New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-02-23

put, would like the Clerk to read it.
Mr.. Davidson-The members do not ap-
pear to understand the nature OF the re-
marks of the gentleman from st. Tam
many. He wants that the people who are
interested in this matter should vote upon
the subject. If the people desire it, why OF
course the vote will tell; if they do not,
we can come to the conclusion that they do
| not want it. am opposed to making new
parishes or cutting up of old ones, and
| hone the members will look at the subject
| in this light 1t is no more than fair aud
just, and | hope that the opinion OF the
gentleman from St. Tammany will prevail.
Mr.. Faulkner, of Caldwell-Th,s dis
| cussion should not take up the time Of the
| House. l wish TO remind the members that
we have but few days left in which to
| legislate for the interests of the people, and
| l hope that the time will not be consumed
| in talking.
| committee, and they have considered it
| calmly and judiciOusly, and have reported
| fayorably for the desired change, and urge
the passage of the bill. So l move that
the motion to indefinitely postpone be laid
upon the table.
Mr.. BRYAN, of Calcasieu-Mr. Speaker
and members of this House, before taking
the vote on the passage OF this bill !chang-
| ing the boundaries OF Cameron, Calcasieu,
st. Landry and Vermilion), l propose to
partially investigate it's merits, if the House
| will bear with me hut few minutes. In
the first place, the grand mover of this bill,
or at least the principal engineering 1t
through this House, does not reside IN the
| parish of Cameron-the parish which this
| bill if passed, changes the parish site,
which was located by the bill creating said
parish. But, sirs, mark you he resides at
or near Lake Arthur, and owns landed
property there Now, sirs, these facts go
to prove that he is personally and pecunia-
rilv Interested in this locality. and this is
the place which this bill selects for the par
ish site, abandoning the old site, where
to law which the General Assembly of
this State passed in 1870, have gone to the
| expense of building their courthouse; and
now, gentlemen, at the request OF few who
are personally interested are you going to
repeal this law in part, 50 as to force these
people to build another courthouse and
heap other taxes upon them for that pur
pose! | tell you, gentlemen, that these
people, like all others OF our downtrodden
| and plundered State, now Overburdened
! with taxation, are not prepared. nor are
they able, to meet the heavy State taxes
which they are called on to pay, much less
the parish taxes which this legislation says
| they must pay by the passing OF this bill.
| You may contend that these people have
asked by petition for this change. &C
knowledge that petition asking the Gen
eral Assembly to pass this BILL with quite
| long list of names OF the people to be
affected by the change, was presented to
the House the day the bill was referred to
| the Committee on Parochial Affairs, but |
stated then. as do today, that the petition
contains but few signatures OF the people and
| referred YOU to the petition itself as proof
| of nv ascertain. When the committee re-
| turned the bill to the House with their
report for its adoption. demanded the
petition and it could not be produced. l
was afterward. told that 1t was IN the hands
| of the committee, and that could see 1t by
| calling at the committee room, which did,
| without success 1t could not be found,
| nor, sirs is it TO be seen to-day, the time
that YOU are asked to vote tor this bill.
| Why is it not here.
Now, gentlemen, will you pass this bill
without any better evidence of the neces-
sitv of its passage than has been presented
! to Won. and which is now before you.
Sirs. a large portion of the people of
Cameron parish by this change, particu-
larly those of the CaIcasieu pass will
have to travel from sixty to eighty miles to
| reach their respective courthouses-a dis
tance of fifty or sixty miles further than
| they are from the present site. This is an
| lien to those people, and one OF no little
consideration, and hope you will reflect
upon it iInpartially before you cast your
vote on this bill. ,
And again. Mr. Speaker and members of
| the House. these gentlemen who are advo
| eating this bill and using their influence to
| mass It through this House tell you that this
| bill returns as much territory and taxable
| property to Calcasieu as 1t takes t1on 1t,
| and in the next breath they tell you that
| the parish of Cameron is so poor that 1t can
| not exist as il is. Now, srs, If they return
to the parish Of Caleasicu as much taxable
| property as they take from 1t, l wish them
TO tell me how the parish with its new boun-
diaries is benefited i'll pecuniary sense. 1t
is true that they are asking for a small strip
of territory from Nermilion parish. but this
| can not increase the wealth of the proposed
parish but very little. AS that portion Of
81 Landry which this bill includes is in
cluded in the bill which you have just
passed creating the parish of st. Joseph,
therefore it can not be included IN THIS
Now. sirs these are burdens and inconve-
niences that should not be forced upon the
majority to satisfy the personal ends OF the
minority.
And. Gentlemen, were these burdens and
! Inconvenience TO be confined to one parish,
it would not be quite so Objectionable. But,
sirs. nv parish iCalcasieu) is materially and
NAV be very seriously affected by the
change as one of the proposed boundary
| lines passes within few miles of my parish
site. throwing it entirely out of the centre
of the parish, and may bring about the ne
cessitv of changing the same to some more
central position in the parish, and that at a
very heavy expense to the people Now,
Mr. Speaker and members OF the House, as
we are here to legislate for the people, the
whole people of the State, and as we are
, pledged to carry out all measures Of re-
trenchment aud reform, l hope that, as this
| is not one OF those measures, you Will not
hesitate to cast your vote to defeat it. Now,
Mr.. Speaker, desire the amendment to be
read to the House which have sent to the
Clerks desk and l call for the yeas and
nays on the final passage OF the bill.
In reference to the bill of Mr.. p. Harper
, | Of st. Charles, creating new court.
Mr.. Carl am opposed to creating a
new court. We have eight courts already
and if we must have new courthouse, let
us create one out of the many we have
If we create a new court there is the
expense OF Judge. which is $4,000; the
salaries of clerks and ether expenses, which
we can well do without The expense OF a
Sheriff is also added, which the oyertaxed
people can not stand.
Mr. Thompson-I wish to understand the
bill of the gentleman from st. Charles. lie
is one of those who have been crying for re
form, and yet he wants to create an add
tonal expense to the State. Is this reform
In creating a new court you create the posi-
ton of Judge, which is a great expense
. Then there are the incidental expenses
which will help to crush the taxpayers. L
we have too much criminal work for ONE
court. we can take the cases into another
court where criminal cases can be tried
but am decidedly opposed to creating an
other court.
MI Carr-As this bill creates such an ex
, pense upon the State, | hope the gentle