New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-12-24
40 PREFERENCE W,RaN7s

Judge Hawkins yesterd4 decided q
very important question win, came he.
fore the Superior Court, in "a CASE. Of
the Citizens Bank IS. :he Sc Treas
urer. The principal :ac:s o: sL..se are
briefly thus:
The bank is the holder 0: large .,o,,n,
Of VIVA: are known as Legislative wa1,nts
that IS, warrants issued and sold .o,ise
money to @efray the current expense Of
the last session al the Legislature. Y
law authorizing the appropriation slip.
iates that these warrants shall be paid OF;
OF "Ihe first money that comes into the
treasury The bank obtained from the
Eighth District Court. during the short
term Judge Limore occupied the bench,
81 ordenf FOX rule aisi on the Treasurer to
Show cause Why he should not be enjo;ned
from paying any warran. until the whole
amount held by The bank. aggcegating
abc1.: $500 900, should be paid Ibe :lia!
O. the rule came on Cor hearing yesterday
in The Superior Court. The Treasure. vas
represented by Colonel Field, :hc Attorney
! General, and Ma. 2.tot represented the
bank.
So.eya! o: the judges. another class
claiming 60 be pvese;red creditors, inter-
yaae1 o. the ground that they were
holders 81 judges warrants, which the
custom a: the treasury Las clothed with
. sor: Of priority over the claims 0: merely
ordinary creditors.
AIr. Pilot, on behalf of lis client, Of.
fered to waive his claim so far as 70 let IN
those judges who Lave served on the
bench and los, their places, hut insisted
upon the Suie as against all others.
Judge Hawkins. however, promptly ar
rested the pleasant little arrangement by
deciding that he would 10: divide up the !
injunction in that way. The bank had |
asked Toy an injunction against all cred
5tors. which it was either his duty to grant |
or refuse. That was the only question FOR I
him TO consider. He held that the Jaw
making the appropriation did no: create
thai preference in favor Of the warrants
held by the bank that the reIator claimed
tor themo But even if the act were stuff.
GENTLY explicit TO make such con8truco
ton clear. then it would be his duty 20
inquire into its constitutionalityo In HE
mind o! the court there can be no such
thing as a preference warrant. Tina.
Judges, like all othev creditors, are entitled
10 their money when there is money in
he treasury. but She State Treas.
lTer is not authorized 20 hold
back money when he has il, and
'e;1'se 30 pay !: under the pretense
II saving it for preference warrants Of any
lind. SO also il the case Of the Bank.
lie though: the :eiator had no gigh: 70 an
)rder torbidding the Treasurer 20 cash the
warrant, properly issued, held by anybody.
Tina: in case :l.ere were funds il the treas.
~ which The Treasurer refuse! 20 pay.
he proper remedy would lie :andamus. :
2or this reason the vule was dismissed, che ;
Injunction denied, and :he bank thu,
laced oH a pas with other bo!!eS, Q: .a..
ants.
It seem. 20 SIS TIA: the rules Of common. =
eHse and equity have been a. las. applied !.
y one Q: OK courts "a case where such
I. agpIica,!o" has long been needed. The =
iea. Cha: ONE order 10 pay money og: OF q ;.
0mmon fund should te bette. than "
mother draw! o. the same. ias serUcd IS .
, extremely absurd. and We have iooke; =
: Tie Ia" BOOKS in vail. E: anything 90 =
atlorize IL, and inquired :or precedent. :.
Io.g business men TO sa2c!.oa :: as.Gs -
au... want oS success. l