New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1873-11-30
of the advantages Of permanent; repuo'

| signed to each of these were invested VIII
adequate authority to do whatever necessity
dictated to enforce the authority OF tne
United States. and to protect the newly Gu
| tranchsed. The freedmen who had out re-
! Gently been made the wards OF the nation,
were provided for by special laws, ard by
the creation of the Bureau OF Freedmen
| This institution had its centre IN Washlns
ton city, which was superintendent oy an
appointee for that purpose Its subdivisions
were promptly established in the Southern
States, and, among others, one in Louisiana.
| An assistant commissioner was sent to each
! of these States, and General Mower was
charged with the duties Of that office here.
The acts of Congress establishing this bu-
reau contain the mere outlines OF the routine
of its duties. l have carefully examined them
with view to discovering the extent OF the
| authority and power given to it, and find no
! mention made of any right to apprentice
even colored children. / next sought for
| information from distinguished officers OF
the army now located here. They could
| give me none. then wrote to General
| Townsend, in the District OF Columbia, who
| being. as | understood, in charge OF the
bureau, thought might furnish me the de
sired information. He has not been heard
| from. Thus, unable to find the rules and
| regulations of this peculiar department.
L determined to examine the article
OF indenture under the sanction OF
the laws Of Louisiana. During the strug-
gle through which we have inst passed, it
was frequently found necessary to invest
the military authorities with certain civil
functions. They as frequently exercised
them, and as often as the validity of their
acts was called in judicial question the Su-
preme Court Of this State recognized their
authority. Indeed it went SO far as to de
clare that it would. eX-OtficiO, take notice OF
some of their orders. Thus | find that the
abstract question of legal power to perform
some civil functions was duly recognized.
| therefore concllde that General Mower
probably had the authority to apprentice
children, although this is is essentially
civil prerogative. But the question arises,
how was he to exercise this authority
w as it to be done ulder the acts of Con-
gress They give him no authority. Was
1t to be done according to the rules and
regulations of the head of the bureau for
freedmen! Then can find none whatever
on the subject Was it to be done only &C
cording to the sictation of his own will
Then this would be recognizing an arbi-
trary power and rule which are peculiar to
an unrestralued dictatorship, and which are
at war with a republican theory of govern
ment. While L recognize his possible aG
thority, am forced to conclude that it was
his duty to exercise it according to the laws
of this State. Such course is usual. 1t
then becomes necessary for me to determine
what these laws are
Article l65, Civil Code, provides that ''the
regulations, manner and mode according to
which persons may be bound to serve
either as apprentices OR otherwise, are pre-
scribed by special laws" The special laws
pertinent to this case are found in Rays
Revised Statutes, beginning at section
seventy, which reads as follows: ANY
person who may bind himself or be bound
as an apprentice or indented servant, in
any art, mystery or occupation or as ser
want for the purpose of ordinary labor,
shall be bound to serve the time expressed
in his indenture, subject to the following
provisions and exceptions" Section sew
enty-one-"lt the party bound be under
the age OF twenty-one years he must be
bound by and with the assent of his parent
or tutor, or in case there be no such person
in the parish where he resides, then by the
Mayor of the city of New Orleans, if ne
reside in the parish of Orleans, or by the
parish Judges OF their respective parishes
Throughout. the State Section seventy
five Provides always, that if the |
party so bound as aforesaid be under the
age OF twenty one years, he must be bound |
with the assent OF his parent tutor or Gu
rator, etc. Section seventy-six-''All in !
dentufes shall De signed and delivered by !
the contracting parties in the presence Of |
two witnesses. one OF whom shall be either !
the parent, tutor or curator lit such exist. !
before the Mayor or judge. as herein pro- /
sided; and ii the party indented has no
parent. tutor or curator and is not OF sutfi-
Gent age and understanding to consent
and sign for himself, then the Mayor or
Judge. as the case may be- shall sign the
indenture for him Then follows the form,
which. Or comparison, Ifnd to be almost
entirely identical, in every particular with
the article OF indenture before me.
This Circumstance serves to convince me
that General Mower acted, or intended to
act, under the laws Of Louisiana. Has he
done so! In the first place, the child in
dented was not an orphan, having its
mother living and present at the time;
whereas the caption OF the purported con-
tract reads as follows "Indenture for
orphan children In the second place.
made between Joseph A. Mower, Brevet
Major General. assistant commissioner of
the Bureau of Freedmen for the State of
Louisiana, and Edward Webb, it was signed
by Webb and Mary Washington as the con-
tracing parties, and was approved not by
General Mower himself, but by L. q. Parker,
second lieutenant, First United States In
tantry, acting Assistant Adju5ant Gen
aral. BY the stipulations and recitals of the
y
signature to it as one of the contracting
parties is one other circumstance serving to
convince me that it was intended to be
lraWn up under the laws | have already
luoted. Else why should General Mower
not have signed it as the guardian of the
orphan James Ames" And why, if he had
to indent him. did he find it nee
essary to procure the mothers signature!
In the third place, there is but one witness
70 the act. whereas the law required two
The Endorsement in red ink. to wit: Il here
)y agree to the terms Of this ndenture |
Nary Washington, her mark is not shown
% have been signed by her, nor was 1t |
hown that she knew anything what !
,ver about 70. 1heye vas no attesting wit
less as to its correctness, and am convinced
hat in reality she knew nothing about it.
t, too, serves to convince me that the OBJ !
ect was to make it conform to the laws of
his State. Sections seventy-one and seven
y-tve of Rays Revised Statutes required
hat it the party bound be under the age of
wenty-one years he must be bound by and |
With the assent of his parent. Now. if Gen
raj Mower really had any power TO bind
ames Ames, why was it thought necessary
o have the ignorant mother signify her |
greement to the indenture Again. it will
re observed that she had signed it as one OF
he contracting parties, and why did not
hat suffice to show her approval! Clearly
ecause the specifications and seipnlaticns |
ad made no mention or allusion to her IS !
eing a party 20 the contract. 1t was,
therefore,. though. her signature at the bot ;
ON Of il had no greater binding effect upon
ey than upon any other stranger to che in
enture. HeS assen. was indispensable
nder the law AND hence the endorsement
4 question:
Thus reviewed, on, of opinion IRA, shis
Unhappy relator neSer did give hey assent
D the pretended apprenticeship of her child. +!
lays Revised Statutes, sections seventy I
OF having been an orphan General Mower ! ,
ad no power 20 bind him by an article of |
ldenturs. That be had no jurisdiction ia ,
ne case. Coo'o Cone Linz 43iss 3!6.