New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-06-04
Court Items.

In the United States District Court. in
bankruptcy, suit has been filed against
the New Orleans, Mobile and Texas Rail.
road company by some of the contractors
and rule to show cause why they shall
| not be declared bankrupt has been taken,
which will be heard June 8. The petition
is signed by Lyman j. Dodge and the aft.
davit made by William H. Roberts. They
declare that they are the owners OF certain
certificates of indebtedness and bonds to a
large amount; that this company have thus
far refused payment; that protest has been
had by reason OF this default, and that this
failure to pay accruing obligations consti-
tutes of itself an act of bankruptcy.
In the Superior District Court the suit
against Governor Warmoth was ended by
the verdict of the jury in his'tavor. The
petition was filed last August, and alleged
that he lad disposed of $4,000 worth of
bonds at fifty cents on the dollar and placed
the proceeds to the credit of his contingent
fund.
The theory of the defense was that there
was no such action on his part, and if there
was any irregularity it was caused by the
error of clerk-not Of the Governor, but
Of predecessor of Auditor Clinton. The
very intelligent jury, as all our juries now
are under the new law, took this view Of
it, and entirely exonerated Governor War
moth from any responsibility in the matter
Judge Hawkins has released two items
from the effects of the injunction on the
appropriation bill. One of them, the $50, 900
for the current militia expenses, was not
enjoined in the original petition, but was
effected by the supplemental petition, which
denied the validity of all items in the Sec
ond section of the appropriation bill. The
other item. OF $4,000 for rewards for appre-
hension of criminals, stood on it's own mer-
its, and there was no intervention in regard
to it. Judge Hawkins allowed it because
of it's absolute necessity. The order also
restricts the Auditor in other matters.
But two briefs have been fled in the case
One of them, that of the Metropolitan Bri-
gade, simply details the claim, which is one
of the most just and equitable under con-
sideration by the court; and the other is
that of the Charity Hospital. In this, the
counsel Alfred Shaw, Esq, discusses the
whole question of taxes, appropriations
and the powers of the Legislature. The
following points are presented, the Ian
guage of Mr.. Shaw being quoted:
The appropriation is simply one of out
standing revenues for back years. 1t is
only to be represented by warrants payable
out of the revenues or receivable for the
taxes Of back years. The State is not
cent the poorer by issuing them; it incurs
no debt in doing 80; they are only payable
in or out Of those back taxes, and the
holder has no other claim.
A warrant is a check for money only if
there be money In the treasury to pay it.
If not, it is mere assignment Of outstand-
ing revenues. AS such it is known to the
use and legislation Of the State for many
years. Its wisdom or unwisdom is legis-
lative and not judicial question.
A fallacy on the subject of warrants is
that the eir depreciation is caused by the ex-
istence of the warrants themselves. Their
tangible and easily assignable form is really
the cause of their maintaining the value
they.have.
Mr.. Shaw proceeds to show that there
nue, and says:
Can any one gainsay that these outstand-
ing taxes are within the appropriating
power Of the Legislature, especially when
exercised in the innocent form of warrants
receivable for those taxes and encouraging
their payment, or payable only out of pro-
ceeds collected, thus not adding in anywise
to the liabilities Of the State.
If We cOncede that the State limitation
of debt is reached, the answer is-the ex-
tent of it's levies. The Legislature may ap-
propriate whatever it has made levy or
setting apart for.
His main argument is that the Legisla-
ture has this power, and while exercising it
can not be interfered with by any other
branch of the government.