New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-03-28


oet.cht NUnnat6F me y1f5tUsTkfES
etfidkf JJ66NM O. new ualEAHs'
E19 COURIN.
sspsssss Ceprs Deesss0. III
MONDAY, March q. 1871.
Fisld r. MontgomsEy -. Al the W:r!d-.
Anneal from the Parish Court parish Of
IS5i1on. Ordered that the judgment Of
~ court i owa be avoided; and 1t is fur
~ ordered that there be Judgment for the
nleintif confirming and promulgating his
ttifIS to the described lands. Wy1y,J J.
Thomas J. STAFFORD VI. Marie J. Dnpray.
pallSh Of Grant. Judgment affirmed.
III. j. Richardson VI. R. A. Hunter-Ap-
peol from tho Ninth District Court. parish
a Rapidos. Judgment affirmed. WHY, J.
Succession Of Mary Smith-Hemry
Newell opponent, vs. Sallie r. Smith. APP
pe1l from the Parish Court of East Baton
Upcn. ; tsblsaa fled BY the administra,
tof u the estate Of MARY, Smith, q claim OF
6allie smith, . creditor, Was placed snd ~
sienedsa rink BY priority Of mortgage su-
psrior to the mortgage Of Newell, who Sp-
noeed the tsbleau ON that ~accOunts Inc
euposition wa sustained, and Mrs. Smith
The facts seem to be that the ~mortgsgecf
Ge1ie Smith stood originally htst IN RAM
on-tle bsoks of the mortgage onhce o. Inss
paFish That she waived ana Possf 4 20
~ m morfeage take. the precedence, and
- fke operation took place in this sense:
W1VAYi. = merchant, made advances OF sup
nlies 10 Mary Smith and Alexander Smith,
ker aecnt, to enable her to make a crop, in
ia year 1867.
HsWell. It the end of the year, received
nothing In payment for his advances, and
l666 secured by what he was informed was
: ma mortkngc on his debtors plantation.
He advanced supplies again for the year
l00S, taking another mortgage in February
81 80 year to secure himself. Finding
sfservard that Mrs. Sallic Smith had q
Dertgage onsthe same property Of prior
rlnk 8 his mortgage, he thrcatened Mary
smith and Alexander Smith, her agent,
ahd the husband Of Sallie smith, that
vouId i~nstitute proceedings against Mary
Smith for obtaining goods under false pre-.
1890. Accordingly, Sallie Smith executed
-, - ~ which her mortgage wa post.
poncd 10 that Of Newell.
oaIlie Smith, In her testimony, states that
80 did not execute and sign the act OF her
oWn frco will-hor husband made her do
it-and that she derived NO benefit from the
s1ppliee furnished By Newell.
fton IS reversed, and that the opposition
0f Newell be overruled. sTaliaferrO, j.
Succession Of Josiah Hine-Contestatior
fur aaAivo tostamentary executOrship. Ap
reAl ron the Parish Court of Rapides
Jadencut afirmed. TAliaferro, j.
.Heury Hine W. H. s. L0see, ct al-Ap
pesi fFcm the Parish Court, parish Of Grant
1poeal dismissed. Taliaferro, J.
Henriette Bodin VI. Mary +. Carter-AP
81 Orleans. Appeal dismissed. Italia
a. e. Carbon for himself and others We
Francois Lacroix end Sheri6-Appeal from
the Third District Court, parish OF Orleans
Ju1gnent revessed. TalfafurrO, J.
George G. Benham ct a W. W.. w: Col
Inns, s6eri6, ct al-Appeal from the Thir
teenth Judicial District, parish Of Carroll
judgment reversed. Taliaferrc, J.:
ct al-Appeal from the Seventh Distric
Court. parish Of Orleans. The plaintiff
claiming the privilege Of q fnrnisher Of sup
nIee. eeouestered kfty-four bales of c0ttOl
oonsiened to d. r. Carroll 4 Co. by J0hl
r, Williams d. r. Carroll & Co. inter
vened, and, denying the privilege a~sserte,
BY the plaintiff, alleged that they receives
esid cotton as the commission merchants o
said Williams, to whom they had advances
supplies to the amount ct $6llo y u pre-
duce it, and that they have q privileg
thereon superior to the plaintiffs.
The court gave Judgment, setting asid
the sequestration and dismissed the deman'
Of the plaintiffs, restoring the cotton to tn
intervenors, ID. gR. Carroll & Co, an
recognizing their privilege for the amour
claimed BY them. Judgment affirmed
~jExecutors Of John Bird vs. Thompson W
parish Of West Baton Rouge. Appeal din
missed. Wyly.J.
Il. a Narionneaux ct al vs. Police Jury {
the parish of Iberville; +. U. Marionneau
vs. the same; F. L. M~arionpeaux vs.. th
Same; Thomas L. Billings VS.. the same; ]
Silver A. Marionneaux vs. the same lconso
idatedl-Appeals from the Fifth Distris
Court, parish Of Iberville. Judgment r.
ve!sed: VIZ, ,,, n ch.nn,;,.
Appeal from the Ninth District COur
parish Of Rapidcs. On rehearing. Jud!
ment reversed. Wyly,J J.
A. G. Knight, administrator, ETC., VI. Il
P~ontchartrain railroad-Appeal from th
sixth District Court, parish of Orleans. III
plaintiff, - administrator and tutor, br0ugl
esuit claiming damages alleged to be du
in consequence Of the carelessncss of tt
defendant.s agents, in causing the death {
George F. Knight, and his wife, Euphcni
father and mother Of the minors. The al
swer wa . general denial.
Tho case was tried before q jury, VII
rendered : verdict in favor Of plaintiff Fl
1l2.OO0. and from the Judgment entere
thereon the defendant has appealed.
IL is ordered that the verdict be set asid
Howe, j.
State VI. J.J. McCort-Appeal from Il
prisoner having been convicted Of ''ente
Ing q dwelling house in the night tim
without breaking, and with intent to ste,
and Of larceny" was sentenced to imprisOl
ment aud bard labor. He has appealed
Judxment affirmed. Howe, j.
D6rah H. LOyds, e~xecutrix, va. James Z
LCyds, executor-Appeal from the Djstrit
C6urt, parish of Orleans. Judgment r
veroed. Howe, ].
Reeve, Case & Co. vs. Phoenix Insurant
Comnauy-Appcal from the Fifth Distri(
Cont, paris6 of Orleans. The plaintiff
sued q u 3 policy Of insurance against fir
The defendants answered by a general d
NAL, and by the further allegation that
the body Of the policy it was provided th'
petroleum, rock, earth, coal, Kerosene
carbon oils Of any description, wheth'
crude or refined, benxine, benzole, etc., al
pa above premises, unless with written pc
mission on the policy; furthermore, that Il
policy provided that the above infiammab
articles. when 20 used q . light, subjecte
the goods to an additional charge.
THE plaintiffs claim. amonR other thing