New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-08-23
THE COURTS.
Eighth District COnrt.


Save Williams ct ais. VS.. Benevolent
Union Association, No. 4.
In this case, yesterday, rule was taken
on defendants to show cause on Wednesday,
the thirty-trst instant, why the injunction
should not be set aside, on the ground that
the court had no jurisdiction, and the ale
tons in the petition are not true.
Vincent Bass VS.. James Sheridan, ct al.
A rule was, yesterday, taken On the plain
tiffs in this case, to show cause ON Wednes-
day. the thirty-frst of August, why they
shall not be condemned to pay defendants
$500 damages for the revengful suing out of
the injunction herein issued.
The Ponfchartrain Railroad Case.
This case, which came up on Saturday for
argument, was again taken up yesterday.
The controversy arose, in brief, from the
fact that the ground occnpied by the old
depot buildings was need for the purpose of
allowing the unobstructed passage of the
Mobile and Chattanooga Railroad recently
charted by the Legislature.
As heretofore reported, the Pontchartrain
Railroad was Incorporated by the Legisla-
ture twentieth of january, 1880. On the
fifteenth OF March, $780, the City Council of
New Orleans passed an ordinance granting
to the railroad company the privilege Of
running it's track in the street or walking
avenue which lines the space Of ground re-
served by Bernard Marigny, and known as
the Marigny Canal, at the period when he
established the old and new suburbs, start
ing from the bend Of said canal to Leyee
street. the whole to be established under
the direction of the City Council. The
Mayor was authorized by the ordinance to
allow to said company the use of said street,
road or avenue, so far that no inconve-
nience shall result therefrom to the public.
On the twenty-third OF July, 1870, the
Board of Administrators of the city of New
Orleans passed a resolution-No. 31S-re-
pealing the ordinance of March Is. 1870,
'.the public convenience requiring the use
OF the space described in the said ordinance,
and the further appropriation of the said
spaces in the manner specified being incon-
venient to the public
After the passing Of this resolution, the
eity authorities gave notice to the POntchar-
train Railroad Company to remove their
old depot buildings, which had long ago
been abandoned, and are now a place of
refuge for rats, a depository of filth and in
q dangerous and falling condition, The
track Of the new Mobile and Chattanooga
Railroad had also been laid through these
old depot buildings.
After the notice to remove these old build
irgs. the Poutchartrain Railroad Company,
apprehending that the buildings would be
TtIIONtt- Stlt. OttL az itStAshAh
the city authorities from interfering with
or removing said buildings, in derogation
of their alleged rights. derived under the
ordinance CT March l5, 1889.
The CITY of New Orleans moved to set
aside this Injunction, without giving bond,
and the case came up on this issue.
Major John II. New, on the part of the
city Of New Orleans, in continuation of his
argument called attention TO the fact that
the old depot buildings Of the Pontchartrain
Railroad were situated on Elysian Fields
street. which was locus publicos. The city
ordinance of March ID, 1880. gave to the
railroad company the right to erect build
ings on that street, with a proviso that they
should remain while no public Inconvenience
should result therefrom. This ordinance
could remain in force only so long as the
City Council might permit.
The Council were the only judges as to
whether public Inconvenience had resulted
from the continuance of these old buildings.
Accordingly, on the twenty-third Of July,
lS7O the Council passed resolution direct
ing that these old buildings should be re-
moved. The railroad company had pre-
vioysly obtained from the City Council per-
mission to build a new depot at the head of
Girod street, and have actually removed to
and now occupy that point, from which the
trains depart hourly.
Henry G. Miller, Esq, on the part of the
road responded, and the case was Sub
mitted.
Judge Emmerson took the matter under
advisement.
Sixth District Court.
z. J. Heron VS.. j. S. Harris.-To the
Hon. w. II. Cooley, Judge of the Sixth Dis
trict Court, parish of Orleans, Louisiana
The petition of F. S. Heron respectfully
represents that J. S. Harris is justly and
truly indebted unto petitioner in the full
sum of s:}247 D, with legal interest from de-
mand, for this to wit:
That in the months of June and July,
1868, in said city, your petitioner loaned
unto said j.. S. Harris for his personal use
and benefit, and to promote his then candi-
dature for a seat IN the United States
Senate, the sum of $500.
That on the first of September following
your petitioner advanced and paid for and
on account of said Harris unto Johnny
Hawkins the sum of $l47 %.
All of which money, loaned and advanced
at the times and amounts stated III the an
nexed bill, made a part hereof.
Alleging amicable demand and refusal to
pay, your petitioner prays that, after cita-
ton and all proper proceedings, and par
ticularly after hearing the following named
witnesses: Hon. William P. Kellogg. S. B.
Packard, j. K. Vest, H. j. Samson, G. A.
Sheridan. w. l.. Mcmillan and Governor II.
c. Warmoth, have Judgment against said
j. S. Harris for $32i7 % and interest and
for relief.
(signed) T. S. McCAY, Attorney.
ACCOUNT ANNEXED TO PETITION.
j. S. Harris to <. 5. Heron
1868.