New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-07-27


Controversy-Testimo of Edwin L..
Jewell and Joseph III. Wilson-The
Legislature Warrant Cases.
The case of the New Orleans Republican
Printing Company against Joseph H. Will
son and others, praying to eDjOin de-
PENDANTS from performing certain print
ing contract alleged to have been entered
into between them and certain officers of
the State, and to which the Republican
Printing Company claims exclusive right
and priority from previous contract made
with them by the State, came up this
morning.
For answer to the petition, Messrs.
Horror & Benedict, attorneys for Joseph
III. Wilson, filed the following:
Joseph ii. Wilson, for cause why pre-
hmiRary writ of injunction should not issue
therein, says that the petition dlscloses no
jurisdiction in the court. and by reasons OF
affidavits herewith fled, the defendant Will
be E3iured in a sum exceeding SlVU,ooo
by the unlawful act Of the plaintiff. Where
fore he prays that the preliminary writ be
denied.
The affdavits referred to are hereunto
annexed;
Personally appeared before me Joseph II.
Wilson, who, being duly sworn, did depose
and say that he is one of the defendants
herein. and did make the contract as set
forth in the petition OF the plaintiff. That
said contract is very valuable, and atiiant
verify believes Will amount to the sum of
$300,000; that the issuance herein of wit
of Injunction will damage atfant in a sum
exceeding 100000, before a trial OF this
efuse upon its merits. ~
ROBERT LYNNE, Deputy Clerk.
Edward L. Jewell being sworn says he is
d printer. editor and publisher, now editor
If lp Orleans
aterci0l B,Hetin. He is aware and knows
the nature and extent of the contract for
State printing under the act of 1865. The
contract is a very valuable one, and is fully
worth $4,000 per month. Had such
contract, and was enoined from executing
It, l consider that my loss per month would
amount TO that sum.
EDWIN L. JEWELL.
The case was argued at some length by
counsel, Mr.. Benedict, for j. II. Wilson,
arguing that inasmuch as the petition dis
closed no actual sum as suffered dam
ages, therefore the court could not take
jurisdiction, and furthermore, if that point
should be overruled, that the bond in the
case provided the injunction issue) should
be fixed at 100000, as that amount of loss
would accrue to defendants in the event Of
lis issuance.
The court decided that the point concern
ing the jurisdiction was not well taken, and
stated that he would take the matter under
-advisement until Wednesday, August ?.
The Legislative Warrants.
Various holders of legislative warrants
have applied to this court for an injunction
TO restrain the State Treasurer from regis
tering or paying any legislative warrants
Until after the decision of the Supreme
Court, to which an appeal has been taken
from the late judgment of this court, order
ing the State Treasurer to register and pay
all warrants in the order of their presenta-
ton.
The case of Petrie, an alleged vagrant,
praying to be discharged from a sentence to
the Workhouse ON the charge of vagrancy,
has been continued to the November term,
the relator meanwhile being released on
bonds.