New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1875-05-23

1heu ociuS easily carried and operated b
IT company has, by it's agents, caused the ma
- chine to be used to great advantage in tn
eAunguishment of fires, in some instance
Is by reaching buildings on fire before tn
: larger hre engines could be run to the plac
3 required. owing to The bad state &C road
and other impediments sometimes occur
y ring; that the plaintiffs have for some tim
caused the engines to be used at fires, ia
9 gether with the common fire engines nse ..
By the fire companies, and with thei
consent and approval, and in all sucl
l. cases unfortunately to and under til,
direction of the engineer controlling
: and directing the operations at Ares
+ The plaintiffs complain that on o,
! about the twentienth OF January, 1875
the tlrenen's Charitable Association. avail
ing itself, to the exclusive right vested IL
: 1T by an ordinance Of the city of New Or
leans, to control. and direct the means 10 be
USED In the eXtingLishment of fires and the
, members OF which association. being as
, tuated by malice toward the petitioners. and
Z with the intent of iniuring them, did adop:
! the following resolution, viz:
Rcsoired, That the chief engineer of the
department, Thomas OConnor. be instruct
ed to prevent the Babcock engines from
running to fires. and il they persist to send
them and the men working them to prison.
They (plaintifsl aver that about that
time, at IRE On First street. several OF the
babcock engines were pushed on in ad-
vance Ct the fire departments engines and
were being successfully used against the
progress OF the fire, when the men working
the Babcock engine were interrupted by
the chief Engineer CT the Firemen 8 Charits
Die ASSOCIATION, at whose request and by
whose direction the men operating the
BabcOch engines were arrested by certain
officers OF the Metropolitan Police force
mn IA Hail teI,.
ipa Plollce Court, where charges were per
ferred against them of violating said city
ordinance 10. l2l0 by the sad CITY En-
gineer CCoanor, which they were bound
over to answer hy sthe judge of that court.
Ihey tplaintitsI charge that .ha city is
without authority to confer upon the said
association sEcA exclusive right under it's
! charter, ana that the same is repugraut 10
| the principles of common equity ard sub
! versIve OF the same. Ths plaintiffs aver
! mat lheE nave sustained great damage by
| the action Of the said Chief Enuineer
| & ConAor, the tlremens Charitable Assc;a
ton and the metropolitan Police force, and
! in the tall sum of one thousand dollars
| Tor which laid parties are liable in soiido
| That said parties threaten and intend to
further carry OFT the aforesaid resolution
anu to prevent plaintiffs from using its said
eXtlngu!sher: that SAID action will cause
them irreparable injury and that suit of
injunction Is necessary to protect the plain
tltf S rights in the premises.
The plaintiffs prayed that a writ of in
junction issue to restrain the defendants
from interfering with them IN the premises,
and they pray Judgment in soldO against
them for $1,000 as damages and al! costs of
suit. An Injunction was granted az pray ed
for.
The Firemen s Charitable Association and
Thomas OConnor chief engineer answered.
denying generally and specially all the
allegations of the plaintiffs petition.
They assert the right of the State to
confer the exclusive power and authority |
over the subject of fires. to the municipal |
corporation OF New Orleans: that the State |
has, by the city charter, granted that ex- |
elusive power to the corporation over the |
subject, and that the city, in its contract
with the FIremen's Charitable Association |
10 extlnguIsh fires has conferred, as it lad |
right to do, upon the said association. the
authority complained of by plaintiffs. The
defendants answer further that the Babcock
hre exNngusher, in none OF its sizes |
shapes and forms, is efectual in extiuguish-
ing fire or putting out fame, except in it's
lnclplent stage, and owing to the very limit
ed benefit arising at any time and under
any circumstances from the use of such
machine, the employment thereof at fires,
where it's presence is calculated to produce
certain injurious results. is not only inexpe-
dent but improper, and ought not to be |
sustained by the court.
The defendants set forth at length the |
provisions OF the city charter on the sui
Ject of the exti1guishment of fires within |
Its Incorporated limits, and claiming the
cIty's right to adopt any and all proper
rules IN relation thereto The defendants |
set up unconventional demand against the |
plaintiffs of $1,000 as damages, caused by
the illegal acts and conduct of plaintiffs n ,
The premises. and by expenses of attorneys :
ices, which defendants have been forced to .
ncur. The defendants charge that plain )
IFS and tho board OF underwriters and :
other insurance companies ana assocs- !
ions OF New Orleans have naliciously
Improperly and unlawtully conf ined and
onfederated together TO embarrass the :
.lremen's Charitable Association, aud I'M
Justly and uniawtully to bring about it's
dissolution. The descendants pray that on | :
he original action Judgment be rendered IN
heir favor; that plaintiffs be cited to an r
wer defendants unconventional demand:
hat the injunction be dissolved; that de ! .
endants recover from the plaintiffs $1,000, :,
With interest at five per cent per annum
rom judicial demand, with coste. etc
The Judgment of the lower court perpet-
ated the injunction restraining the Fire ! 8.
len's Charitable Association and Thomas
J Connor, its chief engineer. and the Board q
metropolitan Police. from carrying into =
fleet the resolution of the board of direc-
'Is OF the said association. instructing its 4
net engineer to prevent the BabcOck :,
lg.nes from running to tires. and TO i'm -
rlson the men working the same. The de- =,
ndants were restrained by the Judgment | ~
ON interfering with the plaintiffs en- ~
oyes in the use of the Babcock extin guish- \,
g as long as they do not interfere with or =,
lpede the action of the officers and mem s.
srs of the fire department. r.,
The defendants unconventional demand &;
as dismissed, with costs. %
The defendants have appealed. The 81
,int made il the defense is that from the us
.ture OF the object or purpose of extin- SO
fishing fires, it is essential to efficient | %
tion; that the means used. the methods sb
'opted and the physical efforts made 10 | he
slsting the terrible power OF the destruc- he
We element of fire, should be directed by W
e mind; that there should be unity Of w
ton: that the power of the fire engineer | 81
ring inc struggle should be as complete | at
"a absolute as the case OF Cesar at Phar- SIX
liza or Napoleon at Austerlltz; and
at his movements and operations is
Guild not be impeded or interfered with to
others using different engines and differ or
t methods than his own; he being the pc
dge OF what constitutes impeachment or ne
reference. We find no objection to this tn
ctrlne. But We do not understand that BIZ
plaintiffs assume the right to use their -
glnes at fires where the fire companies are
action, otherwise than under the direc
n OF the managers and subject to their W.,
1ers. The evidence is that the Babcock | ru,
tinguisher has been often used in this '-'
hx,$I na ~