New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-03-26
are chargeable with negligence, unski1ful-

The onus is on the plaintiff: the consignee
70 prove afirmatively tina. there was
fault attributable to the carrier, from
which the damage resulted.
He has attempted 10 do SO by showing the
good condition OF all the casks "neh
shipped: that the smashed cask appeared 10
nave been as strong and of as good material
and workmanship as all the rest: that II was
the only one damaged. and that not an
other article of freight in the whole ship
was broken. though there were some very
fragile things on buard. such as baskets OF
champagne. etc.
Nor are we free even to suppose that II
was broken for want OF proper Weuglng or
dunnage. Ii IS certified that this appeared
ALI right so far as the cargo was viewed %
the port warden: and thus we are driven 10
the only inference the facts fairly authorize.
viz: that the breaking happened from in
proper handling az the unloading OF the
vessel at this port.
In two similar cases-li An. 429. and Ii
An. t3l-our supreme Court decided that
these facts are sufficient basis for the ju-
dic:al conclusion that there had been i'm
proper stowage or handling. or some fault
for which the carrier was responsible. not
outstanding the limiting clauses Il the
contract.
The plaintiff was not on board. was not
present. or required 20 be present az the m
loading: lie Is not presumed TO know how or
nv whom the unloading was carried on.
TIE particulars are all within the special
knowledge and control of the defendant:
but the defendant has not produced a single
stevedore or member OF the crew TO explain
the circumstances. Hence. according 10
the law Of evidence. the suppression OF
this proof. the Withholding Of these WI
nesses. who must have mad direct KNOW
edge Of what happened on board durlng
the unloading. becomes material con
sheraton 20 confirm and fix the conclusion
already fairly dedcced. Ii there was any
doubt. this silence. this Withholding OF e1-
plana-oIv evidence. would remove that
doubt Indeed. the omission tOitulnlsh eS-
planarory proof IL such cases. IS regarded
bv writers and judges treating OF the mat
ter as amounting 70 an admission OF the in
terable fact. and so have | regarded i il
this case. New trial refused
Decision. of the Supreme Court
This tribunal met yesterday. and rem
dered the following decisions:
Amanda K. Richardson IS. MIS-. (. I.
Barrow ct al -Judgment affirmed.
John NJ. Barrow IS. John T. Irwin
Judgment affirmed.
Farmers and Manufacturers Aid Asso-
citation vs.. L. L. S-rawbridge ct al.-A!1-
peal> dismissed.
John 2. Walworth vs.. John c. Stevenson.
In this case the jud gment OF the lower court
is annulled. and there is Judgment in favor
OF plaintiff against defendant. recognizing
said plaintiff "a the owner Of the property.
1t Is further ordered that the plaintiff re
cover from the defendant s25ll 5 as rent.
with five per cent per annum interest. etc.
subject 10 credit OF Sli;2 II. Il l. ordered
that the defendant recover against his war
ranrees. William " Wilson and John
Scriler. the SUM Of 1856. with five per cent
per annu1n. etc. The rights of Wilson and
ScriIer against their vendor and vaTranc"-
are reserved 10 hem. Justice Howell dis
senting.
y. Y. Davis. executor. vs.. Henry {.
Dawson and William Harvey. Thomas {.
Bedford. inrervencr. a1ErmeG
Joseph Witherow V. Jesse Croslin--
Order fissolvinC attachment annu.led. and
the writ reinstate!.
A Levi IS. CorEeon and husband. co-ad
minisrrator, et al. W. H. Letchfprd. * Co,
observation-disclosures affirmed.
Dennis Redmond ". B. l. Mann e. al
Appeal dismissed.
John Frazier - Samuel Parsons. Sher-
if-Ve-Gic- and Judgment set aside. and
verdict rendered n favor OF piaintlt Tor
5000.
Josephine Mayer e as =. 5. B. Dayr;e-.
WHY and Howell dissenting.
Widow l. Delacroix vs. Mary ". Har-.
Martha J. Barrow, observation-disclosures,
reyeIsed and the case reInanded.
Frank d Henderson rs. William James.
-utOr and William James. tutor. on account
with heirs Of Joseph II. Henderson. con
soiilated-Appeal dismissed.
Tom Bvnum. administrator. -. Caro-
line BvnuIn. admin; sIrarri1-Jpdgmalr al
iImed.
James MilEgan -. David VI. Lie
Judgment auuu.led. and judgment rem
dered in favor 0. defendant Tor costs n
both couras
Arthur R5rt -. city of New Orl-an>-In
This case the Judgment is annulled. and
iud gment rendered II favor Of p.alr;lt. re
jecIing the plaintiffs demand
Joseph Hoy Il Go. y. B. Weiss e ais
Appeal dismissed.
John I. Mitchell v. Milton Bonner. Da-
vid l. Rawlett and Sheriff Sau vinet-Judg-
ment annulled. avoided and reversed. The
injunction taken out IL this suit is dissolved
and set aside.
Mrs. E R Jami-on =. T. E. Barrow e.
als-Judgment dismissed.
Succession OF William c. James-Juds-
ment affirmed.
State of Louisiana ex rel. the Board OF
School Directors Of the parish of Bossler
vs. Thomas w. Conwav-The judgment OF
the lower court purp0-ting 70 annul and
set aside the peremprOrv order 81 October
l.. ISL. is annulled. avoided and reversed.
Defendant 10 paw costs.
Randall Gibson. executor. vs.. I. {. Bed
ford ct als.-The judgm of the lower
court quo Is annulled. avoided and re-
verSed. and Judgment rendered il favor OF
defendants plaintiffs 20 pay costs.
Webster & Co. vs.. Ross Z. BarEe-
Judgment affirmed
". A Wells e a. -. {. ". c. Wa--aE.
Appeal dismissed.
dismissed.
Mrs. { P. Nana.an V. Y. :. Bacon {,
al alignment affirmed.
\. Il Z B. Talbot =. parish ct I6erv---e. !
Judgment affirmed.
D. Blum Stern /, Co. IS George H. Sal
lis-Judgmen- arru!led. avoided ana re-
versed. and ordered that the case be re-
msnded Tor further proceedings:
Daniel Sculiv v. Canal and Claiborne !
Streets Railroad Coupany-No1ion 70 d.
miss overrulfd.
Nr. and Mrs. Peter kracz =. Henry
Weiser-Judgment affirmed.
State OF Louisiana eX rel. Andrew Here. /
Jr. V. john L. Laresche-ApPeal dis (
missed
Louis Stern Brothers -. c. c. Packard
e. ais Motion ~ dismiss appeal refused.
Succession Of Henry Johnson-Judgmen.
affirmed.
Sarah Mayer IS Marshall J. Smith 4
Coin this case il is ordered that much
OF the iUd gmsnc as rejects plaintiffs demand !
fo. damages be rejected. and that she re-
ceive Of defendant $1,000 damages. and that
in other respects the Judgment he affirmed.
VI. A. East and Husband y. Henry c.
Faler-Judgmen affirmed.
Augustine Leblanc. wife Of J. u. Laccgr.
=. Rosa Dayres and husbard.-Jud gmenV /
reversed and plaintiff decreed 70 be the
c wner Of tie property seized in the suit Of
u =. porolo - W yIrou-1, 81 Il and