New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-06-02

therefore your duty to ascertain, from thu
I evidence, if fhe plaintiff has complied witt
7 these requirements of the law, and if no
whether any of the obligations imposed
upon him by law have been renowned o.
modified by any contract between the par
| ties.
"The lessee is bound: First-To enjoy the
thing leased as a good administrator accord
ing to the use for which it was intended by
the lease. Second-To pay the rent at thu
! terms agreed one. G. art. $3.50. For the
purpose of enforcing the payment of REM
this suit has been brought by the defendant
against plaintiff"
"The lessor has for the payment of bis
rent right of pledge on the movable eff
| property leased" Civil Code, article 900
This right includes not only the effects
of the principal lessee or tenant, but those
of the under tenant, and also those OF third
persons. Articles 1916 and 267. e.
Therefore, if you find that Fassmapn
leased the property mentioned in his petit
ton to Connolly, it made no difference so
far as he was concerned whether Fisk was
| the owner OF the planning mill and other
he could have had them seized and sold for
| the payment of the rent due him by Con-
molly.
The fact of Connollys going into bank
ruptcy did not discharge the lien pledge
which Fassmann had upon his property for
the payment of his rent, and he could have
gone TO the bankrupt court and there
claimed the privilege accorded him by law
upon the property of his tenant or its pro-
ceeds. Instead of doing this, he AYERS that
he made the contract mentioned in his petit
ton with Fisk, who was then litigating the
title to the property upon which he (Fass-
NANNY had a privilege as lessor in the
United States District Court
The plaintiff has offered in evidence a
contract of sale of the lease in question from
Connolly to Fisk, passed before George w.
Christy, notary, on 80
He claims that he was entirely ignorant
Of this contract at the time he made the
agreement mentioned in his petition. 1t is
vour duty, gentlemen, to examine the evil
dence on this point, and if you lind that Mr..
Fisk concealed the existence of this nOta-
rial act, OF RETAINED from acquainting Mr..
Fassmann of the contents and purport
thereof, you are justified in giving the plain
tiff the benefit OF these facts The law does
not allow any man to enrich himself at the ,
expense of another, and it raises violent
presumption against party who already
has obtained a transfer and sale of lease
from a tenant, to go to the owner and by
misrepresentation or suppression of facts, to
procure another lease upon more favorable
terms.
If, therefore, you find that Fisk pur-
chased from Connolly all his right, title
and INTEREST," in the lease from Fassmann, you
should hold him to the performance of the
obligations of Connolly to Fassmann, chief
among which was the payment of the rent
of the leased premises. You will, there
fore, weigh the evidence on this point, and
if you come to the conclusion that Fisk
availed himself of this contract with Con-
molly, you should hold him to the perform
ance of all the conditions mentioned there
in, because as man binds himself he shall
be Bound.
In regard to the stipulation in the con-
tract referred to in plaintiff petition, aud
admitted by both parties, it is your duty to
inquire: First Whether the United States
Court has decided in favor of Fisks title
to the mill. Second. Or whether Fisk has
waived this condition and taken possession
of the property. If so, he is liable, be-
cause you are not to presume that the
plaintiff has given him the right to use
and enjoy the premises in question, rent
them out to Others, without paying any
thing for this use or enjoyment. Property
holders and landlords in this city are not
so generous as to allow tenants to occupy
their property without charging them rent,
or receiving some compensation from them. |
In conclusion, gentlemen, you are the |
case. You are authorized to believe or |
reject the testimony of witnesses, and find |
a verdict in accordance with law and jus |
ice. After all, laws are but the rules of |
common honesty and fair dealing among |
men, and if you follow what you know to |
De just and right, you are sure to decide in |
accordance with law.
Eighth District Court.
The suit of the Louisiana Levee Company /
-s. Dubuclet, State Treasurer, was CON
inued indefinitely; also, the suit of the
state House commissioners VS.. the State
Treasurer.
In the latter case. counsel for the COM
nissioners claim that the appropriation for
'tate House purposes comes under the
ead OF necessary government expenses,
Included within the 5000, 900, by the re-
ent decision of the Supreme Court, and
therefore, they claim to be entitled to their
onds. ...