The Louisianian. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1870-1871, 1871-03-12
the Senate.
A true copy:
(SiSned

Secretary of State.

u
The board believed it was clearly the
intention of the Legislature, in passing
this act, to compensate ell worthy and
meritor;ous officers for losses sustained
on warrants, issued to them during the |,
year 1869; but that it was not the in
tention to grant this compensation to
men who, by their own misbshavior,
had been dismissed the force during the
year, or who had resigned prior to the
passage of the act. o, c'.-@ -9
Acting under such belief, the board immedia-
tely after the act became law, submitted the
same to their attorney for an opinion as to its
true meaning and construction, which is given
in the following communication: r .eA M
....+. OFFICE OF BOARD |
New Orleans, March II, 1870.
Honorable Finance Committee, Board Of Metro
politan Police:
have the honor to answer the questions pro-
pounded in your communication Of the ninth
In order to be abba to obtain the benefits of the
act entitled IAN act for the relief of officers and
members of the Metropolitan Police" the follow
ing requisites are essential: b" DID z
| The claimant should have been in the serviee
of the Metropolitan Police at tbs time Of, the
| passage Of this act, and he should have served
six months during the year 1869.
Those who have been honorably discharged
after having rendered service during six months
in the year 1869, are also entitled to the benefits
4 of this act. ..s $1,000 =. arsl.. -.J
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 nsfts OF this act. '
Those who have been dishonsrably discharged,
! or have resigned, at any time before the passage
Of the act, are not entitled to the benefits Of the
act. ........ ..
i Respectfully. ~
fSicned\ 81 E. FILLEUL,'
Attorney of the Board.
, Under the above construction ofth law. the
board paoceeded to audit the accounts and
direct the issuance of warrants to those whom
thew deemed entitled to the sum Of one hundred
and seventy thousand five hundred and sixty.
two dollars and ninety nine cents ($17O.472 99)'
Il But numerous suits have subsequently, been
instituted in the Sixth District Court (Jrdgt
w Fl. Cooley, against the board, by the ex
members Of the police force, who had served sly
l months during the fiscal year Of 1869, but who
. had resigned or been dismissed before TIN
passage of the act, and whom the trainers OF tn
law referred to clearly deemed exempted from
= the benefits thereof, upon which Judgment ha
d been rendered and payment ordered under deci
s sions Of Judge Cooley on June %, 1870 am
: January %, 1871, Copy of decision of Januar.
% appended marked Az ,
These judgments amour. to total OF nnet.
eight cases, involving sum of 81, 2S9 81, an
d costs which are S1323 80; but the amour
q involved in each separate case being below tn
sun OF five hundred dollars. the judgments q
# TIE Sixth District Court were final, aud N
v appeal could be taken; therefore the board L..
been compelled, after consultation with thei
: attorney. to issue warrants Tor the amount
,, Further, that notice has been served upon tn
- board Of twelve aditionsl suits now pending j
II the same court, flied February 1, involving
Is sum of S21J2 -, which does not Yet end IA
list, thus imposing upon the taxpayers of til
Metropolitan Police district tie additions
burden Of thousan Is Of dollars ordered BY IL
- mandatory DEGREES of the Judge Of the Sixt
Il District Court. +...
Your memoralists would further represer
J. that in q number of instances the parties to tn
,e suits against this board have not authorize
such proceedings, and disclaim any knwlede {
- matter involved until Judgment was obtained
III The decision of Judge Cooley seems to indicat
,e that if any officer or member of the Metropolita
ir Police force who has served six months in II
a fiscel year of 1869. and served to the end
said fiscal year, is entitled to the thirty per Gel
" contemplated by the act, but in q number
CT cases he has rendered judgment contrary to
decision where the parties having simply serv
te six months or more during the fiscal year 1856
10 and who were discharged or had resigned befo
= the end of said fiscal year, and who obtain'
:! jungment compelling the board to pay the
l. claims, it would seem that Judge Cooley, who
ge decision is rendered in very vague terms, mere
I'd thoucLed upon that provision, 50 plainly stat
al in the law, that those VINO have resigned or be-
~ disnonorably discharged, shall not be ertitl
to tn, benefits provided for in the act. BY vi
AL of argument, with . view of entirely ingnoril
al said provision in order to render judgments
ed claimants contrary to Inv, his only excuse
or such action seems to be given in the Last part
his decision, in which he says:
1t would be a vicious Interpretation to he
'a' that under statute comforting professedly
Is benefit for losses during certain and fix
SIS period, the conduct Of the grantee long after
m. time when he incurred the loss could be inves
a. gated with view to defeat his claim. ...-
It is more than reasonable, it is just and pl