New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-03-21


"f tLa privilege, and as Doctor jackson
had only ten hundred and odd majority,
UO7o, and Mr. Buick but about seven
hundred. it was confidently expected that
thr Democratic ballOt-boxes would show
handsome majority. Why they didn't is
mystery. They were brought IN, something
undor a hundred in number. aud duly eX-
,mneh. the Judge. clerk. sheriff and attor
news participating in breaking the seals
and covers of the neat receptacles. Alter
some labor and the manufacture of II con
siderable quantity of kinGling wood. care
full count was had and some one hundred
and eighty votes were found, Counsel for
plaintiff incontincntly discontinued his
eases, and the charges of fraud. etc. van
is,,ed into thin air
Mr.. jules A. Blanc, representing himself
and others has applied for mandamus. i'll
the Eighth District Court, against the State
Board of Liquidators. to compel them to
issue bonds tor so .92l worth of State war
rants. The allegations i'll the petition for the
writ are similar to those brought forward by
Mes>rs. Samuel Smith & Co. and the MeSsls.
Levy.
second District COurt-lntere>ting Deci-
sion, by Judge Duvi2neand.
Peter Platz and Mary Platz W.. Henry
WeiSer, tesralnentary executor OF Eliza
beth PlHtZ, his wife
The plaintiff. are the father and mother
of the deccdent. and claim one-third OF the
property composing the succession OF Their
daughter.
By the viii! left the husband was appointed
,e,tamentary executor and universal Iega-
tee. The decedent died without issue.
The father and mother claim one-thlrd OF
the estate under article las {. C., which
reads: Donations jptrf riroS or mo'1s ruhS"
cannot exceed twU-thirdS of the property II
the diSposer, having no children has Il
father Or mother or both.
Article 1882 tsame CODE says: In the
eases prescribed by the last two preceding
articles the heirs are called forced heirs.
because, the donor cannot deprive them or
the portion of his estate reserved 10 them
Oy law.
The status of the plaintiff having been
admitted, and the ground of dcftnsc-tlilt
they were only entitled. under the laws OF
| Louisiana. to Vnc-tourth OF the estate, as
deceased left brothers and slsters-llaNlng
been declared untenable, and considering
| 1881 and 49, c. G.. the court adiudged the
| plaintiffs entitled to one-third OF the estate.
as claimed.
succession of Eliza Evans.-Lewis and
| Robert l.. Evans. of the State of Mississippi,
have filed petition. in which they allrSe
that they are the lawful children OF Thomas
Evans. issue of his marriage with their
mother said Thomas Evans having departed
was the sister of their father. and departed
this life in this city. in January. 1871, I'M
! married. and without issue or ascendantS,
| and that she left nuncupatlve VIII 10y no.
tarial act before S. Magner.
They further allege that Magdalene Evans
| is named therein AS testamentary executor.
with seizin and has opened the succession
in this court; that by said will
deceased attempted to leave her prop
ertv to three of the Evans, under
rhc idea that they were her lawful
neces and ncphews, but that the truth is
they are legitmate children of her
brother. Robert {. Evans. and not capable
of inheritpg under the law. either by blood
or as children. or as nephewS and niece>.
and are each nuNinS films and OF kin to
nobody: that they have no ancestors from
whom dcs"ends any Unbeatable blood, or
| from whom any can be derived, and they
| can not take as such legacies under the
will: that they We're born out of wedlOck,
and that they have never been acknowl-
| edged according to law. so as to Capacltate
them to inherit aS children of anybody. and
! that it is against the policy OF the civil law
! to recognize them a. such.
Defendants set up no cause tor acton,
and the court agreed with them for the fol
| lowing reasons:
That there is no law IN Louisiana pro
| hibiting bastardS or inceStuous children.
| ilegitiInatc children, recognized or not.
! from inhcriting by Testament from any one
except from their father and mother.
Article 1888 told Civil Code says. where
there are no Legitimate descendants. and in
case of the previous dcccaSe of tn" father
and mother. donations inter rirOs or n'o'tjS
rnusD NAV be made to the whole amount of
the property of the dIspo>er. See Marcadc
| on article 9OS. Code Napoleon. note J0S bis.
! Troplong No. 69S. V. >. y. 2li. SAYS. etc.
| l. r,,-,1 GN.,,
| all persons may dispose of or receive by
donation n''rr uros or mortis cd"sn. except
! such as the law declares incapable. The
| prohibition as to bastards relates entirely
! TO their father and mother. and not to any
one else.
Although the defendants may not have
| been recognized by their father, vet ii was
fact known by the testatrix that they
were the children of her mother. inasmuch
as she expresses it in her will.
1t is we'll settled jurisprudence in the
State Of Louisiana that bastards or illegiti-
| mate children can not inherit from the re-
| lntiOns of their father and mother when
they die intestatc such is not the case here
Plaintiffs petition dismissed with costs
Letters of Administration.
W. +. Perkins has applied for letters of
| administration upon the estate of his
brother, F. w. Perkins lately deceased
Seventh District Court-Interesting De-
| cision by Judge Collens.
James Brewer VS.. Edward J. Gay and
others-On the fourth of November, 1868.
A. -. Kelley acknowledging himself in
debted to DR.. J. G. Patrick. in the sum of
$4,000, drew forty weight notes. represent
| ing. together the debt and interest. and to
| secure payment. etc, executed mortgage
on his property in favor of said DR.. Patrick
and any future holder or holders of said
notes.
The defendants having become holders of
some of these notes have sued Kelley. and
the property having been sold on the writs
| of other creditors, the plaintiff Brewer in
stitutcs the suit. alleging:
|. That at the date of the mortgage he
was one of kelleys creditors, and shortly
! afterward recovered and recorded a judg-
mcnt due him for the sum due him.
>. That the mortgage to Patrick was Il
mere stimulation.
3 That it was granted with intent and
design to cover the property of said Kelley
from the pursuit of his creditors.
d. That Kelley retained possession and
control of the notes. and disposed of
them after the date of the mortgage 5.
That they were disposed Of after the re
! cording of Brewers judicial mortgage.
s. That the holders had in law knowledge
of said stimulation.
!. And that plaintiff is entitled to be pad
in preference to them out of the proceeds OF
that sale, the act OF mortgage being null
| and void as to him. and of no force and
effect against him.
The defendants in the respective answers
| to intcrrOgatOrles propollnded by plaintiff.
have, under oath, disclosed the time, man
ner consideration and derivation of their