New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-06-07

VIGOROUSLY bad man. They were stolen
| He made no effort to notify the public OF
| his loss, but remained silent for several
months. while the warrants were passing
| from hand to hand in the ordinary course
of trade.
From these several considerations am
satisfied that justice and the law demand
that there should be judgment in favor OF
the intervenOrs 1t is so ordered.
In the case of C. HI. Slocomb ct al vs..
James Graham ct al, the Attorney General
has, on behalf of the State, as briefly men
toned in yesterdays REPUBLICAN, filed a
petition of intervention 1t is represented
that the State is interested in this suit, both
In determining for herself the question as
to whether the bonds in question should be
issued or not. and if found necessary to re-
slst the same, to do so in regular manner
and through proper officers charged with
these duties, and thus prevent the lrregu-
larities, confusion and loss that must be the
result of private parties assuming the du-
ties that belonged to public officers repre-
senting the State. -
IntervenOr, therefore, prays that injunc-
ton be refused at plaintiffs costs, for the
following reasons:
l. Because the plaintiffs in this suit are
not public officers charged with the admin
istration of the affairs of the State govern
ment, and have no such interest as to en-
title them to injunction as prayed for.
,. Because petitioners have no right of ac-
ton by injunction or otherwise, in this: that
plaintiffs are interfering in and assuming
the charge and control of State matters,
that can alone be exercised by proper State
officers, when deemed necessary under the
constitution and laws of the State.
3. Because even if the right of action by
injunction exists in favor of plaintiffs, pri-
waite citizens (which is denied) this applica-
ton is premature, in this: that the plaintiffs
pray for an injunction before the signing of
the bonds in question by the officers enjoined
(which may never happen), and before being
called on to pay tax ON said bonds that if
they have the right of action by Injunction
or otherwise, it can only be exercised in re
sisting the payment of tax on bonds when
Judgment is demanded of them.
4. The State further pleads general de
NAL.
The defendants in this case have also
filed an answer to the rule nisi. based on
the same representations as contained in
the above petition of intervention.
The testimony in the case of Esnard vs.
city of New Orleans was concluded yester-
day, and the case continued till to-day for
argument before the jury.
Fourth District Court.
In the case of j. Frederick Majonier vs.
+. Stringer, in which the latter was sued
for the sum of $4,000, the jury found YER
dict in favor of plaintiff for one dollar and
costs.
The following cases were fixed for trial
by jury yesterday morning: Harrison g.
Bietry VS.. Orleans Railroad Company, Jacob
Wilsey VS.. John Mullahy ct ais, Amelens
Letorey VS.. Alfred Marie
Sixth District Court.
The case of Durbridge VS.. the Slaughter
house Company, the plaintiff seeking to
compel the issuance of a large number of
shares of stock, and in which default was
taken, a few days ago, has been reinstated,
for reason of answers filed, and by consent
of counsel, will be tried by special jury in
August next. The jury in the case will be
selected by the counsel in the suit.
Before this court yesterday, were tried
four of the several cases of late Jefferson
City policemen suing to recover salary for
services performed during the late riots.
The jury rendered verdicts in favor of Shep-
herd, Richardson and Miller, for full amount
claimed. In the case of Parker, the jury
not being able to agree, was discharged.
There are yet fourteen similar causes to
be tried, several of which will come up
to-day.
United States Circuit Court.
Inc report OF Jle master IN claQcery In
the case of Myra Clark Gaines vs. the city
of New Orleans and others was presented
yesterday, and the court took time to ad-
wise. This case, terminate as it may, is
certainly important, as one item of the
masters report gives the plaintiff the sum
OF two hundred and fifty thousand dollars.
Commissioner WeIIer's Court.
case of aggravated assault and battery,
multiplied by five. which has been slowly
but surely eliminating in the Commission
er's court during tine last several DAYS, yes
terday approached somewhat to a denOue-
ment.
A. J. Mayer, first mate of the ship Charles
II. Southland, was charged upon five several
warrants, based upon the affidavits of
Charles Williams, S. Harkins, John Sedor-
holm, Jeremiah McDush, and Joseph Ran
dali. five seamen of the ship above men
toned, with assault and battery of the
strongestki kind. The second mate of the yes
sci, John Gimpson, was, by subsequent aft
davits, included in the same charge.
The case came up for examination yester-
day before Commissioner Weller, who was
at first inclined to discharge the case owing
to the soft sawderish nature of certain evil
dence for the defense. But when rdicu-
lousy high and brittle spittoon which had
something to do with battering the heads of
the atlantis, was produced in court and
proved to be of magnitude sufficient for a
ram, the Commissioner adj
luds ed it to be an instrument hardly fitted
to strike men with unless it was desirable
to kill them. so the two mates were bound
over to appear before the United States
District Court to answer the charge.