The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1875-07-31

constructed in 1874 Of the aggregate rail
roads, Illinois had 6759 miles, Pennsylvania
56S7, New York $3.50, Ohio 1898, or together
22,O64 miles. Poor gives reports of the bust
ness of Co. 273 miles of railways in 1874, with
the following general results:
Gross earnings ....... $500, 466, O16
Freight receipts. Observation-Disclosures. 375,466 935
Passenger receipts. ......-........ 140 95908l
Operating expenses. ............... $50 895, 05S
Net earnings. Observation-Disclosures. 1S9,570,95S
Paid as dividends. Observation-Disclosures. 67,042,942
Aggregate cost Including watered
bonds .... 4,22l, 763, 594
Capital stock. Observation-Disclosures. l. 800, 997 4S6
Bonded debt. $780, 766, 10S
Average cost per milo. ............ co. 425
The net earnings for 1874 were sc, 900, 900
greater than in 1873. The tonnage moved
was greater, but the rates received were less.
The cost of operating was SO much reduced
as to cover the falling off in receipts and
leave surplus net earnings as stated.
Responsibility of Drunken Man.
Judge White, of Pennsylvania, lately de-
Ivered an opinion in case in which the fact
of habitual drunkenness was set up as de-
Tense by the legal representative of the in
dorser, who had been sued by the holder of
the paper.
There was no direct or positive evidence
that the defendant was intoxicated when he
made the Endorsements. Even if he had
been, says Judge White, it would not avail as
defense against the plaintiff, who discounted
the notes for the drawees in the regular course
of business unless the plaintiff had knowl-
edge of that fact, of which there is no evil
dence. 1t was claimed that on account of
habitual drunkenness the defendants mind
was in a condition Of lunacy. 1t was charged
that to constitute good defense against an
innocent holder, the evidence must be sufi-
cient to establish the fact that the party had
SO completely lost his mind that he was inca.
pable of understanding his own affairs, or of
exercising his reasoning powers, and conse-
quently incapable Of making any binding con-
tract.
Where insanity of fixed and permanent
character has been proved, it is presumed to
continue until restored sanity has been
shown. In such a case the burden of proof
Endorsements were made at lucid intervals. !
But where the insanity is only temporary,
caused by drunkenness or excessive dissipa-
ton. the presumption is in favor of sanity,
and in such case it is the duty of the defen-
dant to prove that insanity existed at the time
the Endorsements were made
The defense offered to show that two Of
the directors of the bank, plaintiffs in the
case, had knowledge of the condition of
defendant, and to thus visit notice to the
bank. On this power the judge charged
even if they knew (of which there is no evil
dence) that the defendant was incapacitated
by reason OF intemperance from properly at
tending to business; yet their knowledge is
not to be imputed to the bank unless they
communicated it to the board of directors or
unless the other proper officers had the same
knowledge
United States Customs Dnties.
IMPORTANT DECISION BY THE SECRETARY OF THE
TREASURY.
HF~..l 1000 .,alo~ A. n..u;o:a.,
an act of Congress Of that date, it has been
the practice at all the United States ports of
entry to permit single member of a firm to
enter into bond for duties in behalf of the
entire firm. his action being sufficient to bind
his partners.
The Collector of the port of Baltimore called
the attention Of the Secretary of the Treasury,
in May last, to the fact that these provisions
were omitted in the Revised Statutes, and
asked for instructions The reply OF Secre-
. tary Bristow was printed in the circular Of
Treasury decisions for May, and contained
the following passages.
O. In reply, have to state that, in the alb
sence of any statutory authority therefor, such
practice must in future be discontinued. With
q view however, of avoiding possible embar-
easements from the disallowance OF said prac-
tice, you may permit one or more members OF
q firm to execute such bonds in behalf of the
aOSeut UemUGTS Lutl6Ul, III tu0lI iAolNlduhi
capacity, on filing with you q continuing
power Of attorney, under seal, confirming
such an authority, which must be renewed in
accordance with general regulations"
When the circular containing this decision
was received at the New York Custom House,
Collector Arthur sent q munication to the
Secretary of the Treasury representing the
great Inconvenience that would result from |
the enforcement of such regulations at this
port, where such q vast amount of customs |
business is transacted, where q firm of i'm |
porters sometimes includes eight or ten part |
ners, and where there are single houses which |
constantly have great number of bonds to |
be signed
The following reply to this letter has Just
been received from Secretary Bristow:
TREASURY DEPARTMENT, July 20, 1875.
"Sir-The Department has had under con- |
sideration the suggestion presented in your |
letter of the Both ult, on the subject of the |
execution of customs bonds as affected by the |
instructions addressed to the Collector at |
Baltimore under date Of of May % last, and |
subsequently published in the official record |
of decisions for that month. From the tenor |
Of your letter it would appear that you in
cline TO the opinion that, although section 25 |
of the act of March /, 1923, is omitted from |
the Revised Statutes, bond since executed |
by but one member Of firm, in the name of
the firm. continues to possess the same |
validity, as an act of the firm, as II said Sec
ton were still in force
"The consideration have given the subject,
however, leads to the conclusion that, while