New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-04-24

mitted. to the court. Counsel for the first
wife Of the deceased in reviewing the case
of her opponent (Lu Dudley, spoke Of the
fact that she claimed to bear q marriage
certificate from Justice of the Peace Myers,
in whose Office she was married on Christ
mas Eve. This was Sunday, dies non.
Was it likely justice of the peace would
be in his Office for business on Sunday, or,
if there, any transaction on such day
would have any effect7 The review OF the
case on his own side set out an array of
facts and discrepancies in the testimony
of Ln Dudley, the opponent, which pro-
duced deep feeling in the court room
among the spectators. 1t appears the judge
is to decide upon the point whether Mrs.
Wheyland the first-who. was married be-
yond a doubt to the deceased, who was
divorced, who was remarked and who bore
him two children-is entitled to letters Of
administration, or the second Mrs. Whey
land, who by her own account was married
to the deceased in the Office of q justice OF
the peace on the last Christmas Eve.
Seventh District Court.
In the case of the heirs of John Slidell
VS.. Joseph p. HornOr and w. s. Benedict,
Judge Wharton Collens has rendered the
following decisions: & .at4aI
Considering the resolution passed by the
Congress of the United States, approved
July II, 1862, explanatory Of an act to sup
press insurrectiOn, etc., No. 63, page 627
Statutes at Large, and that the allegations
of PLAINTIFF petition are proved and the
defense is rebutted by said resolutions.
Judgment for plaintiff.
The heirs OF Slidell claimed some real
estate in this city, which was sold by the
United States marshal under proceedings
in the United States District Court under
the cOnfscation act.
Eighth District Court.
T. Wharton Collens, Louis Duvigneaud
and Charles Leaumont have applied in this
court for writ of mandus against the
State Treasurer to pay the warrants held
by them. and furthermore, that he
may be ordered to exact from the State
tax collectors, sheriffs and other collecting
officers of the State, in every instance, Q
full, complete and bona fde performance Of
their duties, to pay into the State treasury,
in cash, the moneys certified by the State
Auditor as payable by them, according to
their accounts, without allowing the col
lecting officers to present any warrants or
demand against the State as q set off or
compensation for themselves.
They represent that they expect to prove
that the Treasurer habitually allows the
State tax collectors, Sheriff and other col
lecting officers to evade the laws which re-
quire them to pay directly into the treasury
the moneys they have accounted for to the
State Auditor as collected by them. That
this illegal and corrupt evasion is perpe-
trated as follows: That sevefal of the col
lecting officers speculate in State war
rants. and when they come to pay into the
treasury the money they have collected, in
stead Of doing SO and acting as bona fide
agents and officers, they simultaneously
present the warrants they hold and assert
the. right to set off these warrants against
tie moneys they are accounting for as
sworn depOsitaries and fiduciaries, and they
are allo wed by the Treasurer to retain the
moneys under pretext of debts due them
by the State, or, what is the same thing,
the State Treasurer pays them with one
hand what he is receiving with the other.
to the prejudice of these petitioners and to
all the bona ide creditors of the State, and
to the ruin Of the credit of the State herself.
That the fduciaries and depOsitaries are
prohibited by law from committing such
acts; that the law prohibits the collecting
agents from receiving from the taxpayer
State taxes in warrants, in OrGer that the
actual cash may 90 into the treasury, to be
fairly and equitably disbursed; but by this
practice the collecting agents surreptitOusly
use the money of the State for their private
purposes, and make for themselves the
usuriOus speculation which is refused to the
people, and which they are forbidden to
allow.
That unless this illegal and corrupt prac-
tice is forbidden, the rights of petitioners
to the prompt payment of their salaries as
soon as due will be defeated, and they will
wrongfully be made to wait an indefinite
time.
That the writ of mandamus is the only
means Of relief which petitioners have.