New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1875-03-28
COCRT RECORD.
SATURDAY, MARCH q, 1875.
United States Cfrcuft Court.

United States Circuit Court.
Present, Hon. w. Z. Woods, Circuit
Judge.
State of Louisiana vs.. Myra Clark Gaines
and the city Of New Orleans.-The effect ot
the order of court that IN Injunction issue
restraining the sale of the batture. prop
erty, is to place the case in such state
that trial can be had on the merits. The
following is the answer of the city to the
petition of the State:
The city Of New Orleans for answer to
the bill of complaint Of the said plaintiff,
says:
l. It is true that each and every one Of
the parcels of land described in the levy of
the marshal of this court in the suit of
their cOdetendant against this defendant.
as rendered in the decree of this court. and
as advertised by tie said marshal is within
the limits Of the parcel of land known as
st. Mary suburb of this city. aud it forms d
part OF the batture ia front Of the city atore.
said.
2. 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 conditions therein contained.
). 1t is true that said parcels of land de.
scrlbed IN the advertisement of the mar
shall contained in this bill and in his levy of
execution of this.codefendabt. is in front Of
Front street and the river Mississippi. aud
that the said several parcels are included
in the prohibitions of the acts of 1886 and
of 1850 of the State Legislature, being
within the limits of the portions Of land set
apart for public use and the convenience OF
commerce.
This defendant further answering admits
that the corporate authorities have made
agreement relative to the sale of said land;
have taken measures to have the same sold,
but it has been from poverty and the de-
pieted condition OF their treasury that they
have co concluded.
This defendant regards the sale Of said
property rs injurious to the commerce and
TO the interests Of the city, and as viola
ton OF the terms OF the statutes aforesaid.
Whenever the finances of the city are sutfi
GENTLY restored they hope to pay the said
debt.
This defendant admits, that this CORPORA.
ton is, at this time, under injunction from
selling portions of said property, included
in the said advertisement, set forth in the
bill. and from interfering Herewith, and
that the control which they are hindered
from exercising over the portions of prop
erty to which the writs apply, affect the
whole title OF the city; that the controversy
is unsettled. and that che sale of the prop
erty would be at q great sacrifice, if il we're
made.
This defendant submits copies Of the
records OF this case. in which the injunc-
tions have been granted. and the DEGREES
thereon. CHARLES j. LEEDS,
Mayor.
Ex parte Henry Williams, petitioner for
habeas corpus.-Relator alleges he. is H.
legally imprisoned in the Parish Prison ON
commitment of Charles T. Estlin, United
States commissioner; that On March % he
was arrested on a charge OF ASSAULT and
battery committed while on the navigable
waters of the United States; that the bond
was fixed at $1,000; that his surety was
solvent; that the commis sioner exacted an
illegal fee of So, which was extOrtionate,
oppressive and unjust; that he refused to
pay this fee, and therefore the commissioner
caused him to be imprisoned. Prisoner Gr-
dered to he produced March 90, and service
by the sheriff.
Supreme Court.
Adjourned to April D.
Superior District Court.
w. w. Handlin VS.. New Orleans. st.
Louis and Chicago railroad.-Judge
Hawkins gave the folio wing reasons Tor
judgment: This is an action in damages in
stituted by the plaintiff against the New
Orleans, st. Louis and Chicago Railroad
Company, and the Mobile and Texas Rail
road Company, for alleged depreciation Of
the value OF his batture lots of ground
situated in the First District OF this city, in
the square bounded by st. Joseph, North
Market, Front and Futon streets.
The evidence shows that the railroad
erected their depots across
North and South Market. Delord and st.
Joseph streets, whereby they were closed
and their use by the public prevented. 1t
is also established by the. testimony, that
plaintiffs lots of ground, which are situated I
near these Instructions have deprecated
in value TO some extent on account OF these
The right of action of plaiu-
lift is founded on articles :,3l5 and 1894
of the Civil Code, which provides that
every act of man whatever which causes
damages to another Obiigcs him by whose
fanlt it occurs to repair it,"
To enable the plaintiff to recover damages
lone to his property by depreciating its
value. he must show that depreciation was
caused through the fault Or negligence of
he defendants. Now was it or could it.
nave been the intention or either of the
'ailroa companies to have injured the
plaintiff or his property by erecting their
iepots or making Enclosures OF their own
on their own limits. II the COM
,anies, or either of them, have taken
possession of, or had used any of the
plaintiffs ground, then the act would have
,een done through their fault, and damages
ould have been recovered.
But in this case the evidence shows that !
he defendants made their Enclosures and |
rected their depots on their own land or |
over which they had acquired |
he right of way from the State. They !
we're then, 80 far as the plaintiff in this |
nit is concerned, in the exercise OF law. |
III purpose in erecting the works COM !
'lained of, and are not therefore respon. |
ible to plaintiff for damages caused him by |
he exercise of their legal rights.
The question of the obstruction to the |
se of the public streets can only be asserted
as the control of all the public streets and /
responsible to the public tor the manner
4 which they are kept
There being no cause of action shown, it
eoomes unnecessary to determine the
uestion raised by the defendants as to
7hether there is misjoinder of parties de-
sndant in the suit. Judgment for defen-
ants. Motion by plaintiff for new trial.
A. Hayem VS.. city of New Orleans; A.
rechoux VS.. sane.-Applications for in
motions to restrain the city from dis1os-
~ of REALTORS notes given for the market
The court said it was matter
notoriety that this court had more
lmiiarity with State and city finances
iau any other court. The policy Of the
,rmer years had produced just what might
ave been expected, wreck and ruin. Both
tate and city are bankrupt. The only
ovation for either is the plan now at
mpted 70 he carried out. A basis of
oney only which was just to honest tax
ayers.
The object of these motions was evident.
was that the city should be compelled to
old these notes Sd that the makers, when
ley became due, might present what were
He'd certificates Of Indebtedness, pur-
lased for fifth. quarter. or perhaps half
their value. aud force the city TO accept
em at their face value. This was the old T
.inous policy. 1t is sure TO cause wreck
i'd ruin and is unjust. IL should be the
al. I'd r., ,