New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1875-01-24

| County of Davies, % Howard U. s. r.
365 Third holders of such bonds stand
| precisely on the same ground as the first
holder or original payee.
Even If there was no constitutional limit
alton Of the public debt of the State at the
/ time these bonds were issued, still they and
| every one OF them, are null and void, be-
| cause none of the conditions upon which
| their issue was authorized has or has yet
been fulfilled. But the Legislature was not
| eapacitated to authorize the issue of these
| or any bonds of the State at the date of the
| passage OF act No. 80 of 1871, because the
amendment to the constitution limiting the
| State debt was adopt d in November, 1870,
several months prior to the passage OF act
| No. 95 of 1871.
The limit of the State debt provided by
| the amendment to the constitution had
| been reached and exceeded prior to the
| passage OF act No. 95 of 1871 authorizing
| the issue of these bonds. By Chis constitu-
| tional prohibition the bonds were striken
| with nullity at their birth.
| 1t is ordered, a6judicated and deereed
| that the injunction herein issued be per-
| petuated and that, Charles Clinton, Auditor
| of Public Accounts and Antoine Duburlet
| State Treasurer, be eDjoined and restrained
from Issuing or paying, or receiving IN pay
| ment any bonds, coupons, certificates, war
rants or other writing, calling for the pay
| ment or credit OF money in any way Con.
nected with or depending upon any Of the
items complained of and objected to in the
petition.
1t is further ordered and deereed that the
series of bonds issued under act No. 95 of
1871, amounting to S2,500,000 with the cou-
| pons attached, made payable to the New
Orleans, Mobile and Texas Railroad Com
,pany or bearer be declared null and void,
! with costs
Fifth District Court.
Peet, Yale & Bowling VS.. Male g. Cam
mack.-New trial refused. On the former
trial it was held that, although article ll00
of the Code declared that lin case any per-
son shall take possession of vacant sue
cession, or a part thereof, without being
duly authorized to that effect, with the in
tent OF converting the same to his own use,
he shall be liable to pay all the debts of the
said estate, exclusive of the damages to be
claimed by the parties who may have suf-
tered thereby" it is nevertheless incumbent
on the creditors to establish judicially or
by acknowledgment the actual existence
Of their claims as a prerequisite to their
right to invoke the benefit of this areticle
of che Code. Counsel demurs and main
tains that creditors of vacant succession
may proceed under this article directly
against the intermeddler therein and obtain
and enforce the execution of their
judgments against them without reference
, to the proof and establishment of their
CLAIMS against the succession, and quoted
A | BeCLlOn 1000, IN. ,. III was COlU61ueu UlaU
it was the purpose of the law not to subject
I creditors to the vexatiOns OF legal delays in
proceedings of criminal nature, and they
j. might proceed without reference to the
a | SUGGESTIONS; that action existed in favor OF
creditors, Independent of the succession
! against Intermediates who could not avoid
| liability by pleading misrepresentation OF
f the succession in the liquidation of their
I claim; that the fact of intermeddling placed
. them outside of any legal defense against
a civil liability; also, there could be no prac
a teal result as to the intermeddler from q
e judgment obtained against the succession
# for the reason that if offered in evidence il
/. a proceeding against the intermeddler
q it would be rejected as res inter ala
\ dctG, and not binding on him. 1t il
a principle of law that a partI
IA seeking to recover must demonstrate thu
0 verify of his demand. The Code of PreC
e tice provides the appointment of curator
d to vacant SUGGESTIONS, through whom tn
1. verify of all claims is to be established
article 9Si, C. c.; succession of Yal
| borough, l6 An, p. 25S. The proof of in
Ia termeddling can not be considered as proc
I. of the creditors demand. The true inten
"a of the law is to deter persons from appr(
e, priating the effects of SUGGESTIONS to prs
n vent creditors from realizing the benefit {
proceeds belonging to them, and to max
No Intermediates liable for deficits. The int
II. meddler can not represent the estate, or e
tv cape liability. A creditor must be reaO!
n. Dized as such in due form before he ca
e. pursue an intermeddler, A iudgmeI
IN | against the curator would establish the fa
40 that an estate owed debt, A judgmei
Of for plaintiff in this case would establish ii
nd fact that defendants were intermeddler
se bat not that the estate owed them a certa
a. sum; defendants would under article II
Of c, G. be liable for the debt sued on, pr
in vided it were legally shown the estate owe
20 it, and only on proof that it did owe
a. How can the estate be proven 10 owe it in
v. proceeding to which it is not and can not
re made party
de- Fourth District Court.
BY Taylor s. Co, VS.. j. R. Shannon & Co.
d. Judgment of the seventeenth of Januar
lst 1875, revised for $l557 81, with legal int
IN est on $773 from September H. 1861, 81
Is costs of protest and costs of suit.
ct Mrs. H. S. holland, executrix; VS.. c.
'et Wayne ct al.-Jhdgment in favor of plai
as tiff and against defendants in solido for &
IN sum of Sl27l 80, with legal interest there
Of from the tenth of February, 1874, and cos
lat of suit.
M Mrs. Klopman VS.. Leon Haas. her hi
or acknowledgement in favor of plaintiff al
In against defendant, decreeing a dissolut
his of the community of acquests and gal
en- heretofore existing between her and b
said husband; also authorizing and empO
he ering her to manage and administer
To- separate and paraphernal property, and
to carry on in her own name the business Of
on public merchant. Defendant to pay COZ
ers of suit.
on sixth District Court.
tor The petition of Edward G. Hancock
ne this city and State, represents that ON
lat vepber nineteen, 1873, there was organic
private corporation under the statut
The by act before r. c. Mott, notary, styl
gu and designated as the New Orleans Phi
'he yune Printing Company, with the Objl
ad and purpose to print daily newspaper
om the city of New Orleans, and to carry on
general printing establishment in conn
per ton Herewith; cOntemporaneously with I
re- Incorporation of said company, it beeal
on the owner unincumbered of the PcdylI
establishment by purchase from A. NJ. Fl
acg brook, an incorporation and chief stOI
OF holder OF the company aforesaid. I
TIC stock of the company was fixed at one hJ
re- hired and twenty shars of nominal I
TO value of $3.50 each. Petitioner orig
by ally owned and now holds fifteen gu
MS shares and has since became the owl
les, by sale and transfer of five addition
OBJ shares. After the incorporation of I
ion company and acquisition of the print
the esta blshment, it did, through A. NJ. II
OF brook, president, and the board of dir
re- tors, continue the publication Of the ne'
ate paper. The business prOspered and increaS
de. in value. The stock was by charter declal
act full paid stock, and is now worth fully s,
nth per share On or about December ii, Is
IRE. President HOlbrOok called meeting of
OF board of directors, and petitioner submit
0JO a resolution authorizing HolbrOok TO ira
Cd, fer and deliver to Joseph Hernandez,