New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-03-12
COURT RECORD.
WEDNESDAY, MARCH IL, 1874.
United States Circuit Court,

1 k $50 >.~VAAASs
WEDNESDAY,, MARCH IL, 1874.
United States Circuit Court.
United States Va. Hadnot ct als-On trial
testimony concluded and argument be
gun.
Supreme Court.
AS mark Of respect to the memory o,
ex-President Willard Fillmore, the court ad
journed till Friday
First District Court.
NOLLE PRosEQUI ENTERED.
Larceny-C. kirkland, Joseph Alexan
der, Alfred Baptiste. Lizzie Green, Frank
Lewis.
Assault and battery-Kate Shaw, M, Pa
iicio del Modal.
TRUE BILLS.
Murder--Bartholomy Town.
Assault and battery-E. G. Fortier, Pat
Murphy
Pernry-H c. Bull, Dennis Downing,
Peter Vincent.
False imprisonment-Pat Murphy. Den.
mis- Downing.
Larceny-L. Barba alias Lucas.
Obtaining money under false pretenses--
Peter Vincent.
PLEADED GUILTY.
Larceny-GeOrge Wilson, Pat Collins.
PLEADED NOT GUILTY.
Larcfny-Andrew Walker, George Will.
Hams, William Ward, H A. Kelley, Charles
johnson, William Henry, Zenon Decade,
John Anderson, George Tolbert.
Carrying concealed weapons. William
Ward, Henry c. Bull
MISUNDERSTANDING Town; bail fixed at
$4,000.
Obtaining money under false pfe.enses-
Henry Foster.
Ppriurv-TIaprv r. Roil
Assault and battery-E. G. fort:e:.
NEW TRIAL.
State vs.. Peter McWilliams. - Accused
was discharged on his own recognizance Of
$500.
rERDICTs.
State rs. Alexis Azard.-Larcenv. Guilty.
State vs.. Randolph Bauer.-Larceny.
Not guilty.
State Us. Benjamin Meyers-Iacceny.
Guilty.
State vs.. Brown and McAlpine.-First,
false imprisonment; second, assault and
battery. McAlpine not guilty. Brown,
first count, not guilty; second, guilty.
State VS.. Gus YOung-Burglary and lar.
ceny. Guilty.
State vs.. John Lee.-Larceny. Guilty,
with recommendation of mercy.
State va. Aleck Smith.-Larceny. Guilty.
State VS.. John Thompson.-Breaking and
tutTlug SlOFo III ING ulSNU ClIue du4 ldI'
ceny. Guilty Of larceny.
State VS.. Joseph Victor.-Larceny. Jury
being unable to agree . mistriaI was en-
tered.
Second District Court.
SUGGESTIONS of Carrie G. Catoire, de.
ceased, wife of Max Catoire, and William
Parsons, opened.
Fourth District Court.
The following petition was filed:
Peter Joseph VS.. David Bidwell.-Plain-
tiff alleges citizenship of the United States
and Louisiana; claims damage of $1,000;
that defendant is proprietor of the Acad
envy of Music. where, for pay the public
witness and enjoy plays etc.. that it is a
public place paying a license; that the
license is contract between defendant
and the State to conduct his business ac-
cOrding to law and make no discrimination
on account of race color or previous cOndi-
ton under the penalty of forfeiture of
license and closing of business; that March
7, 1874, plaintiff purchased tickets and " as
refused admission by Dan Owen, the
assaulted him and pushed him out of the
entrance; that he is a man OF good char
acter, taxpayer and property holder and
there was no good reason for refusing him
admission; that he has been refused CON
trary to law because of his African blood,
and that he has been damaged TO the said
amount.
Fifth District Court.
Judge Cullom rendered the following
decision:
N. E. Bailey VS.. +. Boursier & Code
PENDANTS occupied PLAINTIFFS premises on .
twelve months lease, giving twelve notes.
By agreement, Mrs. p. Boumara was 70
relieve defendants of the obligations of the
lease, and she Endorsed the notes. Defend
ants claimed the notes before giving up the
premises, which plaintiff refused. Defend
ants refused to vacate the premises. and no
rent has been paid, the court releasing Mrs.
Boumard on the ground that the lessor had
not put her il possession. &. &. 1892, sec.R, 3.
Defendants had no right to occupy the
premises, for the lease was cancelled. but
having refused to vacate. must pay the
rent. C. G. 1911, sees, 1913; Golding VS. Petit,
20 A. sos; Provosty VS.. Putnam, 10 A. "a.
Defendants can not take advantage Of their
own wrong, for plaintiff might have col
lected from Mrs; Boumard if they had
vacated. c. c. 23l6. Judgment for plain
tiff for rent, canceling lease, the notes to
be returned to defendants.
Sixth District Court.
Judge Saucier rendered the following de-
cisiOn:
l.. Heyliger vs. Abraham Hoffening ct
al-"On plaintiffs rule nisi for an injunc-
ton" The allegations of plaintiffs petition
charging fraud against the defendants, and
q private understanding between them,
whereby Abraham Hoffening was enabled
to prosecute his large claim to judgment
and execution, while the vigilance Of plain
titfs was Quoted by common attempt
made by all the creditors of Wolf 4 Levi,
and Wolf & Levi themselves, to inaugurate
and complete negotiations, whereby an ex-
tension for the payment of their liabilities
might be compassedkn favor of said Wolf
& Levi, are abundantly disproved by the
numerous atfidavits of responsible parties,
filed by defendants on the trial of this rule.
The allegations of collision between Hoff-
enng and Wolf & Levi are also disproved.
The question then presented is whether
the article of the Code of Practice, 30l, re-
lied on by plaintiffs, justifes the relief
sought by them. This article, the Supreme
Court held, makes provision in favor of
creditors who have higher privilege than
the plaintiffs in the execution, for it directs
the money to be brought into court, to be
divided among the creditors according to
their respective privileges and hypOtheca-
tiOns, which certainly includes the privi-
lege obtained by the seizure. The seizure
creates privilege even when the property
of the debtor is insufficient to pay all his
debts. 3 Rob-, p. LOG.
Plaintiffs allege no privilege, and the arti-
Gle of the Code of Practice above referred
to gives them no relief. Rule discharged.
Meteorolosicai and River Report.
The signal service, United States army,