The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1875-03-28
THE BATIURE CASE.
An "er Of the City Of New Orleans TO the
Bill in ChanceFy Filed Behalf of The


Having published in our edition of the 2fti
inst, synopsis OF bill in chancery filed by A
F. Field, Attorney General on behalf Of thu
! State, and the answer thereto Of Ir. J. q. A. Eel
lows, attorney for Mrs. Gaines, in our edition O
the 25th inst, We now publish in full the answer
Of The city OF New Orleans to said bill.
As the question Of ownership in the batture in
front OF the city is Of deep interest to every
our readers TO peruse with Gaze the articles on
this subject.
We also call attention to the decision of Judge
Woods, published il our edition OF the 18th inst
In the Circuit Court o. the United States Dis
trlct OF Loulslana, No. 72s;7.-The Attorney
| General Us. The City OF New Orleans and
| Myra clark Gaines.
| The answer OF the city of New Orleans to ths
bll Of complaints Of the Attorney General pend
Ing III the court Aforesaid.
| The city of New Orleans Tor answer to the b;lI
Of complaint Of said plaintiff, says:
| l.2 l. IS true that each and every of the
| parcels OF lard described in the levy Of The
Marshal Of this court il the suit of their code
| PENDANT against this defendant as rendered N
the decree OF this court and as advertised by Tie
said Marshal, is within the limits Of the parcel OF
land known as st. Nary,s suburb Of this city and
DID form a r@rt II the battur5 front CT the city
aforesaid.
L. 1t is true that it is all of it embraced in
what is termed the Livingston compromise
dated as described in the bill. and copy OF
which Is filed herewith, and is subject to the con
dtlons therein contained
Ill. 1t is true that said parcels of Land de-
scribed in the advertisement of the Marshal con-
tanned in the bill and III his levy of execution of
this co-detendan, is in front of Front street and
the river Mississippi, and that the said several
parcels are Included in the prohibitions of the
acts OF 1886 and Of 1S3 OF the State Legislature
being within the linlts of the portion. Of land
set apart for public use and tho convenience of
commerce.
This defendant, further answering, admits |
that the corporate authorities have made agree |
ments relative to the sale of said land and have |
ta-1en measures to have the same sold but il has |
been from poverty and the depleted condition Of |
their treasury and that they have so Concluded |
This defendant regards the sale of said proper
ty as injurious to the commerce and to the inter
ests of the city, and violation Of the terms Of
the statutes aforesaid. Whenever the finances
OF the city are sufficiently restored they hope to
paw the said debt.
This defendant admits that this corporation is
at this time under in functions from selling por-
tons ct the said property included in the said
advertisement set forth III the blll and from IN
serler.a5 Herewith and that the control which
they are hlndefed from exercising over the por-
tons of property to which the wrlts apply fleet
the whole tile cf the city; that the controversy
Is unsettled, and that the sale of the property
would be at a great sacrifice if it were made.
LIS e'oAchudLl ,upllltS cofltS Vi We RECORDS OF
the cases in which the iriunctons have been
granted and the DEGREES therein.
CHAs J. LEEDS, Mayor.
p. T. JoNss, City Attorney.
Charles J. Leeds, Mayor, being duly sworn
says that all the allegations in the above answer
Ire true to the best of his knowledge and belief
S-Torn 30 and subscribed before me at New Or
ems, .i-ls "a day Of March, 1875.
w. L. HoUSToN, {
First Justice of the Peace '
for the Parish Of Orleans !