.
The Mayor and Administrator of Finance
presented the following report:
NEW ORLEANS, August l6, 1870.
To the City Council of New Orleans:
In the matter Of the communication of F.
L. Claiborne, asking an appropriation to re-
move the remains OF the late Julian Poy-
dras, we respectfully report:
l. That we fully concur in all that Is said
in praise of the "great philanthropist'
whose name is identified with our city, with
the Charity Hospital. and with the Poydras
Female Orphan Asylum which latter insti-
tuition has been enriched by his muniticence.
2. That while these are our sentiments,
we are nevertheless compelled by the imam
cial condition of the city, to recommend
that the request fOr an appropriation be not
granted.
Respectfully submitted,
BENJAMIN +. FLANDERS,
Mayor.
JOHN S. WALTON
Administrator of Finance.
Mr.. Bonzano would like the Administra-
tor Of Finance to explain the reasons why
the request could not be granted. If the
amount asked for was not very large. he
thought the Council ought to show its APP
probation Of the muniticence OF Julian
Poydras.
Mr.. Walton did not know that any other
reason was necessary than than the one
given. He did not believe that the city was
a charitable institution, and doubted very
much whether as Administrators, they had
the right to give a dollar to any charitable
purpose. He was very well satisfied the
Council had no right to give money in the
direction they had given it. AS to the
merits of Mr.. Poydras, he was willing
to 90 as far as anybody i'll re-
cognizing them, but if there was
any money necessary to remove the body