New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1873-02-12


pirates have for the flags Of the various
| nations which they run up to suit emer.
gencies, i: has been assigned them in ad-
vance By their defender and advocate the
Courier -.JOurna'. What remedy does the
tourie.-.I0urno' recommend: Another
presidential election, of course.
4 STUMP SPEECH FROM THE BENCH.
Judge Cullom, of the Fifth District
Court. took great deal of pains and ex-
pended his valuable time the other day TO
show his fusion friends that it is out of
his power to help them. 1t is fortunate
circumstance that we have q Supreme
Court possessed of sufficient knowledge Of
the law and authority to hold such eccen-
trio judicial luminaries in check.
The question before tie Fifth District
! Court was a motion to transfer cause
there pending, in which the city is party,
to the Superior District Court. One of the
attorneys in the sui. filed a petition in
which the right Of the Superior Court to
be court at all was questioned. and Judge
Cullom has written forty or fifty pages Of
what he considered his reasons for judg-
ment. in which he shows that he is person
ally very much of the opinion of the attor-
ney. but dare not say so as a judge be-
| cause the Supreme Court has settled the
| question adversely TO the fusion interest.
It willsperplex legal mind to see what
connection there is between abolishing
one or more courts and erecting another.
The constitution expressly authorizes the
Legislature to establish as many district
courts in this parish as the public inter.
ests require. We presume it will be con-
coded that the Legislature is to be the
sole judge of the necessity. and that i. is
by this clause of the constitution vested
with discretionary power over the whole
matter. In the case at bar it appears that
the General Assembly decided upon Great
ing another district court for this parish.
and yesting in it certain jurisdiction. The
right to create this tribunal was the only
one before Judge Cullom. He had moth.
ing to do with the two abolished courts.
No person representing these two defunct
tribunals appeared before him as inter-
yenor. or as having an interest in the suit
before him. All he had to determine was
whether the law requiring him to send
certain cases from his court to the newly
created tribunal was one to be obeyed,
and whether it affected any of the prerog-
atives of his own court. He had nothing
whatever to do with the Seventh and
Eighth District Courts or their judges. If
they had suffered any wrong they could
seek their remedy in the manner provided
by law, but he could not redress thei.
grievances for the very good reasons that
he had not been appealed to. and would
have been without jurisdiction if he had.
Besides. in this stump speech from the
bench no distinction is made between
abolishing court and legisiating a judge
out Of Office. It is barely possible the
Legislature might do the one without the
other following as sequence. We hold
to the opinion that if, il the Judgment of
the Legislature. any district court in this
city became unnecessary. it could abolish
it, while the judge would remain such to
the end Of his term. It is very clear. at
all events, that the adjustment OF the
Seventh and Eighth District Courts can
not have any effect on the legality Of the
establishment OF the Superior Court.
There is no necessary relationship between
the two propositions Neither is depen-
den. on the other. and therefore each must
stand or fall on its own merits.
The argument on the point Of jurisdic-
ton is SO ably answered by the opinion of
Judge Howe. in the case reported in q
An. SOS, that We merely copy it without
comment:
Eirst-There is nothing in the nature % |
things which makes II improper for the |
Legislature to control the organization aud |
jurisdiction Of the district courts OF this !
parish. Such power has been freely ex-
ercised in Louisiana under the c0nstitu- |
tions of 1912, 1885, 1852 and 1864. A SINH
lar authority has generally been vested !
in the Legislatures Of our sister States,
and has been exercised by Congress
in reference 20 tribunals inferior to
the Supreme Court OF the United States.
Such control has never. so far as we are
advised, been deemed OF a nature danger
Gus TO public liberty or private right: but.
OIL the contrary, may, III many instances,
be used to further bOsh: and especially. by
proper regulation. to prevent those distress
ing conflicts which have too often sprung |
up in large cities, where courts OF the first
instance are necessarily numerous. II. |
therefore. it had been the intention Of the
trainers OF the constitution of 1868 TO de-
prive the Legislature OF a cOntrO! so limo
cent and useful-of a power which had
been exercised without complaint in LOUISE
ana tor ne arly sixty years-Itls likely theS
would have so declared in unmlstakahle
terms. Yet when we turn 70 the conslitu.
ton we find this provision.
For each district there shall BE one dis
trict court, except in the parish OF Orleans,
in which the General Assembly may estab-
hsh as many district courts as the public
interests may require. Until otherwise
provided. there shall be seven distric:
courts for the parish OF Orleans, with the
following original jurisdiction The First,
exclusive criminal jurisdiction Second. ex-
elusive probate jurisdiction: Third, eX-
elusive Jurisdiction Of appeals from Just ices
of the peace !: the Fourth. Fifth. Sixth an.
Seventh District Courts. exclusive jurisdic-
zion in all civil cases, except probate. when
the sum in contest is above one HUNDRED!
dollars, exclusive of interest. These seven
courts shall have such further jurisdiction
not inconsistent herewith - shall be CON
terred by law.
We find in this language express author
ity conferred on the Legislature to create
n ~ Eirrlty hi .+ript and