New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-07-26
COURT RECORD.
SATURDAY, JULY Is, 1874.
eupcrj>r Di.trict Court.

SuDer1oE District Court.
Judge Lynch, of the Fourth District
Court, presiding in the absence of Judge
Hawkins, rendered the following decision
Barthe.-UDder q yule nisi Maybe & Co.
have applied for an injunction to restrain
defendant from violating the provisions of
an act passed at tho session of the General
Assembly Of the State of Louisiana in the
year 1874. The city of New Orleans and
Turhbull, the Administrator of Commerce,
having interviewed and been made parties
The case is in q proper condition to be dis
posed of upon the constitutionality of the
private market law which is the only serious
question arising herein 1or judicial deter
minatiOn.
Full argument has been had in the mat
ter by j. B. Gotten, Esq, and George s.
Lacey, City Attorney, on the part of plain
titfs and intervenOrs, respectively, and by
E. Filleul, Esq.,, counsel for the defense,
and, considering the Importance OF the
question presented, have bestowed upon
it a very careful examination.
When take into consideration the object
of the statute, which is police and sanitary
in its character, the unbrOken line of pre-
cedents which authorize the Legislature
and q municipal corporation by the au-
thority of the State to legislate in reference
to the public and private markets in q city
or town, and when, more particularly,
have the expression of an opinion from
majority of the judges of the Supreme Court
of this State maintaining the law in ques-
ton, can have no doubt of its constitution
ality. l conceive it to be the duty of tho
judiciary at all times to support the legisla
tive aud executive departments of the
State, unless those departments should be
found committing acts plainly unconstitu-
tional and illegal. As 1 have no reason to
believe that the law above referred to was
enacted for any other than good purpose,
and as do not entertain doubt, and much
less reasonable doubt, in relation to the
constitutional question raised by counsel
for defendant, l must regard the act to
regulate private markets in the city of New
Orleans as valid, subsisting and solemn
expression of legislative will, not only to
be heard, but to be needed and enforced by
this court Edwards vs.. Dupuy, q A., 694;
6 Cranch. l26; IL Wheaton, 270.
The act being constitutional, it is the
duty of the court to prevent q violation of
it's clear and stringent provisions.
opposition to the private market law, not
only injure the health and disturb the
peace OF the city of New Orleans, but are
actual and lawless trespassers npOn rights
of other parties having an interest in the
maintenance OF the law; and this court,
when its attention is called to any illegal
act of private market men sought to be re.
strained by writ of injunction, has but
one course to pursue and that is, peremp-
torily to arrest such unlawful act until the
matter can be fully inquired into, and dis
posed of upon the merits OF the case.
would greatly prefer to have this mat
ter disposed of by the regular judge of this
court, now absent; but my preferences must
give way to the unquestionable Fright of a
litigant to be heard.
The application for relief is made to me,
and am compelled to dispose of the ap-
plication according to my conscientious con-
illusions in regard to the law as applied to
the case before me.
For these reasons, have determined to
grant the writ of Injunction in favor OF
plaintiffs as prayed for.
Second District Court.
SUGGESTIONS of Peter Wolf, Francis j.
Oser and Margaret Mckay opened.
Catherine Holtgrave prays to be emanci
pated.