New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-04-21

10 DeH6uI tho people VINO, OF necessity, must Dat.
ronize those who had obtained the franchises
Following out this ana ogy. the Legislature. con-
siderng the increasing public wants, enacted that
the area OF gas lighting ehould be extended. This,
Iconcludc, was the object or purpose in view by
the Legislature in passing the act Of 1860 and not
their purpose to increase or enlarge the privileges
of the company. There being no other objection
urged against the validity of this act and an exam
alton of the act discloses nothing inconsistent
with any other provision of the constitution then
or now in force, and nothing nconsiste with the
well settled principles Of constitutional law, the
act of 1860 is constitutional.
The next question for consideration so far as the
city of New Orleans is concerned is whether this
act being constitutional posrpones the right of the
city to purchase the gas works in April, 1875, &C.
cording TO the terms OF the charter.
The city Insists that she has this right secured
to her by the terms of the charter, which it must
De conceded is valuable right, implying that she
had the right from and after the termination of
the che rter to use said works for the purpose of
lighting the city, This provision of the grant
recognizes the full right of property and owner
ship to the gas works to be in the company. and
makes provision for their sale at the expiration OF
praisement of their value and designatinS the
mode and means of payment.
According to the terms of this provision, when
taken in connection with the clause extending the
charter. it is manifest that the Legislature had in
contemplation the use of these works for the pur.
1t seems, then, to follow logically that the poet
poneme mt of the charter OF the company for twenty
years after the time fixed for its termination post
pones the right of the city for the length of
time to purchase the works, because the right to
continue the organization of the company carries
with 1t the right y own and operate the works of
The company. This dispOses of the interventions
and leaves only the remaining question of the
elusive grant given to the plaintiff by the charter
vend gas in the city of New Orleans for a period
of fifty years, commencing the first Gay of
April, 1875 The great length of time embraced in
this exclusive grant causes us to pause, and con-
slider well the legal principles on which monOpnlies
are mare to rest, and the source of power from
which the sovereign derives the right to invest
ar n
government is at war with the doctrine that
the law-makinS power may at will. ard in the
exercise Of mere caprice fancy, create and in.
vest a company an Individual with monopoly
over any legitimate or lawful pursuit. Such crea-
tons, whenever and wherever made, have met
with stern rebuke and cOndemnations from all
publicists and urists in every age and in all parts
of the civilized world Monopolies, have, however,
received sanction for a Limited period of time in
matters of great public importance where ind-
yidual enterprise might fail OF be Inadequate tor
lack of means OF the security for realizing reward
for the investment. Bat in all such cases the
grant is or should be kept within such bounds as
not intrench upon the vested rights of labor or
as to allow every person to freely engage in and
pursue any vocation CT business the same all
other persons. Take the case of the slaughtering
of animals for food in the city of New Orleans,
where company was created to supervise the
slaughtering OF animals for food, aud place
of particular kind created. but it was
held that this monopoly in no wise interfered
Win tights OI because every person was
permitted under the restrictions imposed. TO fol.
low the business Of saughterng animals for food.
The monopoly in that case was sanctioned ON the
ground of sanitary and police regulations, which
did not contain an abuse OF police power. This
decision looses much of it's force as an authority
on account of the division Of the judges OF the SUI
preme Court of the United States or the question;
there being we Of the judges in favor of the valid
ity of the act and four against it. 1t can not be
public mind everywhere Oh the right Of State Leg
isstures to grant monopolies. This change is
marked by the current Of legislation; the restric-
tiOns placed upon them by constitutions, and the
engagements OF the rights Of mankind by amend.
ments to the constitution of the United States.
The right to create a monopoly springs from and
necessity in any given case. the right is limited.
The question of lighting city with gas is a pub.
to many persons. 1t must be directed by an
individual will, and requires large amount of
ready and available capital to make it permanently
successful The course of legislation in this State
shows that it is not in the Judgment of the Legis
lature any logger necessary to have monopoly of
gas making. for the public purpose of lighting the
city with gas because the act Of 1860 had repealed
that exclusive privilege which had been previously
granted to the New Orleans Gas Company. This
refusal to continue the monopoly which had pre-
vously existed for forty years, under the grant by
that Legislature, was step forward, ard a rebuke
to the license which bad previously been INDUCED
in by the Legislature in the granting of monopoly
for that purpose. The action of the Legislature of
1860 must be taken, therefore, as the judgment of
the people OF Louisiana that it was 10 longer nee
essary for the benefit OF the public that monopoly
should De conferred upon any one TO make gas.
From these c0nstde ratons it appears that the
exclusive right of the plaintiff to make gas IN the
city of New Orleans is void, because there is no
public Iecessity for ii. The Crescent City Com.
panv has the undoubted right to make and vend
gas from AID after the date at which their rights
accrue, and to that extent their charter appears
to be good and valid. The defendant has the same
right By the extension of their charter for twenty
years, with the exclusive privilege taken away.
Judgment for defendant.
Superior Criminal Court.
From the seventy names drawn from the iury
box, forty seven Jurors were obj aimed, and from
them the court selected the following gentlemen
to serve as graAd jurors:
J j. Warren. foreman; William r. Bastow, Wal
ter II. Wait, John Mcqueen, Henry Camp, J. K.
Small, Gustave Chaval.ier James Damorele p b.
s. Pinchback, Philip Werlein, r. VI. harrison
Aristide Mary, joseph Bowling. Octave Belot, T.
3. Stamps, John A. Brasselman.
The grand jury were then addressed by the
court as follows
GEyTLEMKN-Under the law creating the Supe
rior Criminal Court for the parish of Orleans, the
luty develves upon the Judge of that court to se
ect sixteen citizens to constitute the grand iury
Tor the parish OF Orleans during the period of three
months from the time of their being iupaneled, |
unless sooner discharged.
In compliance with that duty have selected YOU !
% act grand jurors with the full conviction that
have made worthy selection.
The present regular session of this court will ter
inmate on the lest day of the ensuing month of |
May, but the judi &c is empowered to hold special
sessions whenever the pubic interest may so re-
IuiTe. Whether there VIII be any necessity for a |
special session at the end Of the present regular |
er is question that can be determined only |
hen. Should there be special session you viii |
lot be called upon to perform any duty after the
expiration OF this regular term but If it be other
wise you will continue to act Tor three months
rom this date.
1T believes you, gentlemen, to fully appreciate
he fact that grave responsibility rests with YOU
IS Ind jurors. You must divest yourselves of
he thought that a burden is imposed On you. II
s to be regretted that it has grown to be popular
lief hat m
" any and all means, carries with it no blame, |
hd is not Inconsistent with the aualtcat OF
o avoid jury duty: for there is no more portant,
20 more sacred duty to be performed ~ good |
itizen. than that OF juror. You are all IN
Oubtedly familiar with the frequent complaints
hat improper findings We're returned By grand
lries, proper ones omitted, and that improper |
erdicts were rendered by petty iuries. How
ould it be otherwise when the very citizens who
re londest in their concentrations of these occur
enoes, are the ones who have brought about that
tate of thlngs Dy avoiding the performance of o
uty wmch they owe TO their country, to them
elves and their families, and upon which so very
luch depends the peace and prosperity of The
l am well aware that some in
Convenience is caused by service upon juries but !
your case that inconvenience VIII be greater !
r less according You are systematic, prompt |
I'D before you. You need not meet every day, |
nd when you do a few honrs well employed will |
on of cases. SO thoroughly impressed am with !
'e necessity OF the performance Of this duty by !
10 qlalhed citizens, that am determined to en- |
rce IL without fear OF favor.
Until the necessary building and accommodate |
ons for the sessions OF this court are prepared |
lu viii have to make little sacrifice of comfort |
using the rooms in this building, but whatever |
IN be done to improve the condt ton Of things !
lille you remain here will be cbeerfuliy ordered |
the court and will that, IL the building to
occupied by this court. the looms of the grand !
I'd petty iuries be made 1t for the deliberations of
ch important bodies.
as YOU should enter upon the discharge of your |
lty and exercise whatever power you may possess
lderstandingly, desire your attention while / |
ye you briefly some explanation OF how that |
lty is to be performed and the power exercised. ,
As Grand iIirnrS eYamiIIa int liz fact |