New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-11-08

+. Thezier. Louis SINGER.
Ernest Villa. N. Freret.
John II. Vigere, Charles Handler.
Antonio F.. Nolasco, A. B. HALEY.
Jesse X. Bell. William Hufendick.
Hermogene Ga!laud, 4. J. Bachemin.
Alcide Belly. =. Daetillon.
Albert Richards. Charles Barnard.
John A. Harris, Henry Heidenheim.
A. Thieser. Sosthene Rock,
George J. Weigel. VIC. James.
Cyriile Benoit, Eugene Berthelot.
second District Court.
SUGGESTIONS of Dennis Hefferman and Mrs.
Hannah Holmes. wife Of James Rice, were
opened.
Elizabeth Hefferman and Marie HeyOl
Bourdettes pray to be emancipated.
Filth District Court.
Judge Cullom rendered the following de-
cisions:
Nalle &: Cammack vs.. J. Z. and II. NJ.
Payne.--The evidence in this case clearly
discloses the following facts: George NJ.
Freshman, of the parish of st. Landry. had,
for several years previous to 1873, done
business with the defendants as his factors
and commission merchants. I'm 1873 he was
indebted to them on balance OF previous
accounts in a sum of $1,000. more or less.
In 1873 he made arrangements with plain.
tiffs for supplies. advances. ETC., necessary
to the planting. cultivation. gathering.
ETC., Of his crop. They complied with their
part Of the agreement. and on the ninth
day Of July. A. D. 1873. freshman gave
them his promissory note. payable to their
order. for "cash and supplies for the work.
ing of the growing crop OF 1873. on his tmy}
plantation in St. Landry" piedging said
crop and binding himself to ship the same
to them. Said note was given for $!6O 10.
with eight per cent interest after maturity,
to wit: December /. 1873. During the re-
mainder OF the year Messrs. Nalie 4 Cam
mack. acting in accordance with their
agreement above named. became inc cred
itOrs Of Freshman by open account current
in the additional cum Of S3l9 10. making
q total Of $579 So.
On or about the eighteenth day Of De.
cember, 1873, Fleehman forwarded six bales
Of cotton from his place to Messrs. Male T.
Cammack, on board the steamboat Palmet'
to, marked G F.B. three bales: G F-S. two
bales: G. FIJI, one bale. He took a bill Of
lading for i've bales Of this cotton. three
bales of which were marked G F.B, and
twoG F.S. The bill Of lading shows this.
Owing to some unexplained cause the
steamer Palmetto proceeded no further
than Churchville, on the Atchafalaya river.
Here che 1eshipped her freight on the Les:
sic Taylor. and consigned this identical
the twenty.frst day OF December. 1873, at
s. 50 per bale. The bill Of lading gives the
marks in the margin as follows: G F-S. ,;
G F.B, 3; G F 4, I. Thus it appears that one
bale more was shipped than the bill OF lad
| ing called for.
1874, Messrs. Payne T. Go. received these
! six bales of cotton, with accompanying bill
| of lading. 1t was placed on the market and
| sold by them on the ninth Of January, 1874.
showing net proceeds Of $2S7 0S, which
these gentlemen passed on their books to
| the credit OF Fleshman's account with them.
| Due notice of these transactions was given
| Freshman by them. On the ninth of Jan.
uary, 1874. the latter had informed Messrs
Nalle &, Cammack, that he had shipped
! them six bales Of cotton -four weeks ago"
! previously. although his bill OF lading
called for but five, which through mis-.
! take of the boats clerk had been sent
| to j. u. e. H. NJ. Payne. He makes men.
| ton of the fact that the cotton had been
sold by them. and instructs Messrs. Nalle
&: Cammack ITO 60 and demand the pro-
ceeds'' thereof. Nalfe & Cammack did go
and demand them. and were informed that
they payne & Col had received the cotton
with accompanying bill Of ladipg, had sold
it and placed the proceeds of i: to the credit
of Mr.. Fleshman's account with them.
Messrs. Male & Cammack were not salts.
tied with this termination OF the matter.
and instituted these proceedings to compel
Me6SrS. y. u. ~ H. Nle ldy 10 w pay oNc1
the proceeds of said cotton, to wit, Sl32. to
them. They urge the fact that their ad.
vances and supplies were used by freshman
in making the cotton, and that they have q
privilege tart. 32l7. c. c. on it, which of
right and as matter of law. should be first
paid. Wood vs. Galloway. Il A. AL. and
Il A. 1859 To this the defendants reply
that plaintiffs have no privilege as to them,
because there is no evidence IN the case that
1nd
Article 1878, Civil Code. declares that
privileges are valid against third persons.
from the date of recording the act or evi.
dence of Indebtedness as provided by law
Plaintiffs urge that the consignment of the
cotton to them by Freshman, on the eight.
zenith day Of December, 1873, gave them
privilege which can not be superseded. To
this defendants reply that the cotton was
also consigned to them; that they had re-
ceived and sold it and entered the proceeds
| to the credit of the cOnsigner in part pay
ment of his balance OF Indebtedness to
them, before they we're made aware OF the
claim of the plaintiffs, and before they saw
| the letter of advice given by freshman to
the plaintiffs. l can not consider this
sound argument under the circumstances.
!. freshman. who alone had the authority
to cOnsgn the cotton, had shipped it to
Nalle g. Cammack. In resbippiDg 1t an
| error was committed by the officer OF the
| Palmetto, which was unequivOcally testified
| to by the captain. As Male Il Cammack
had nothing to do with this error, their
| rights ought not to be affected by 1t; and
as the cOnsigner had nothing to to do
| with it and knew nothing Of it until
after some weeks had elapsed, it can not
fairly be pretended the confessed error
should have the effect of altering his will
or of depriving him of any choice
in the consignment. The officers Of the
Palmetto undertook to transport the
cotton to plaintiffs. and they were charged
and intrusted with no other prerogatlve or
duty. They were not authorized, under
anv circumstances, to change tleshmans
CONSIGNMENT. If their act in doing so was
entirely unauthorized, it can not be binding
on the shipper, and therefore can not be
taken advantage of by the defendants, who
were not the cOnsignees, SO lar as 10 war
rant them in retaining the net proceeds.
Such consignment did justify them IN pay.
ing charges, selling, and charging the usual
commissions. The simple consignment
gave the defendants no privilege, they not
having advanced ANYTHING on the cotton.
Collins vs.. Austin, ) L. 302; GOOdhue vs..
McClarty, 3 An. AL See McCutchon vs.
wilkinson, II A. 4S3; Shaw We. Grant, Is
A. S.
So far as the evidence goes, it shows but
one shipment as to freshman. He had
made that himself, and no reshipment
seems to have been contemplated, for the
bin of lading taken by him stipulated that
the cotton was to be delivered to plaintiffs
in New Orleans. The captain, therefore,
held the property for the lawful or rightful
holder of the bill Of lading. and could not
have held it for any other person; fetler
ct al. vs.. Field ct al, l An. p. so.l Inc
ohlication of the master with freshman
was to carry and deliver the cotton to
Messrs. Male & Cammack, or their order.