New Orleans Republican., 1872-07-04


ticipating a quiet rest from tax collectors
0d interim, for which they have been strug-
Cling fercely for months. The courts will
not open until November.
Second District Court.
Mrs. Matilde Plauche, widow of Henry
j. Forstall, deceased, has petitiOned this
court to be appointed and confirmed as
natural tutrix Of her minor child, Marie
Emma FOrstall, the legitimate and sole is
sue Of her marriage with deceased She also
prays for the appointment Of an under
tutFix and for inventory
To this demand of petitioner, Oscar j..
FOrstall has filed an opposition to said ap-
pOintment for the following reasons, tO-wit:
That on the twenty-fOurth day OF March,
1866, he, the said Oscar j. Forstall, did. in
full conformity with Jaw and in pursuance
of decree Of the honorable the Fourth
District Court, signed on the tenth Of
March, 1866, with the full consent Of the
said Mrs. Widow FOrstall, adopt said minor
child as his own. as evidenced by a nOtOrial
act passed at said date before Charles BOu-
dOusquie, notary public.
He therefore prays that the prayer Of the
mother be rejected, and that his position as
adopted father Of the minor, Maria Emma
FOrstall be recognized and confirmed, and
that as such he be recognized as administra-
tor of the property Of his minor child, Maria
Emma FOrstall.
The court in passing upon the case says:
The law Of 1865 for the adoption Of chill
dren, and the subsequent laws on the same
subject passed in 1870 (Ray's Statute, p.
1851, do not define with any certainty the
relations existing between the persons
adopting and those adopted. 1t is clear TO
my mind that those laws were not passed
in deFogatiOn Of the laws regulating sue
cessions, nor the parental authority, except
when such power is expressly surrendered
fbn 20 nv tot rtEo # hnfh 20 lfufurr
fSectiOn 1928 Rays Revised Statutes
The act of adoption is made entirely for
the benefit Of the party adopted. The
adopting party is not the heir of the adopted
child, if the latter at his death leaves his
parents OF any blood relation, while he is
considered as the forced heir Of the adopt
ing party at bis death if he leaves no legiti-
mate issue. The adopted child by our laws
is not considered as a member of che family
of the adopting party. He retains after the
adoption all the rights heretofore granted
to him by law in .he succession Of his blood
relatives. The statute, in the opinion Of the
court, has not repealed or modified any of
the laws regulating inheritance between
legitimate heirs. Article 267 old Civil
Code. which gives to the natural father the
administration H the property of his chit
dren during MARI age, n article 26S, which
gives, after the dissolution of the marriage
10y the death of either husband OF wife, the
tutOrship of the minor children to the surviv-
ing mother or father, are not repealedby the
statute for the adoption Of children.
If the Legislature had had the intention
of depriving the natural parents of such
sacred right, it would have so 81 tated in the
act passed for the adoption of children.
Its silence in that respect is the best evil
dence that it had no such intention.
As an illustration Of the principle above
stated, | have searched ia the different
f.e ffaa
subject matter at issue in this case, and l
have found IN the Prussian Code, articlo
694, the very point at bar, well defined and
settled. The Code says: "The adopting
father has no right on the property Of the
adopted child, who, it he is of age, shall !
retain the administration thereof, aud If a !
minor, his property shall continue TO be
administered by his natural father or his |
tutor"
1t is therefore ordered, adjudged and de-
creed, that the opposition of Oscar j. For |
stall, the adopting father of the minor |
Maria Emma Forstall, be dismissed, and |
that Mrs. Mathilde Plauche, widow of Hen
ry j. Forstall, be appointed and qualified |
the natural tutrix Of her minor child, Maria /
Emma Forstall according to law.
The following SUGGESTIONS have been
opened in this court:
John Mckee, Samuel Mary, Robert Gill |
AusgrOve, Jean Labat and Josephine Grill
o, his wife; James n. Harding.
Sixth District Court.
James Reynolds has entered suit in this
,ourt against Alfred Shaw, Christian Rose
ius, Anthony Sambola, Henry p. Walter
md Francis Oberhauser. Petitioner AYERS
hat, having been subrOgated to a contract
# Alexander Mckee with the late City of
Jefferson, in 1867. and having expended
arge sums of money Hereunder, and the
anne not having been paid him, he after
ne demand and refusal of the city of New
Jeans to pay the same, brought suit on
Jueid claim in this court, and obtained
lnt@ut against said city for S2976, with
An J0nd costs.
"deposltelS72, copy of Judgment, etc, was
counts With the Administrator of Ac-
registered, We request that the same be
plleu with II was neglected to be COM
onaw, Admnistrqer alleges that Alfred
ca TO perform his Of Accounts, has fail
demanded, on the TIRE and to warrant, as
traitor OF FINANCE Tor Nv or the Admins
said judgment, by which 1mount due on
tered damages in the sumoner has suf.
which damages said Shaw and $1,000. for
on his official bond, RoseEusyecurities
walter and Oberhauser, are bOunmbola.
debted to petitioner I'd in
Eighth District Court.
In the case of the State VS.. the New
deans Gaslight Company, wherein there was
ISuuereu recent Judgment tOrteiIing the
charter of defendant, a suspensive a1peal
has been taken to the Supreme Court.
In the case of Livingston g. Guthrie, de-
elded yesterday in favor OF relatOrs, Messrs.
Hornor q Benedict appearing for the Au-
dltor, this morning applied for a suspensive
appeal. The court refused it on the ground
That under the law none but the Attornev
Ueheral could act as counsel for the Audi
Tor Mr.. Benedict notified the court that he
would apply to the Supreme Court for a
manuamus to compel the granting of the
appeal - 'A'
In the case of the State ex rel. j. Strauss
vs. the State Treasurer, Judge Emerson
Vsittlng in place Of Judge Dibblel recently
gave Judgment for relator, recoGnizinT AZ
genuine the State warrants held bv him.
am, ana ON which he claimed payment from the
From this Judgment the State appealad
and subsequently applying for a nuility of
Sne Judgment and an injunction to restrain
strauss from proceeding with the Same on
tanned also writ of prohibition from fine
supreme Court commanding relator 10 ar
stain from further proceedings.
Judge Emerson read written oniniop
wherein he refused the Injunction prava5
for and dismissed the suit at the cost of tbe
State.
The Washington special Of the Cincinnati
Gd-ette telegraphs