New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1873-01-11
THE COURTS.
United States District Court.

LDe rules OF court, 10 serve during thlS pres
emit term of the court, and that venire
issue for the same.
The order previously issued for the sale
by the marshal of the steamer Katie, was
amended as follows: Tho marshal is or
dered to sell said steamer for cash sufficient
to pay costs and expenses. For the bal
aDee of the price he is authorized to receive
bond with good and solvent securities
conditioned that the principal and sureties
shall, after the various claimants shall have
had their respective rights adiudlcated
upon and decree rendered for the same in
ten days after the order of court directing
them SO to do, the said principal and sure
ties shall deposit il court the price OF the
adjudication.
Superior District CsRrt
George 8. Lacey, City Attorney, has en-
tered suit in THIS court against the estate OF
l.. +. Foucher, Marquis de Gree, to recover
the sum of $500 due the city for muni-
cipai taxes for the wear 1879. ID. A. South
worth, Robert Bloomer, c. E Cirardey &
Co, Nicholas j. Hoey, John II. OConnor,
the New Orleans Park and the commits
sioners of the tame are also sued, they hav'
ing bound and obligated themselves, with
the estate of Foucher, to pay the full
amount of the taxes claimed. The city has
a lien and privilege on the following prop
erty: All that portion situated IN the Sixth
District, bounded by the Mississippi river
in front, the middle of Nay AIDES street tnOw
st. Charles ayeDue) in the rear, the lower
line of Greenville aud the upper line OF
Burthevlle, containing about 30 arpents.
The petition sets forth amicable demand
and refusal to pay. Wherefore petitioners
pray that said defendants may be cited to
appear and answer, and III addition TO the
Judgment against the Foucber estate, that
In due course Of law they be condemned
jointly and severslly to pay petitioners
$4,000, with interest at ten per cent and
costs. That for The payment thereof your
petitioners be Geereed to have mortgage
and privilege upon the property hereinabove
described; that the same may be ordered to
be sold for the payment OF the Judgment
herein prayed for.
State ex rel. HI. A. Southworth, recorder
of mortgages, VS.. Charles Clinton, State
Auditor. This is q petition filed yester-
day asking for msndamus compelling the
Auditor to pay petitioner the sum Of 81 30
for recording the name Of each delinquent
tax payer in the parish of Orleans, under
section 2l72, Revised Statutes.
State ex rel Willis w. johnson va. L. A.
DUvigneaud. This is a suit under the in
trusion in Office act, contest for the office
of sealer of weights and measures Of the
First District of New Orleans.
State of Louisiana Ok rel. I. Wharton
LOllGnS w. ADpOlnb Olhlo ALCdS'
urer. On motion of J. Q. A. Fellows. for
the Attorney General, and on suggesting to
the court that there is error TO the prejudice
OF the State in the Judgment rendered
herein on the sixth instant is Is ordered
that suspensive appeal be allowed the de-
fendant from said judgment, Teturnable to
| the Supreme Court on Monday, the twenti-
eth of January, 1873, without bond, the
State of Louisiana being the appellant.
= 'hnr lp in
and Antoine Dubuclet, No 800 On motion
of A. F. Field, Attorney General, il is OF
dered that the injunction issued herein, SO
far 10 the item No. 3, being the appropriation
of S3l ,740 60 for the free school fund, be-
dissolved, and the petition, SO far as that
item is concerned, be dismissed without
prejudice.
The State Of Louisiana, on the relation of
Fl. w. Benjamin, has flied q suit in this
, court against John Calhoun, Administrator
! of Finance, 10 whieh relator AYERS that he
| is holder Of certificates to the amount OF
| SIS, 900, issued by the city of New Orleans.
| the school board, and the Board of Metro
politan Police said certificates being paya-
| BILE in gold bonds, bearing seven per cent
! interest, as provided by ordinance No. l769.
| adopted October l, 1872
Petitioner avers that application for ex.
| change of certificates afore said has been
! made to said John Calhoun, Administrator
! of Finance, who refused 10 comply with
/ the demand OF reiatOr Hence the latter
| applies for a mandanus TO compel said Ad-
Einistrator to do his duty. The court has
! oriere6 the mandanIus 10 issue.
FIFTH District CSErts
Frederick A, Belhado vs.. William T.
| Weide {. Co.-The plaintiff in this cause
TOOK passage on the steamship Mississippi,
at New York destined tor New Orleans.
! His baggage was put on board. Eothing is
| said Of tho fare, and We presume it was
Satisfactorily settled. The witnesses testi-
| fed that it ID the universal custom to stow
| baggage of passengers IN the hold OF Sea
! going vessels. In this instance it is shown
| that it was stOwed on deck; that the tar
| raulin was spread over it and ropes SO ar
! ranged as to make everything secure III the
| opinion OF the witness. This vessel is
| shown to have carried baggage in this way
! on other occasions, but it WAS also shown
| that all other vessels habituallY stow it in
the hold.
The unfortunate steamer vas unexpect-
eddy overtaken by storm and driven
| aground. The surg ing waters swept over
her deck and carried away the plaintiffs
| baggage He briggs this suit TO recover its
| value.
Judge Cuiiom. IN passing upon the case.
| says:
have examined the detailed bili OF con.
| tents of his trunk charged TO have been
lost, and find it decidedly elegant in the
number and quality of articles that com
pTised his travelling wardrobe. But what
| ever may be my opinion of the liberalitv OF
extravaganza of the plaintiffs apparel, he
| has testified that the account is correct and
there is nothing in tha evidences of the
| other witnesses TO show that ne was in
error. The court must. therefore act upon
| the evidence before it, without INDUCING
any personal opinions of the plaintiff 3 taste
| or apparent extravaganza.
On other ships it appears to have been
| the universal custom to carry baggage in
| the hold; while on this on one OF two
| previous voyages she had carried it I'd on
| this occasion--on deck Tho fact thus es-
| tablished that she vas in the habit of disre-
| garding the precautions and safeguards
| which other ships sailing between the same
| ports found it necessary to observe and TO
| practice, would seem TO warrant the court in
| taking stern view of its liabilities in this
| instance, az far "a the evidence would
| Justify it, She wes q common carrier, and
| as such ia responsible for the loss
| Counsel for defense made an able argu-
ment before the court in which he insisted
! that as the plaintiff WAS on board and saw
| where his baggage had been slowed and
made no objections nor complained to the
! proper Officers on BOARD, le Is estopp6d
| from any right of action for its loss. / can
not cons der this proposition as at al tena-
| BILE or sound in law or fact. The master of
q ship has almost imperial authority. This
| right there is none To dispute" His re
sponsibility is oorrespondinglJ great, The
| two must coexist. Passengers are supposed
to be acquainted with these facts. They
are entitled to the benefit OF full conf
dence in the capacity and experience Of
| those who make the ocean their home. 1t
is not fair nor right TO presume that pas
| sengers should look after and direct the
| slowing away Of their baggage, when the
80 La