New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-02-16
ton, which is given in the following com

| ZION, WHlcn lS gwen IN Tue IOAOwWS CoA
| muIicatiOn:
OFFICE ATTORNEY OF Beam,
| New Orleans, March II. 1870.
Honorable Finance Committee, Board OF Metro
| gohtan Police:
! / have the honor to answer the question
prOpounded in your communication OF tn
ninth instant, rs follows: NA.
In order to he able to Obta1 tllyteHetit
Of the act entitled IAN act fog the relief o
officers and members Of the metropolitan
Police the following requisites are essen
| tial:
l The claimant should have been in the
service OF the metropolitan Police at the
! time Of the passage of this act, and he
should have served six months during the
year 1863
! Those who have been honortblg dis
charged after having rendered service dur
ing six faonths in the year 1865, are also
| entitled to the benefits OF this act.
The heirs of those who have died in the
service OF the Metropolitan Police, after
having rendered service during six months
OF the year 1869, are also entitled to the
benefits OF this act.
Those who have been dishonorably dis
charged, or have resigned, at any time be-
fore the passage of the act, are not entitled
to the benefits of the act.
Respectfully.
lSisned) f. FILLEUI.,
attorney of the Board.
Under the above construction of the law
the board proceeded to audit the accounts
and direct the issuance of warrants to
those whom tleS deemed entitled TO the
sum OF one hundred and seventy thousand
five hundred and Sixty-two dollars and
ninety mine cents (sl7O,472 99).
But numerous suits have subsequently,
been instituted in tie Sixth District Court
tJudge w. II. COoley,, against the board. by
the eN-members of the police force. who had
served siN months du,i0g the fiscal year Of
1869. but who had resigned or been dis
missed before the passage of the act, and
whom the trainers of tue law referred to
clearly deemed exempted from the benefits
thereof upon which Judgment has been
rendered and payment ordered under deci-
sions Of Judge Cooley. on June .9. 1870.
and January D. 1871. Copy OF decision of
January % appended, marked A.
These judgments amount to Il total of
ninety eight cases, involving Il sum of
SCI $50 81, and costs. which arc $l323 80;
hut the amount involved in each separate
case being below the sum of five hundred
dollars, the Judgments Of the Sixth District
Court were final, and no appeal could he
taken; therefore the board has been com
PEELED, after consultation with their attor-
ney. to issue warrants for the amount.
Further, that notice has been served
upon the board of twelve additional suits |
now pending in the same court. filed Feb |
ruarv 4, involving SUN Of S2l92 l3 which |
does not get end the list, thus imposing |
upon the taxpayers of the MetrOpoli- |
tan Police district the additional burden |
Of thousands of dollars, ordered by the man
datory DEGREES Of the Judge of the Sixth |
District Court.
Your memoralists would further repre-.
sent that in a number of instances the par
ties to the suits against this board have not
authorized such proceedings. and disclaim
any knowledge of the matter involved until |
Judgment WAS obtained.
The decision Of Judge Cooley seems to
Indicate that if any officer or member of
the metropolitan Police force who has
served six months in the fiscal year of 1869.
and served to the end of said fiscal year. is
Untitled TO the thirty per cent contemplated
by the act. hut III Il number of eases he has
rendered Judgment contrary to his decision
where the parties having simply served six
months or more during the fiscal year
500, and who were discharged or had re-
'iSned before the end Of said fiscal year,
md who obtained Judgment compelling the
,oard TO pay their claims. it would seem
hat Judge Cooley. whose decision is reI,-
Tered Ill very vague terms. merely touched
!pon that provision, so plainly stated in the
;tw. that those who have resigned or been
lishonOrably discharged. shall not he en-
tiled to the benefits provided for in the act |
81 way OF argument, with a view Of en-
rely ignoring said provision in order to |
enGer judgments to claimants contrary to |
aw, his only excuse for such action seems
o be given in the last part OF his decision,
d which lie says:
1t would he a vicious Interpretation to
old that under a statute comforting pro
nSset,ly q benefit for losses during a certain
nd fixed period. the conduct Of the grantee
Dng after the time when he incurred the
oss, could he investigated with a view TO /,
eteat his claim.
II is more thap reasonable. it is lust and
roper that his merit and denelit should
e co-eXtcnsive in point of time or, in
Their words, that as he is Unidentified only ,
Or the losses suffered during 1869 that |
Misconduct which will dcbar him from the
ounty must have occurred during that {
ear.
IT. view of this action of Judge Cooley.
y which an unnecessary expense has been
ntalled upon the taxpayers, and in view of
Judge CooleyS decision in the cases of
burbank and Dubuclet, rendered also con
rarv to law. which resulted in loss of ,
early half ambition dollars to the city OF ,
lew Orleans. We impl1re that courts of
lstice thus made the medium for wrong
DING should he abolished, and Judge ,
no thus assumes arbitrary authority to in
Ire the community should he removed
ON Office. and your memorialists will ,
ray, etc.
W. NJ. ROBINSON. Vice Pre- sdcnt
J. A. RAYNAL. Treasurer ..
WILLIAM GEORGE. i,
THOMAS ISABELLE,
GEORGE HAIDFN