New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-09-26
Auditor Graham Remanded to Prison.

The Eighth District Courtroom wa!
crowded yesterday at the hour OF clever
o'clock, it having been announced thai
Judge Dibble would render his opinion il
the contempt case of Auditor Graham. A
| score or two of the members of the bal
were present, and great deal of interest
was manifested. Shortly after the hour
the judge took his place upon the bench,
and the minutes were read. He then pro-
ceeded to read his opinion, first recapitu-
lating the facts of the case, of which our
readers are already sufficiently familiar.
Touching the matter of contempt, the Judge
continued:
To the rule for contempt, the
Auditor filed an answer which contains sucl
unseemly language that / feel constrained
to notice it. He characterizes the claim of
the relators as unlawful, fictitious and
fraudulent, and these proceedings as an
effort to rob the State. He seems to have
forgotten that the judge Of this court had
entered judgment in favor of these reIators
Last year the board of assessors instituted
suit IN this court upon demand in every
respect similar to this. l tried othe case.
and, after deiberatiOn, | held that while
the compensation allowed these officers
seemed eXtravagant, the law did grant it,
and had no option but to issue the man
damus. In that record No. 1872 is Letter
from this respondent to the Attorney Cen
eral, which | caused to be filed. as sup
posed the case would go to the Supreme
Court, in which he, the Auditor makes all
the objections urged in the case.
At that time the Auditor had under the
decisions OF the Supreme Court, full power
to appeal i'll the name of the State, upon
furnishing aomere nominal bond for costs
The Auditor did not see fit to take an ap-
peal from that judgment, but a once goluno
taFily executed it.
Subsequently to this, law was passed
by the Legislature forbidding the Auditor
and other ministerial officers to appear in
court by private counsel to represent the
State, yesting that power where it properly
belongs, with the executive and the law
officers OF the commonwealth. When the
Judgment in this case was signed the Audi |
tor neglected to have it appealed The At
torney General was then absent The act
No. II aforesaid in such case authorizes the
Governor to appeal. But the respondent
would not apply to him, but chose rather to
disobey aud defy the law, and so he ap-
pied for the appeal in his own name. specifi-
cally stating that it was by his own c0un-
sci, as if to insult the Jaw while disobeyo |
ing it.
III tuC JItStuCt VI bIACu tdCSS as fHGEe j !
have no patience with this respondent when |
he uses such language as I find in this |
record. While presiding in this court l |
have observed that his official conduct has |
done more to shake confidence in the tinano |
cial credit of the State than all of the ex.
traYagant demands against its treasury, |
which he mas loudly denounced, but which |
be has so often etfectually aided
Judge Cooley made the rule for contempt |
? hGoiJltp and Gpnt fIa spas +f
until he should obey the mandate Of the
,0urto
Some days after his Imprisonment the
Governor of the State issued an executive
oardons upon which the respondent was re-
eased. The judge again ordered his at
achment, and the respondent is now before
he court, and it becomes necessary to dee
ermine the effect OF this pardono
l can not but agree with the judge of the
sixth District Court in considering this act
# the Governor as unconstitutional, and
bsoutely null and void.
There are cases in which the executive
lemency may release a person from i'm
risonment for contempt Of court, where
be otense is in the Qature OF crime
gainst the Stateg
But he can not satisfy Judgment against
be State by sustaining a ministerial officer
1 his disobedience OF the law and in his re-
lsal to obey the mandates of the judiciary.
If such an interference on the part of the |
Xecptive were permitted, the coordinate
of the judiciary would be sub
erteds The executive department might
len become an instrument of tyranny and |
ppressi0n against the creditors of the
tate.
If the Judges who presided In this court
ere wrong in holding that the appeal has
cen dismissed; il the appeal is still pend
e in tho Supreme Court. about which l
Sprcss no opinion in the presence of their
dgments, the Auditor has full and clear
'medy by an application to the judges of {
le Supreme Court, or to either of them for l
e writ OF prohibition. |
If the writ should be granted would in {
antly obey it and recognize its effect, not 7
the counter opinion of nv S
other judges of the district courts, or /
y own opinion, if it should coincide with t
eirso But if the writ is refused. the effect a
to sustain the opinion of the Judge of c
e Sixth District Court to the effect that c
is judgment is eSigible. Ia that event it Y
ust be enforced, notwithstanding the p
laEms Of the respondents awakened con, d
ienceo
But counsel for respondent says under P
structions of his client, that in no event :
n he consent to be compelled ITO execute =
e Judgment whatever may be the opinion d
this court or of judge of the Supreme :
,urt expressed in chambers, upon the L
estion of the pendency of the appeal. /
lis idle and stubborn threat is made either u
rough sheer folly and ignorance of the ?
ties Of ministerial officer and citizen. =
is intended for some Interior purpose or y Il
ect not connected with this case, and is, y
Brefore, disgraceful and contemptible y
e judgment of this court, he says, vio- 'l
es his moral law, and he will not utfer =
to be executed. Ii the court so orders h
will rot in JAIL until November. Be it
This sacrifice to his protean goddess,
'nesty, will infict no wound upon Justice,
10 sits calm, changeless, passionless, un-
npathetic. I'll
It is ordered that the respondent, James D
aham, be remanded into the custody of -
sheriff, who is instructed to imprison Dl
u in the Parish Jail, and there to hold ST
q under the commitment made in this cC
e by the Hon. w. II. Cooley, presiding
This court September 13, 1872. The sheriff
1 SO hold the respondent until the fur It
r order Of this court, unless directed to
ease him by the Supreme Court of the y
teo "
di
Investigation of Charge