New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-05-14

Of the constitution Of the United States,
and is the only rational one.
But il strikes ms, also, that the real es-
tate in dispute herein could not be cOnsid.
cred as enemies property for another
reason, even if Congress had thought proper
to make the distinction, which is not the
fact, as / have shown.
1t is an historical fact that the late war
between the States of this Union ended on
the ninth of April, 1865, by the surrender
OF the army under General Lee. How can
1t then be said that SIidelFs real estate
was sold as enemies property! Peace was
restored prior to the twenty-third of Nav,
1863, which is the day on which the adiudi
cation to the defendant took Mace. The
right to treat Slidell as an enemy was at
an end. He was then treated as a rebel
who was punished after the cessation of
nosulltles. The conclusion is irresistible:
HIS property was sold as rebels property.
and consequently conveyed no other title
to the defendant but a mere life estate-a
utle terminating with John Slidell's life
FOR these reasons let there be Judgment
Tor the plaintiffs as prayed for.
Seventh District COurt-LOuisa WesthOItz
VS.. C. =. sauvinet.
In rendering judgment in this case, Judge
L. WhartOn COilens said:
24O6, and which reverts to the filing of the
petition for a separation is a very different
thing from the FetrOactiOn to the date of
marriage resulting from the remuneration of
the community.
In fact, the law does not in terms declare
that the wife's remuneration shall have a
retroactive effect but defines the effect it
shall have in other terms of much narrower
import; and certainly not in such terms as
90
retrOact so as to impair a contract validly
alternating community property entered into
BY her husband previous to her renuncia-
ton, and which she retained the right of
accepting
The retroaction of article 24O8 is applica-
bic only in case Of the acceptance Of the
community by the wife. 1t is made to Sc
cure the rights of the wife to the property
belonging to the community at the date of
the suit, and in furtherance of the liouida-
ton and partition of an accepted commu-
nilty. II Is for this purpose that article 148
gives the wife the right of having an inven-
tory at the beginning of the suit.
Even in this case the husbands contract
made pendente lite affecting the community
property, would, according to all authors,
be valid against heI; provided they do not
exceed the limits or acts of ordinary adj
mlnlstratiOn. Some of the commentators
even deny any retroactive effect whatever
against any contract made in good faith by
third person with the husband
But waving this, the evidence in this
case shows that the plaintiff did not cause
any inventory to be made, left the enjoy
ment Of the property to her husband, left
the store and goods belonging to the com
munity in his possession, allowed him To |
carry it on publicly, and allowed him to
deal there with his customers without max |
ing any objections, enabled HIM by her |
laches and taeit consent to make a sale of |
goods which we're paid for in cash by a |
bona tide purchaser. | am clearly of opinion |
that, under sucn circumstances, eale of |
movable property, viz, goods in store and |
in due course of business, is an act of adj |
m1nlstratiOn, since it is implied by and |
necessary consequence of the nature of the /
affair or establishment left in the hands of |
the husband to be carried on.
In such case the wife must be cOnsid-
cred to have waived her right tn the thing
or to any privilege in it, and when these
equities and this legal effect of her hus-
bands acts of administration exist against
her it is too late for her to seize the goods
on tieri facias before delivery, as a mere
stranger might have done. Still less could
she by remuneration of her rights in the
1Onjugal community make good to-day
what was illegally done land legally m
tOne) yesterday. If she had no right to
make the seizure, the sheriff had a right to
release, and his act was daDlR1tn a5Sque in
aria.
The fact that the sheriff restored the
FOODS to the purchaser (Griff) when more
han thirty days had elapsed after the date
# the Judgment, is immaterial. even though
hat, Notwithstanding the wife still retained
he right to accept, there was a presump-
ion she would renOunce the community.
The reason is, that the sale IN itself was,
or the reasons given above, valid act,
ranslative of property, and vested the pur-
haser with title, as against her, at the mo-
nent 1t took place. Judgment for defend
mt.
Barrett g. Lesassier VS.. Joshua Seaman.
Traverse of answer of garnisher set aside,
nd judgment in favor OF intervenOT,
springer, declaring him entitled to the pro-
eeds in the hands of the garnisher.
Covenant of Shorthand Writers,
The shorthand writers of the city have
ntered into an agreement to take no testi-
lOny, nor do any other shorthand work.
rom and after the first of April, 1872 for
,ss than forty cents a page after written
ut in long hand, the agreement not to {
pply to any arrangements which may be
1tered into by any of the undersigned {
18th the clerks of courts to take testimony. [
be following gentlemen have signed the q
yreement: j. o. Nixon, Jr., Walter Re s
an, L. M. Finley, o. III. TennisOn, T. Whar-
N Collens, Jr., G. w. Cotton, John O'L0gh-
n, Henry LangfOrd, H. Conquest Clarke,
gorge w. Wang.