New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1873-02-11

his claims find much difficulty. The agree
ment between the parties was only verbal.
Nothing was said as to whether primage
should be allowed on the cargo from New
Orleans TO Liverpool. The defendants ties.
tify that the plaintiff had no part in engag.
ing that cargo OF IL loading the ship. and
only Joined the vesse! when she was
about 10 sail. Ross states he arrived IN
New Orleans six days before the departure
of his ship, and during that time he was III
different ways attending TO the business OF
his employers. In plaintiffs account there
is an item of $279 20, being for pIimage Oh
the voyage from Cardiff hither' This IS me
only part Of his bill not objected TO by 'ne
owners OF the ship. They admit bis rlgnt
to A per centage on the freight earned IN
that voyage. but they make its amount ON!
1863 -.
The commissions claimed by Captain
Ross on his outward voyage IRON Ne" VI
leans TO Liverpool amount TO 900 ~ anu
the commissions on the second voyage rum
New Orleans to Liverpool, begun after the
discharge of Ross, would be tlJo, or
500 9gs We look in vain in the record for
aDy evidence as to the custom III regard 10
a case ike the present one. IL other words,
whether or not i: is customary tor a mast
of A ship 10 charge prlmdTc or COMMISSIONS
nm a CARO- already on board ship To the
command OF which he has been appointed,
and also whether the removal OF captain
after he has engaged the cargo and super
intended the loading of his vessel. and
when nearly ready to sail, works a forfeit.
IRE Of his primage or commissions, sven
when his employers have a right TO remove
him from command, as | believe they had
in this case, his emplo ymtnt having been Tor
no specified period. In the absence OF any
such evidence, and of any stipulations IN
regard 20 the matter by the parties them
serves, Che court has Tor It's IctioR no other
guide than that OF equity.
The defendants say thai Captain kOss
was only entitled 20 $3.50 u. including
wages and commission. for period OF SIX
months and seventeen days during which
he was in their employ. The court thinks
differently. The Inate Of Captain Ross was.
during that time. receiving 500 per month.
This rate OF wages for the same period
would amount 10 $39i. few dollars more
than, the wages OF the chief officer OF the
ship.
/! think it but Jus. tina. the primase or
commissions claimed by the plaintiff ON the
cargo he took 10 Liverpool! be allowed MN,
his services in engaging and superintend-
ing the loading OF Che second outward
cargo being at least sufficient 10 counter
balance those of that nature rendered III
regard 60 the former cargo before he tOCk
command OF the ship. ] can not allow the
item he claims on the trip made by the ship
TO Liverpool, after bis services as master
had been dispensed with by the owners.
This stem is $500 90. The demand OF the
plaintiff should be allowed with the excep-
ton OF the last named item.
The Gettysburg IS 4 sQuare-Ticged slip
Of large carrying capacity. The office
OF master OF a vessel of that class is one OF
Importance and great responsibility. His
duties are nultitaricus and OnerOus. re-
quiriDg great intelligence, courage pfu-
dence and vigilance.
He is responsible for The lives Of hi. crew
and the property committed TO his keeping.
1t SECURES years OF study and severe tram
ing TO lit him FOR the dangerous duties of
his profession. IL. iso!ates himself from
home, wife and children, and exposes him
self almost continually - deadly peril.
Men of this class will always be we'll paid
:or their important services.
Captain Ross. By the testimony. appears
20 have been an efficient and faithful officer.
Twice he braved the storms of the western
ocean, and Che greater dangers OF st.
George, channel, riskins his life 20 pro-
mote the pecuniary interests OF the DIT.
PENDANTS. He remained with his ship N
thi. hlrhOv in che autumn Of 1870. exposing
himself to the danger ef being stricken
down By yellow fever. and working 10 ad.
vance the. interests Of his employers. The
defendants are bound TO pay him.
Wherefore. let there be Judgment II IA.
vor of plaintiff and against the defendants
IL soido for the sum of S87l. with legal ir.-
teres. and costs, to be paid by lien and priv.
.le.e out q! the property attached.
Fifth District Court.
IN The case OF Ben amin J. West vs.. Nra.
{. Wesley and the city OF New Orleans,
Judge Cullom rendered tho following
opinion:
\ melton WAS made by TIE Assistant City
Attorney. i. Lewis, 10 transfer TIL. case.
as 20 the city OF New Orleans. ia the ST.
pcr!Or Dis'ric. Court OF the parish of Or
leans. under act No. :. OF the General As
semb!y Of Louisiana, approved December
II. \. ID. 49,. Said &C: declares that. i'm
medatcly upon the passage thereof, Ill
snail be the duty OF the judges OF the Third.
Fourth. Fifth ana Sixth District Courts Tor
the parish OF Orleans TO transfer 20 the Su
periOr Dis;ric: Cour: for ;he parish et Or
leans all suit. OF proceedings the !ur.sdlc.
iion over which Is. by Tins law. vested in
said Superior District. Court Section two
q! said a:t, as 10 juT.s!!c IN THIS case.
reads a. follows:
The said Superior District Court shall
also have exslus!y. "rigina! jurisdiction il
and for the parish. of Orleans. over all cases
or proceedings in which the State of Lon
Isiana. the munic!pa! corporation OF the
city Of New Orleans. or any corporation
established BY ac; of the General Assembly
and domIciled III the parish Of Orleans.
shall he q party etc. In obedience TO
these provisions the court had ordered the
case 20 be transferred 30 the Superior Court
TO be transferred as to tine city. when the
plaintiff attorney. K. II. Mari. came before
* and asked 30 have the order gescluded,
with view 20 contemplated objections Of
a constitutional character 10 the right Of
the Superior Court to have the order granted
as to the city.
The order was revoked, and The following
rule was fled in Two Or three days after
ward. notice Of which was accepted by Mr..
Lewis, representing the city. 4 day was
fixed for the trial 81 the vuie. and it was
taken up. Upon hearing the same read
the court, ex utlic:o. ordered numbers one.
two. three and fear of :he reasons assigned
stricken out. first, because this court Is
W!thCu, authority 80 pass upon the ques-
tons thus eollaterally raised. because It IL
in dGty bound to recognize all the depart
men.. and branche. az the State govern
ment as :hey have been recognized by thc
government of the United States. and last
lv. because the only question before II IS as
10 the .onstitutionaiItr OF -aid act No. =.
approved Dtc.mbe. II. 49,. creative OF
the Superior Court fer the par'sh OF Or
leans. and which defines its jurisdiction:
The first reason was based upon Che deci-
sion o. ,de Supreme Court Of the taited
States IN Luther -. Borden {. si@.. re
ported in the seventh Towards Reports at
p. I ct seq. in which, the court held that
tho federal courts have no jurisdiction OF
the question. whether government organ
lied III a State is ;he duly constituted COZ
eminent of The State: that is question
which belongs 10 the political. not to the
judicial powers" The court held IN this
ease that, by law. the President was clothed
with authority 30 iecilc which was 'h"
government. where w. ostensib!c govern,
,uents were contendng for supremacy. and
that i had n" power 10 entertain jGc >ilc-