New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-05-12
THE COURTS.


against William Chambers, the injunction
demanded by the cOmplainants was MADE
perpetual and the defendant condemned to
pay in damages $5000 eThe decree Is en-
| tered, by agreement of both parties, IN the
controversy which sprung from the use BY
the defendant of the "Open slot" IN tie
| cotton tie, for which the complainant, as
alluded to in previous reports, had a patent
right
Mrs. G. w. Quinn is ordered to show
cause on the twenty-frst instant why new
! trial should not be granted the Manhattan
Life Insurance Company, defendant;
Mary p Evans ct al. vs.. William Z. Pike.
/ The court took time to advise on the motion
for new trial.
William r. Hodges VS.. A. Menuet. Judg-
ment by default, and plaintiff RECEIVERS
| $1,000 with interest as specified.
United States Commissioner Weller
Three men, named John Rust and Harry
| Birch Germans, and Louis Morrison, Bel
| gian, were, at ten o'clock Friday night,
/ taken in charge by Sergeant Sullivan, Of the
harbOr police, at the SlaughterhOuse Point,
charged by Captain Tyson, of the ship Fran
els B. Cutting, from Cardiff, Wales, with
mItiny.
They were subsequently conveyed to the
| first precinct station, when one OF the
| sailors. Harry Birch, stated that the cause
of the difficulty was because the captain le-
| fused to give them sufficient to eat, whereby
they were unable, on account of weakness,
to do some work ordered by him. They
were thrown into irons and handed over to
the United States officers at the Balize.
The examination of these parties COM
menced before the commissioner yesterday,
and on hearing testimony the court dis
charged them, saying that the imPrisOn-
ment suffered already, with bread and
water diet, was sufficient.
Fifth District Court.
j. M. Tubery VS.. NJ. A. Nadal-Judge
beaumont has Just decided a case involving
the liability of a tenant to pay notes given
to landlord for rent, in the hands of
third party, although the house was burned
down before the notes mature0.
Tue facts presented are as follows:
Nj. A. Nadal rented from. Mr.. Eincke a
house, for the rent of which, during the
space of a year to come, he gave twelve
separate notes, each for one months rent,
and payable on the first day of each sue
cessive month. Eincke, directly after re-
ceiving the notes, sold them to j. NJ. Tubery,
who, as they came due, collected them from
Nadal until period of six months elapsed,
when the house in question was destroyed
by fire, leaving in the hands of Tubery six
unpaid rent notes. to recover on which he
brought suit against the maker, Nadal, who
x
consideration for which the notes had been
given no longer existing, he was not liable.
Althoug h heretofore holding TO a contrary
opinion in such matter, Judge beaumont in
this case gave Judgment in favor of plain
tiff, being guided thereto by the decision in
the case of w. Sadlers vs.. White ct al, IA
An, III, in which it was held that ut can
not affect the negotiability of a note, that
its consideration is to be realized in future, or
that from some contingency it may never
be realized. If the consideration of the note
had not failed at the time of its transfer, the
maker can not set up a defense that the
holder knew that there might be offsets to
it."
The suit in that case was instituted to re-
cover on prOmissOry note.
Payment of the same was resisted on the
ground of failure of consideration, and
that the plaintiff, third holder, is bound by
the equities between the original parties to
the same.
The answer AYERS that the note was given
for and in part consideration of the rent for !
the year 1856 of a hOtel that the hotel |
was rented by White of WOrsham, the |
payee, and of Dixon; that on May 3, 1856, |
the hotel was sold at sheriff. sale to satisfy |
an outstanding mortgage and vendors priv |
ilege, and was bought by J. F. MoNeely; |
that the lease in favor of White was thus /
destroyed, and he was compelled to rent |
the property from the purchaser, contend |
ing that he was not liable for the payment |
of the original note, for want of eOnsidera-
ton.
The case of Mrs. R. E. White, widow of
Judge White, of the Superior Court of New |
York, against Mrs. Myra Clark Gaines, |
claiming 100000, with interest, for profess /
sional services, was decided by Judge Leau-
mont Saturday morning in favor of plain
tiff.
The Orleans Railroad Company has en-
tered suit in this court against the city of |
New Orleans, claiming $1,000 damages. Pc
titiOner alleges that on Mardi Gras day,
mob, or crowd of rude, tumultuOus and
persons, to the number of about
forty, rushed to the top of car No. IA of
petitioners line, which was stationed near
the Clay statue, on Canal street. and in
spite of the efforts and circumstances of
the driver and of the president of the COM
pany, and in spite of the presidents ap-
peals to the police force, said mob and
crowd crushed in the top and sides of said
car, rendering the vehicle unfit for use.
Bertrand SalOy has also instituted suit in
this court against the Board OF MetropOli-
tan Police, claiming $25S 60, with interest,
the value of fence which inclOsed petit
toners property, and was stolen, owing to
the absence of policemen and watchmen
from that locality.
Sixth District Court.
Thirty more petitions have been fled in
this court against the city of New Orleans,
similar to the other suits instituted for the
of license taxes Illegally collected
by said city.