The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1874-08-07

DlStTlcC Judge Is acquainted win the
parties in interest; heard the witnesses
testify, and saw the documents. His
opinion, therefore, must have great
weight; while an examination of the
signatures satisfies the Court that the
District Judge did not err in admitting
the signatures alleged to be forgeries,as
genuine. Judgment affirmed.
City of Shreveport US. l.. \. Levy.
This was case where the defendant
appealed upon 4 fine of ten dollars in
the city court for having kept his store
open on Sunday. Defendant is Il Jew
and observes Saturday as his Sabbath.
The city ordinance provides that who
ever observes Saturday as his Sabbath
shall not be required to close his store
on Sunday. "Before the Constitution"
say the Court, "Jews and Gentiles are
equal by the law they must be treated
| alike, and the ordinance of a city coun-
Gil which gives to one sect q privilege
which it denies to another violates both
| the Constitution and the law, and is,
therefore, null and void.' Judgment
in favor of defendant.
Louisa Brstcey and husband VS.. Ray,
tax collector of Monroe. Plaintiffs
property was seized for taxes. Prior
to the sale, the tax was paid, but the
penalty enjoined. Held, that penalty
and tax We're equally exigible. In
junction dissolved, with costs.
Mrs. S. Richardson VS.. Dinkgrave,
ut al Ind Zoo. lx,;.,
! injunction, sustained.
Dodson Harrell vs.. J. G. Sanders.
Judgment affirmed.
| NJ. S. Pool VS.. Annie Alexander and
! husband. Judgment for plaintiff for
$151S.75, with interest as claimed.
Cornelia Mccoy VS.. Nicely Mccoy,
admir-. Judgment affirmed.
! Steamer Stella Block VS.. Parish OF
Richland. The fact that plaintiff ped
died his goods on steamboat did not
exempt him from the payment of
license, and the assessing of such license
stitution respecting tho regulation Of
commerce between the States. .Iudg-
ment affirmed.
! r. r. KilgOre VS.. Willis ct ais. Judg-
ment reversed; injunction dissolved.
| Croxton vs. Morgan. Judgment at
frmed.
Kilgore W.. Nicholson ct ais. Iniunc-
ton dissolved, the evidence not s,,s-
tanning the Judgment OF the court
below.
Martha GraSson VS.. John i:uic. Yer
dict of jury set aside on account of
| for now trial.
Sarah Richardson vs.. Dinkgrave,
sheriff, ct al. The plaintiff in injunc-
ton has tho right to open and cluSs. the
argument.
Where n mortgage creditor furnishes
supplies as factor, it is false doctrine to
contend that the proceeds Of the crop
entrusted to him by the planter, must
be imputed first to the mortgage, the
residue to go the payment OF supplies;
Judgment dissolving plaintiffs injuuc-
ton sustained, the evidence not sur
| porting her plea.
| J. r. P:,rgouu vs.. Mrs. &. Richartl-
son. Motion to dismiss denied. son
! tAIS itIVhlto. tllt Nbltlt lItiti
; 1t is first objected that the note sued
on is not stamped. This was not ncccs-
Sary as the act nianSing he note
was stamped.
1t is next objected that tho note was
not presented mt the place Of payment,
at its maturity, according to the agree
ment of the parties. This agreement
is not q stipulation in the act OF sale
and mortgage, but was added to the
| note some time after it's date, and ats-
thentic proof of a compliance herewith
cannot be required, rs seems to have
been considered necessary in the case Of
Moss VS.. Byrne, II l.. Glj.
The act Of mortgage used as evidence
to obtain the writ is not binding a.; a
mortgage, and the courts are prohibited
by the laws Of the United States from
admitting it in evidence, because it is
not stamped as required by the internal
revenue laws Of the United States, and
the evidence is otherwise insufficient to
| authorize the writ. The alleged in
sutficiency of stamps amounts to .Etl.y
cents.
80 I>D s..:x