New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-03-29

the failure of Lizardi Il Co., of London, the
Crescent City Bank was insolvent. As sooI
| as it was known that LIZARD e. Co. had
misappr0priated the funds sent to pay the
bills drawn on them by the bank, the in
solvency of the bank was known to its
cashier, its directors. and was currently ru-
mored and suspected by the interested pub
lie. The board of directors as early as
February %. had determined to make no
further preferences Hero is the Official
act of the board of directors which in feet
implies the insolvency Of the bank. Is il
| possible that Summers, a member of and
president of the board of directors. and
who himself reported this action of the
board to Jonas, did not know of the insolv-
ency Of the bank? The Contemplation OF
insolvency" is in my judgment clearly es-
| tablished.
1t remains to inquire whether the trans
fer Of notes. etc, made on the twenty six b
OF February. 70 the Citizens Bank. in con.
temptation OF insolvency, was made with a
view to the preference of one creditor 70
another.
The fact is beyond dispute that the Citi-
zens' Bank. was preferred because itIwas
paid in full, while other creditors similarly
situated, were not paid any part of their
claims.
Did Summers, in making the transfer of
notes, etc, do it with view to prefer
ence! The law presumes he had in view
the natural result OF his acts But defend
ant claims to have shown that the trans.
fer was made to provide means to pay the
bills drawn by the Crescent City Bank in
London, and thus save the credit Of the
bank. Why, then, were not all the holders
of the bills applied to TO discount paper from
the portfolio OF the bank, and thus furnish
the means to each to take care Of his own
bills! This arrangement was made With
part, but not with all.
1t was made with the Citizens Bank and
others. They were secured and the bills
held by them paid. The bills held by
others were left unsecured and We're pro-
tested. How was the credit of the bank to
be maintained by such courses
e. G. Palmer, WHO held $4,000 of
the bills of the Crescent City
Bank drawn on Lizardi & Co.,
heard Of the failure Of the drawers
on February -, and within two hours went
around to the bank He saw Mr.. Faurie, |
the cashier, who told him to go and see Mr.. |
Summers, the president. He found him talk !
ing with three or four of the directors. No |
offer was made to Palmer TO transfer to him |
assets from the portfolio of the bank, in |
order to secure him. Doubtless he would |
have been willing to take care of the so 600
Of bills of exchange which he held, drawn
Dy the Crescent City Bank on Lizardi &
90. if he could have been made secure out
If the portfolio of the bank. So would the
Canal Bank, and Eugene Kelly 81 Co., and
;arriere But no such opportunity was
lforded them. These favors We're reserved
" Summers for the Citizens Bank and
thers.
The truth is, as is evident by the testi-
nony, that one az least Of the purposes of
he transfer of assets to the Citizens Bank
y the Crescent City Bank was to secure
he Citizens Bank on the bills which it had
urchased from the Crescent City Bank on
.izardi & Co. The pretense that this transfer
yas only to sustain the credit of the Crescent |
'ank Is too transparent TO deceive any one
l am of opinion, therefore, that after |
sview of all the evidence in the case that |
le transfer by the Crescent City Bank TO
10 Citizens Bank OF the notes, bills, etc.
eDtiOned in the bill of complain: was
AIDE in contemplation of insolvency. with
view to the preference of one creditor 10
lother, and is, therefore, utterly null and |
id Let decree be entered as prayed for
the bill.
Superior District Court.
Crescent City GasIigh5 Company VS.. =
aw Orleans Gaslight Comprehensive of
,uisiana and city of New Orleans, inter ,
nors. Arguments continued. =
First District Court. r
iNfORhAlIONS tlLEO.
Breaking and entering dwelling house, r
c.-John birmingham. II
TRUE BILLS. II
Assault and battery-Susau Landry, Cor /,
raj Miller, Thomas Donohue. :,
False mprisonment-Corpora Miller. r
c. Bull two charges. -
falsely altering a public record-Wil- =;
N Ii. Seymour, Philip McKenna. h
SENTENCED. ST
Assault and battery-HenrY Forchter, Ii
orgo Meyers, Christian Russell; each S nj
, or one day in Parish Prison; Pat Burk. hi
50. al
Rheinhardt. alias Flash "
ID; six months in the Penitentiary. as
PLEADED NOT GUILTY.
Paul. IL
ssault and battery-Frank Hitch. sam he
chell. -
Second District Court. re-
OF Charles Baumgarten. Mrs. of
bara Young, Henry Graham. Mrs. Ro- ru
a Dorman, wife of Felix Delaney and ! Nil
'ie Celeste Bernard, wife OF Pierre The
! Olivier opened. me-
Third District Court. tn
ldge Meunier rendered tbs following
sion: res
ate of Louisiana, ex r5latione Henry
ardere, administrator of the succession TO
nnie Christman, Va. John L. Laresehe, SUI
4 justice Of the peace for the parish Of OF
ans.-Application for writ of manda. i,
This controversy arises from the re. the
on the part Of the third Justice OF the of
e to try two suits pending before the the
t wherein he exercises his judicial func- gul
J, and entitled Henry Lagardere. adj. hbt
strator, VS.. William Schafer The rel L
alleges that on the - day Of March, reg
at A. NJ, the two cases Of SUI
" Lagardere, administrator. va WI. fac
Shatfer, Nos. 96i and 1922 on the dock sta
the third Justices court, we're duly par
for trial, the parties being represent peo
: their respective attorneys then present Ire
'urt, when, then and there, the court 1
, in session, the Hon. John Laresche, tar.
of said Justice court, er nro0yio nit
announced his intention not to "a
said causes, and decided that they and
d be submitted for determination the
V other Justice Of the peace actino in Rel
tead, alleging az his REASONS far NOT ana
Z said cases, THAT the same had al pa !
been up and tried before him; that he Il
such an intimate knowledge of the ..
'rs from that circumstance. and had pow
liked opinions of the questions likely OF T.
again brought up and discussed that
It he must and would be inclipeu
st the defendant, fearing he could not
the cause with any hope OF doing JUS w
o said defendant; and would, there rum
refuse, and did refuse, to try the hast
" To this relator alleges that he OBJ mai.
/, on the ground that said justice had Bori
al or JUST cause OF recusation; that | Seer
Ut a just or legal cause of recusation dan!
Ter justice might try said cause in his Kit
stating ut the same time, however, Hen
f it was simply disagreeable and re- daug
mt to said justice to try the said not
he (relator1 could consent and agree men.
defendant to transfer the same to any will
justices court Of competent iurisdic-
that counsel for defendant de- est.