New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-05-10
THE COURTS.
Tnited states District Court.

United States District Court.
E. E. Norton, assignee, against j. J. Per
son ct als.-JOhn McDOugal, one Of the de-
PENDANTS, permitted to file his answer.
Time to advise was taken in the Mer-
chants Insurance Company against the
Sabine, and the report of the commissioner
is ordered to be paid for.
William HI. Riddle, intervening libellant
in the case of r. Bowling against the steam
tug Reliance, RECEIVERS of the Reliance and
g. L. KOuns d Bro, bOndsmen on the re-
lease bond, $500 and costs.
United States District Attorney Beckwith
has filed suits against the following firms:
B. E. Castendyk & Co.. Bogel ct ais, FatiO,
Marks g. Co.. Emile BOuny ct ais. Shan
non, Lewis & Co. ct ais, Soular, Ducat &
Co. ct ais, based on the following facts:
That each of the above defendants import
ed into the United States, from a foreign
port, goods which were subject to the pay
nent Of import duties, deposited them in
the warehouse without the payment of du-
ties, and made a bond the conditions of
which the defendants failed to comply with,
inasmuch as they did not, before a year had
elapsed, pay TO the collector the ascertained
legal duties thereupOn, nor withdraw from
Ghe warehouse the goods within three years
from the date of importation, which goods
being sold and not realizing the amount of
the Duties suit is brought for the difference
between the proceeds of sale and the
amount Of duties.
In the bankruptcy court A. J. Desha was
forever discharged from all the liabilities
under the bankrupt act, to date from the
fling Of the petition.
United States Circuit Court.
Suit is entered against the Louisiana
Paper Manufacturing Company by Amelia
j. Mahan, widow of Mahan. who deceased
from the boiler explosion on the premises
short time ago, claiming $4,000 damages
for the loss of her husband, originating in
the act Of the defendants. who purchased
an old and thin boiler to run their works..
In the matter of William Edwards, &C
eused of passing counterfeit $50 bill, the
grand jury found not true bill, and the
charge was dismissed. Edwards was set
at liberty.
In the case of Jules Labatut ct ais. VS..
A. E. Presswell ct ais, the Injunction is
made perpetual, and all the property levied
upon by the marshal, with the exception of
certain mules, are subject to seizure as the
individual property OF Labatut, and there
fore the property is recovered to the COM
plainants. Defendants are released from
all damages; compliments released from
all liability from costs. On agreeing not to
demand restitution of anv moneys col
lected in the original suits of defendants,
the compliments are considered to have no
interference with the rights of Octave Hop
kins
Sixth District COurt-Suit Against the
Citizens Bank.
Holmes g. feathers, a commercial firm /
of this city, have entered. suit in this court |
against the Citizens Bank of Louisiana, |
claiming Sll68 so, with five per cent inter- |
est from December 10, 1861, till paid. The |
facts Of the case are as follows
Petitioners deposited with defendants. as |
q 4 70 avlr .fafU
from time to time drew their checks against
said deposit, as will more fully appear by |
the bank book issued to petitioners
On the twentieth December, 1861, there |
remained and still remains a balance TO
petitioners credit of Sll68 50, which has
never been drawn against or paid to peti-
TONERS, according to the contract made
with defendant, or in accordance with the
law applicable to banking institutions, and
the said sum Is still due, owing and un-
paid.
Petitioners allege that the defendants de-
cline and refuse to pay, upon the pretense
that they have applied said balance to the !
extinguishment of an alleged Indebtedness
to them by I. P. feathers.
Eighth District Wrongful ApprO-
priatiOns by the Legislature.
The cases of David Fisher and other par |
ties, claiming certain appropriations made |
Yesterday morning.
The Attorney General, who objects to the
payment on the ground that no service was
rendered, and that the payment of the said
appropriations would be a waste or dOna- |
ton in violation Of the constitution and
law, has applied for continuance.
State ex. rel James Bynum VS.. James |
Graham, State Auditor.-The REALTORS, who |
were lessees of the State Penitentiary, |
brought an action to compel the Auditor, |
by mandamus, to issue to them certificates |
of Indebtedness, under section 1877, of the |
Revised Statutes, for a claim held by them |
against the State. amounting to Sl8I III. |
After hearing, and for reasons assigned, the |
court made the mandamus peremptOry, but /
on the morning the decision was read, the |
attention of the court was called to act No |
%, of 1872, approved March ), and lust pro- /
mulgated, section five OF which provides !
that "section 1877 of the Revised Statutes |
of 1870 be and the same is hereby repealed" |
whereupOn the court ex Oticio ordered |
new trial
In the second decision rendered on |
Wednesday, Judge Dibble refused the man
damus and from his opinion we quote:
Section 1877 aforesaid, which was origin |
allv enacted in a statute No. l25 Of 1855,
regulating the duties Of the Auditor of Pub
lie Accounts, provides, THAT in all cases
where the law recognizes a claim for money
against the State, and no appropriation
shall have been made to pay the same, the
Auditor shall audit and settle it, and give
the claimant certificate for the amount
thereof, and shall report the same to the
General Assembly with as little delay as
possible"
The REALTORS insist that the section Of
the act No. p, in SO far as it assumes to
repeal section 1877 and to prevent the issu-
ance TO them Of certificates, is a "rOtrOac-
tive law, and in violation Of article ITO of
the State constitution.
All laws that '1ook backward" or "act |
backward" are lot retrospective within the /