New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-03-18
THE CUUKTS.
Fourth District CoRrt-Sn't Against the
C.ts-Cin;n. NeorIy SO, O,OG1-A sas ~ cr
oftbe City IAItcEney-De niiand In Re
conventten-Eu ust Char geG with Selling
sfsU nsrs

C.ts-Cin,ns NeorIy &4O,0o0-A sls ~ er
OF the City AttcEney-Ds mmnd IN Ks-
couventten-RustC Charg ged with Selling
Clay Dirt.
John Z. Rust Us. city Of Neg Orledhs.-
On the twenty sixth OF February the plain
tiff, through his attorneys, Cotton u Levy,
filed a petition before Judge TheGrd, claim
ing of the city of New Orleans nearly
$4,000.
Plaintiff alleges that about the seventeenth
Of September, 1868, John r. Conway, Mayor
Of the city, under an adjudication by the
Controller, authorized by resolution No. 10l4
of the Common CouHcil, sold to him The con-
tract for digging the necessary draining Ca
nails, and for the construction of the necessary
dams and levees, to carry the water from
the Benville street draining machine, and
from Orleans street to the swamp on the
| other side of the Metairie Ridge, and that
petitioner furnished security tor the per-
formance of his contract. anG did perform
il accordingly.
Yesterday, J. R. Beckwith. City Attorney,
| filed an answer, denying the material sl-
legations in plaintiffs petition, and for
further answer says that the defendant
never entered into the contract as set forth,
and that the pretended contract, as set
forth by the claimant, is IN al. all
| Mayor, John p. Conway. was without
| authority TO make the CONTRACT, there
/ being no lawful ordinance OF the City
| Council authorizing him to do so. That in
| the year 1861, before Conway became Mayor
| the Common Council adopted resolution
| authorizing q contract Of the nature of
! that alleged in plaintiffs petition, but that
! +. Heath, who was then Mayor, vetoed it.
; That about the twelfth of September, 1868,
| said resolution was unlawfully promulgated
! rs al ordinance in force, under ordinance
| No. l0l4 new series which pretended ordi-
nance is the one referred to in plaintiffs pc.
| titi0n, rs the basis tor said pretended con-
tract. That afterward said John r. Conway.
| with no other authority than said pretended
resolution, executed contract with said
! Rust, and which plaintiff pretepds was a
contract with the city Of New Orleans, but
| which he well knew was no ordinance, and
! that said Conway had no authority to
execute said contract for the city OF New
| Orleans.
And further answering, Mr.. Beckwith
| says that all and singular the pretended
dams, canals ana works which the plaintiff
has constructed, are of no use or value to
the CITY, but on the contrary sre q great
damage, injury, loss and Inconvenience to
the city and to its inhabitants. That By
| reason OF the useless excavation of canal
in the vicinity of the Bayou st. John, the
uuskiil.ul character Of the work, and the
insufficient levees, during the fall OF 1869,
the waters broke through and flooded q
great portion of the city, aud caused great
damage, which would not have occurred had
the canal not been dug.
And assuming the character Of plaintiff
in reconvention. Mr. BeckWith says that
the plaintiff has unlawfully excavated from
the property of The city large quantity of
EARTH and sold the same ana received
! money therefor to the amount Of $4,000.
That by the mistake and misrepresentation
OF certain officers of the city, who acted in
| mistake and without authority, Rust has re-
| ceived from the city in money and erroneous
certificates of Indebtedness and lumber and
material, the fun sum OF SO 000- That by
rcesOn OF unsghtly excavations, made with
! out authority IN the public streets, he has
caused the city damage 10 the extent of the
further sum OF Sl0.000
Wherefore defendant prays that said pre-
tended contract may be atjudged null and
| void, and that said Rust be condemned to
restore to the city all Of said Illegal certl-
| 1icates OF ind b.edDess Illegally issued TO
him, or, II default thereof, that he be con-
demned to pay TO the city the amount Of
money named therein; that there be judg'
! meut against said Rust for the full sum Of
money that he has received on account OF
sum Of Sl2 600 for further damages caused
the city by his unlawful acts, with legal in
terest from Judicial demand.
Divorce Suit.
Mary Anthony brings euit against Joseph
August, 10 whom she was married in June
last, for q divorce. She Gays that ever since
that lDauspicious event he has led an Idle
aud dissipated life, and is now In the Parish
Prison on d charge Of felony. Albert Voor-
hies of counsel.
| United States Circuit Conrt-Judge Du-
| reib Pre- siding.
1 John p. Fan Bergen Us. Wm. A. Shafe1'
In this case plaintiff claimed $4,000 of
defendant for an alleged breach of contract
for the sale and purchase of a crop of sugar.
1t was alleged that the defendant agreed to
deliver the crop at a stated price, aEd after.
wards sold it to different persons. The
matter was tried before jury yesterday,
and verdict render, for the defendant
Fellows d Mills, attorneys for PLAINTIFF and
j. Ad. Rozier and Rightor & McCollum for
| defendants.