New Orleans Republican., 1871-07-16
THE COURTS.
Eighth District COurt-The Citv of New
Orleans in Court ON the Metropolitan


Eighth District COurt-The Citv of New
Orleans in Court ON the Metropolitan
Warrant Question.
The City Attorney has filed the following
answer to the petition of the Board OF
Metropolitan Police, and the rule to show
| fixed for Monday next:
Board of Metropolitan Police VS., city OF
New Orleans ct als.-Into court now come
the city of New Orleans, Benz. +. Elan
ders, Mayor; John S. Walton, Administra-
| tor of Finance; Alfred Shaw, F. T. Remick,
Louis T. Delassize, james Lewis, John
| Cockrem and II. Bonzano, Administrators
of said city; the several parties above
| named appearing, not only in their official
capacity, but individually. and show the
| same:
| That the petition herein filed fails to con-
| tain clear and concise statement of the
| object of plaintiffs demand moreover, it
| is filed with 'impertinent and insulting
| expressions" and for either or both OF those
| causes appearers are entitled, under article
| l72 of the Code of Practice, to have plain
| tiffs' petition dismissed at its costs. Inas-
much, however as these appearers desire a
| prompt hearing of the matters in difference
| between the city OF New Orleans and the
| Metropolitan Police Board, and are not dis
| posed to impair the real merits of this cause
| by useless issues, they forbear further to
notice the unjust accusations contained in
| plaintiffs petition, and leave them 70 expire
| from their inherent weakness.
And these appearers further show unto
| the court that plaintiffs are without the
legal right to commence and prosecute this
action, for the following reasons, tO-wit:
Section five, Of act number ninety-fOur,
of the session of 1870, entitled - An
act to order the payment and TO pro-
vide the means for the payment of the
expenses of the Board of Metropolitan
Police District" upon which plaintiff must
rely to stand in judgment herein, are in
violation of the letter and spirit of the con-
stitutions of Louisiana and of the United
States, particularly articles one, fourteen,
fifteen, seventy-three, ITO, ia and 13l of
the former; and article one, section ten, and
the seventh and twelfth amendments of the
latter, and the preambles of both.
Moreover, the said act is arbitrary, IN
reasonable and oppressive, and not in the
pOrer of the General Assembly to pass.
Wherefore, excepting to plaintiffs peti-
ton, these appearers pray TO be hence dis
missed, at the cost of the Board of Metro
pOlitan Police.
Should the foregoing exception be over
ruled, but not otherwise, then and in that
event, these respondents, Tor an answer of
plaintiffs petition, deny each and every al
legation therein contained. except such as
trial of this cause will require strict and
legal proof of such allegations.
And for further and special answer these
respondents say:
That the several acts of the Legislature
of the State of Louisiana, establishing the
Metropolitan Police, and providing for its
maintenance and support are IN violation
of article 1l8 of the constitution of the State
of Louisiana, adopted in the year 1868.
which requires taxation to be equal and
uniform throughout the State, and also that
article of the constitution of the United
States which guarantees to every State re-
publican form of government.
That the several acts of the Legislature
authorizing the Metropolitan Police Board,
arbitrarily, to fix the amount OF the annual
appOrtionment against the city Of New Cr-
leans, and requiring her each year TO levy
an assessment to meet the same. and also
the act or acts making the Metropolitan
Police warrants receivable for licenses and
taxes, are not only violative of the funda-
mental law of the land, for the reason here
inabove set forth, but because they impair
the obligation of contract entered into be-
tween the State and the city at the time of
incorporation of the latter; and, moreover,
are unreasonable and oppressive.
And that act 81, approved March 30,
1870, is also viOlative of the fundamental
law of the land, unreasonable and oppres-
sive, and, therefore, void and without eff
feet, as is more particularly set forth in the
exception filed in this cause.
And these respondents further say that at
the time of filing the petition herein, the
city of New Orleans was not, and at the
present time is not, and on the thirtieth dav
of September 1871, the close of the current
fiscal year of the Metropolitan Police
Board she will not be indebted or liable to
the said board, in any way or manner, or
Tor any amount whatsoever: on the con
trary, the said city, on the first of july, |
1871, had advanced, and is now in advance, |
10 the said board, on account of pretended |
apportionments against her, from the or
ganization of the said board down to the |
present time, in sum not less than $780, |
707 81, as will more fully and at large ap- |
pear from the showing made in the recon |
ventiOnal demand hereinafter set forth. !
and from the exhibits annexed hereunto. |
and made part of such demand.
And reconvening, and now becoming |
plaintiff in reconvention, the 'city of New |
Orleans" shows unto the court:
That for the actual expenses of the Metro |
polltan Police Board, on account of the |
police of the city of New Orleans. Jefferson |
and Algiers, for the year ending September |
80. 1869, the city of New Orleans, although |
not bound by law so to do, has charged |
herself with the sum of $Sl6,S3l O6. and has |
paid on account thereof $S05, ,S04 90; thus
leaving herself indebted, on account of the
first years liability to the board in the |
amount of Sl0,026 IA.
That for the actual expenses of said
board, connected with the police of the
said city of New Orleans, jefferson and
Algiers, for the second fiscal year of said
board ending September 80 1870, the CITY
OF New Orleans without being lawfully |
bound to do so, has debited herself with the
sum of S95S,757 81; and has paid on account
thereof S904,365 AZ, making an excess of
payment over her pretended liability for the
second year of S5,607 Is.
And recOnvenor further shows that within
a short time past the Supreme Court of the
State of Louisiana has decided that the city
OF New Orleans was without the power or
authority to levy an assessment upon taxa
BILE property within its corporate limits to
an amount exceeding two per centum on the
value of such property, the said tax, as
reconvenor AYERS, to be applied or distribu-
ted as follows:
10 the consolidated loan. an..................... so
SdIlrotu oonus.. ~
Other liabilities and expenditures. 10
Making. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS rs
Leaving to be applied to the Metropolitan Po-
lice Board, One-fourth of one per cent, or. 25
Reconvenor further shows that the city
Of New Orleans, in no event, was liable for
The apportiOnment against the city made by
the Metropolitan Police Board for the finan-
cial year to end on the thrtieth day of Sep
.ember 1871, nor for the entire amount of