New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-04-26
Terms Of Subscription.
One year, 65; six months, 81 so.

8OV&rGlS6m0uV9
Ddly. Monthly advertisements inserted for on.
fo1Tfh Of the daily rates.
4 liberal commission allowed to those who cen
- G1ubo OF I'VE or more.
THE COURTS.
United States District Court-In Admi
rally.
The clerk ordered, in the case of the MeI
chants Mutual Insurance Company, agains
the Sabine, to pay thirty three and one-thir'
per cent OF the funds in the registry, thu
amount of the judgment.
The wages case against the pilot-b0a
Eclipse was dismissed.
The court adjourned to allow citizens Il
visit the fair, and other cases were contin
ued over.
IN BANKRUPTCY.
Adam Werner was declared a bankrup
on his own petition. George l.. Logan. Jr.
e. Co. were likewise declared bankrupts b.
c. S. Kellogg, register.
Supreme Court.
NJ. A. Southworth against the city of New
Orleans. This is an appeal from the judg
ment of the lower court in favor Of de
fendant in suit brought by the plaintiff
who is recorder of mortgages. to recover
the value of services'rendered in recording
the abstracts Of inventories Of the property
of minors, whose tutors had not been re-
quired by law to give bond.
By Chief Justice Ludeling: There is a
manifest error in the verdict and judgment
in favor of defendant. The judge quo ad-
mits this in refusing to grant a new trial;
but he remarks that the refusal of the mo-
ton will facilitate the final decision at once.
This court has often said that it is the duty
of courts to grant new trials when parties
require it. And a new trial is the proper
remedy tor an improper verdict. M. 80.
Non cOnstat that anappeal would have been
taken if the judgment had been such as the
judge quo would have approved in this
case. A new trial should have been granted
in this case.
The plaintiff is entitled to Judgment for
2l3 abstracts at the rate of 81 so each.
Therefore, judgment accordingly, setting
aside that of the lower court.
The above claim, so adjudicated, was re-
sisted on the part Of the city on the follow
ing basis:
By the act of 1869 the expense of record
ing ''the abstract provided for in that
= statute was made chargeable to the minor,
property of the minor, while by the act of
1870 the fees were required to be paid by
the respective parishes in which such serv-
ices were performed. The court, upon this
objection, concludes:
We do not consider the expenses afore-
said properly debts of individuals; they are
charges imposed by law without the consent
of the parties, and the General Assembly
may require that such charges shall be de-
frayed by the parishes. All the officers of
the State and parishes whose cOmpensations
are not fixed by the constitution, might be
paid by salaries fixed by the General As
sembly; and thus citizens who had no litiga-
ton in the cour.s would be made to contei-
butte to pay the debts of other citizens who
had, if they be debts. There is no force in
the position.
Tie next objection is, that the city of
New Orleans is not embraced by the act of
1870, which says the parishes shall pay.
The city of New Orleans is the parish of
Orleans. Acts of 1870. p. 30, section 2.
3. The defendant urges that the act Of
1870 provides that the recorder shall charge
the same fees ''as for other similar services,
and that for the registry of ordinary mort
cages, 81 so for each is allowed"
1t the charge were made thus, the relator
contends that his fees would be increased
tenfold, as there were many mortgages in
cluded in many of the abstracts. This is
an error. The law created a mortgage on
the property OF the tutor in favor of the
minors, etc., and the law which required
the registry of an abstract of the inventories,
only provided mode to preserve the mort
gage, and only one mortgage is thus re-
inventory in each tutorship.
In the dissent of Justice WHY, in the
same case, the following conclusions were
reached:
think the law of March 9, 1870, is un-
constitutional, in SO far as it compels the
parishes to pay the cost bills already due
by the minors for whose benefit the alb
stracts were recorded prior to January l,
1870.
At the time the statute in question was
passed, the debts for recording were already
due. They were the debJs of private in
dividuals. To compel the city to pay such
debts would be practically the taking OF
public property for private purposes. 10
take money from the treasury OF New Or
leans to give to the plaintiff because certain
persons happen to owe him, is virtually an
appropriation OF the property of the city
for the benefit of private individual.
The principle involved in this case is one
of great Importance. On the solution
thereof hangs the fate of the city, so far as
the right to possess property is concerned
(See opinion of Justice WHY in the suit of
Joseph hernandez against the city,
Howell, j., concurred in the dissent of
Justice WHY.
Richard +. Vinson. Administrator,
against Numa Vives.-This is an appeal !
taken by the plaintiff from Judgment of |
the district court in Assumption, rendered |
against him in his suit to recover the value |!
Of four promissory notes. amounting to
Sal 900, given by the defendant in payment |
for plantation in the parish, purchased in |
1862 When the notes became due. COM |
promise was effected between the seller,
James B. Vlnson, and the buyer, by which |
the original debt was reduced about one
half to $4,000. of which the defendant |
paid $4,000 in cash, and gave his notes for |
the remainder in place of the original |
notes, and all of the compromise notes were
paid, except two. AT this compromise no
one representing the wife of James B. Vim
son was present.
The plaintiff was confirmed as natural
tutor of the minor heirs of Mrs Vinson, and
he, ignoring the compromise effected,
brought suit on the original notes and to
foreciose the mortgage which secured them,
alleging that e 4 as partner in the community,