New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-05-21

| wife, opposed the right of pettloner TO be
| appointed administrators, on the grounds
| that petitioner had never been lawfully
| married to deceased, and that opponent is
| the natural tutIix of her legitimate children.
The court, in passing on the case, says:
/ am satisfied that the petitioner, Mary E.
Roberts, was lawfully married to Walter
Il. Wheyland on December "a, 1871, not
withstanding the testimony of the Justice of
the peace TO the contrary The two wit
nesses to the celebration have emphatically
declared that the ceremony of marriage
was performed in their presence, and their
testimony is cOrrObOrated by subsequent
declarations of deceased.
Marriage is considered by law in no other
view than that of civil contract; it sane
lions all these marriages when the parties
at the time of making them were willing to
contract able to contract, and did con-
tract pursuant to the form and solemnities
prescribed by law. Civil Code, article
nine.
1t has been proved in this case that all
the above fOrmalities have been complied
with. 1t is true that the certificate of the
marriage delivered to the parties by the
justice had not been signed by HIM. Does
the negligence of the justice to perform his
duty vitiate or annul the celebration of the
marriage? think not. The law says that
the act of celebration must be signed by
the person who celebrates the marriage, by
the parties and the witnesses. No nullity
is attached by law for the want of these
fOrmalities. They may be supplied by
other testimony. This jurisprudence is
well settled over the United States.
In all intestate SUGGESTIONS the admins
tratiOn thereof must be given to the beneh-
ciary heir over all other persons, if he be of
age and present in the State. c. c., Art
1885.
Ii the beneficiary heirs be minors, their
tutors or eurators can claim the preference
for the administration, and it shall be given
them. G. o.. art. 1887.
Mrs. Providence II. Wheyland being the
natural tutrix of the legitimate heirs Of the
deceased is therefore entitled, in the name
of her minor children as beneficiary heirs,
to the administration of the succession of
Walter r. Wheyland.
1t is therefore ordered, etc, that the oppO.
sitiOn of Providence Ii. Wheyland be main
tanned, that she be appointed Administrative
of the succession, and that Mary E. Roberts
be recognized as the legitimate widow of
the deceased, Walter r. Wheyland.
Sixth District Court.
BuissOn VS.. the city of New Orleans
Judgment heretofore given in favor of |
plaintiff ordered to be set aside, it appear
ing plaintiff was not.city surveyor of Jeffer- |
son at the time the service for which com
pensatiOn was claimed was rendered.
In the case of Sampson vs.. Whitney, |
Judgment in favor of plaintiff.
Heirs of Doll VS.. the succession of Kath-
man.-The defendant claimed that she had
not been properly put in default The
court held the point was not well taken, as
all that was requisite for the notary to do
was to inform the party that the act was
and ready for signature at the
place required by law. Judgment tor
plaintiff.
Alexander Walker VS.. the city of New Or
leans.-The plaintiff sued for fees as attor-
ney for the board of second drainage com
missiOners prosecuting and defending suits
against the Ship Island Canal Company.
The court said it appeared from the testi-
mOny in this case that the Ship Island Ca
nal Company was a grand swindle, being
simply engineered to obtain what money it
could under the ostensible purpose of drain
ing the city of New Orleans, and was a
myth for all other purposes except that of
obtaining the money.
The court characterized the attempts of
the company to obtain possession of the as
sets of the drainage boards as a big grab,
and that if it got possession of this money it
would be the only thing that the city Of
New Orleans would be drained of.
The court was of opinion that the value !
If the services of the plaintiff was some
What exaggerated and he allowed $500
instead OF Sl5,OOO, giving SOU for extra
services. I
Eighth District Court.
In this court this morning Judge Dibble {
passed on the case of McCullOm and eight !
,thers VS.. James Graham, State Auditor, ]
praying for writs OF mandamUs to compel {
he Auditor to issue his warrants on the !
jim exchange for warrants, vouch-
rs and checks, held by relatoTs, issued to
,ay the mileage and per diem expenses of !
he Legislatures of 1871 and 1872 l
The court refused the writs, stating that {
he appropriations for which the warrants
we're issued were exhausted, but decided
hat the checks held by REALTORS, and issued 6
" the Warrant Clerk on the Citizens
Bank, should be exchanged by the Audi
or, inasmuch as they were pOrperly drawn
gainst an appropriation, but under mis- !
pprehensiOn drawn against the bank in =,
tead of against the Auditor, the error aris-
lg from the fact that former apprOpTia-
on having been deposited in the bank, it I
7as supposed that the one in question had 5
kewise been so deposited but it proved to
ave not been DONE