New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-02-26
THE COURTS.
Eighth District Coart-Decision by Judge
Dibble.-A NIandamus ap0n the State

Eighth District Coart-Decision by Judge
Dibble.-A NIandamus apon the State
Auditor.
In the suit of J. w. Digger. clerk suing
Jacob Muller, Jr.. for a years salary, al
| legged to be due, although he was discharged
| at the end of the first month OF his engage
ment in Muller's store, Judge Dibble de-
cidcd that no contract had been broken by
| said discharge, and gave Judgment for de-
| PENDANT, Muller, Jr.
+. Montieu Assessor and Tax Collector
| of the Sixth District parish OF Orleans, is
| again after the State Auditor in the Eighth
| District Court.
| ten thousand dollars in warrants for COM
| missions upon taxes collected in the parish
| of Jefferson, he now desires to obtain some
| $500 more, which he claims is due him for
| commissions upon taxes assessed and col
| lected in the Sixth District.
| The suit of Dunbar VS.. Stcib.-In this
ease, which has attracted some little atten-
ton. and which is before the Eighth Dis
trict Court for trial, supplemental answer
has been filed by Messrs Labat Il ArOni,
counsel for defendant.
They set up IN this answer that Dunbar
is a declared bankrupt, and attach to their
petition Il certificate to that effect from the
clerk of the United States District Court,
and that the claim of $4,000 upon Joseph
INdlscL IstS UttH suiltHuS1CN W hoh'"A y
creditors in bankruptcy.
Wherefore they claim that the allega-
tons contained in the petition OF Dunbar
! in tie suit are false that he is still the
! owner OF the claim, which he alleges has
| passed into ether hands, and that by law
| he cannot stand i'll Judgment upon SAID
| claim.
sixth District Court.-An Insurance Deci-
sion.
Judge Cooley of tie Sixth District Court,
has rendered the following decision in the
suit of Kenneth & Bell IS. the Merchants
Insurance Company and Union Insurance
| Company of this city:
| These suits are upon policies of insurance
for SO, 600 on the steamer Texarkana. The
| Era No. 9 and TeXarEana cOllided III Red
| river about fifty miles below Shreveport,
| and the latter boat was sunk and a total
| loss
The ,,e1ense made by the insurance com
panes is. that the pilots OF each boat were
negligent i'll not giving the proper signals at
a bend in the river.
Nearly all the Red river pilots were intro
duced hv plaintiffs to show that the bend
| was gradual one, and not such as to re-
| uuire signals but counsel tor plaintiffs con
| tended that even without this proof the
owners OF the steamer did not forfeit their
| rights to recover. The loss was by one OF the
perils insured against, viz: collision, and
| numerous authorities were cited 70 show that
the owner was not debaIed from recovery by
| negligence of agents, particularly protes-
siOnal agents. like pilots acting in the line
OF thcil professional employment 1t was
urged that four-1ittES OF all losses by fire
and by the river and the sea were traceahle
| in some way to negligence, and all lnsHr-
ance would be idle unless such losses were
covered.
The counsel for defendants argued that
Ii...r ~
ing whistles and ringing bells: that the pilots
were tie agents OF owners. and could not
recover. The question presented Is one of
general interest.
seventh District C0urt-The Question Of
Liens.
VI. MuSson & Co. vs.. A. Foster Elliott
We present portion of the opinion OF Judge
| Collens in this ease i'll reference TO the
question OF liens and privileges on movable
property. which is now much discussed ny
! the bar of New Orleans. and upon which
there is great difference OF opinion among
the Judges OF our courts.
Prior TO the adoption of the constitution
of 1868 there was great Embarrassment III
the ascertainmeut of clear and perfect titles
10 real estate. resulting from the existence
| of tacit mortgages IL favor OF minors ana
married women. Under this constitution,
| and laws passed pursuant thereto. these
tac!t mortgages are abolished. and all mort
cares are to he recordcd: and il is contend
ed by MANY that under III" same c0nstltu-
tion.l provision and laws all liens and Privi-
leues are abolished unless recorded: that the
landlord 10 longer has lien iUr rent unless
under recorded lease: that the iaboIrr upon
plantations has 10 hen tor his wages: the
factor none tor his advances or supplies fur
nSli-d.
This view is urged as being he best for all
interests i'll Il argc commercial community
ike this where it is insisted rLdt all nova
be property should pass 10y delivery unIn-
numbered and unemharrassed by latent
Zen ur privileges
The opponents OF these views cuncur with
Judge Collens and insist rlat the whole
system Of laws under which oar people have
! lived and acted for years are not TO tc de-
>trov,,l by an ambiguous alagraph III The
constitution or laws The subject demands
the attention Of our Legislature.
The next objection is that whatever may
have been NILSSON X Co.'S privilege.
whether under this law or that. it has not
been recorded "a required 10y the con>titu-
ton TART l5:}) and hv the act ot 1869 page
ll4). This article and law requires that
no morigag" or privilege snail Hereafter
affect third parties. unless recorded in the
parish where the property 10 he affected Is
situated | do not think that tins can
possibly he understood as referring to
movable property.
We say OF a movahe-e. e. a horse. or q
bale OF goods-that il l. III place but we
cannot say it is situated in place. and we
have no right for the lnschievous purpose
of making law intiict great haldships and
injustice, to suppose the Convention or
Legislature We're so ignorant that while de
signing To include movablc>. they used IAN
suase wholly inappropriate to such pul'-
pos, Vet particularly app opriate to more
| limited scope.