The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1875-05-23

| rights in he premises.
The plaintiffs prayed that . suit OF injunction
| issue to restrain the defendants from interfer-
ing with them in the premises, and they. pray
Judgment in solido against them for one thous-
| and dollars as damages and all costs OF suit.
An injunction WAS granted as prayed for.
The Firemen's Charitable Association and
Thomas OConner, Chief Engineer, answered,
denying generally and specially all the allega-
tons Of the plaintiffs petition.
They assert the right of the State to confer
| the exclusive power and authority over the sub
lect OF tires to the municipal corporation of New
Orleans; that the state has by the city charter
granted that exclusive power to the corporation
over the subject. and that the city in its contract
| with the Flremen's Charitable Association to ex-
tnguish fires, has conferred, as it had right to
planned Of by plaintiffs. The defendants answer
| further that the Babcock Fire Extinguisher, in
none OF its sizes, shapes and forms, is effectual
in extinguishing fire or putting out flame, except
in its inciplent STAGE and owing to the very linn
tied benefit arising at any time and under any
| circumstances from the use Of such machine,
| the employment thereof at fires, whore its pres
ence is calculated to produce certain injurious
| results, is not only lHexpedient, but improper,
| aud ought not to be sustained by the court.
The defendants set forth at length the provi-
sons Of the city charter on the subject Of the ex
tinguishment of fires within its incorporated
limits. and claiming the city's right to adopt any
and all proper rules in relation thereto. The de-
PENDANTS set up q unconventional demand against
the plaintiffs of $1,000 as damages, caused by the
illegal acts and conduct of plaintiffs in the prem
ises, and by expenses OF attorneys fees which de-
PENDANTS have been forced to incur. The defend
| ants charge that plaintiffs and the Board of I'm
derwrlters and other insurance companies and
| associations of New Orleans have maiiciously,
Improperly and unawfully combined and confed-
Grated together to embarrass the Firemen's
Charitable Association, and unjustly and uulaw-
fully to bring about its dissolution. The defend
ants pray that on the original action judgment
be rendered in their favor; thht plaintiffs be cited
to answer defendants unconventional demand;
that the injunction be dissolved; that defendants
recover from the plaintiffs s5Ou0 with interest at
five per cent. per annum from Judicial demand,
with costs, etc.
The Judgment of the lower court perpettated
the injunction restraining the Firemens Charita-
BILE Association and Thomas OConnor, its Chief
Engineer, and the Board Of Metropolitan Police,
from carrying into effect the resolution Of the
Board Of Directors OF the said Association,
instructing its Chief Engineer to prevent the
Babcock engines from running to fires, and to
imprison the men working the same. The de-
PENDANTS were restrained by the judgment from
interfering with the plaintiffs employees in the
use of the Babcock Extinguishers as long as
they do not interfere with or impede the action
of the officers and members OF the Fire Depart
ment.
The defendants unconventional demand was
dismissed, with costs.
Inc Oe1euOdnt6 nave appeared. Inc pOlUb
made in the defense is that from the nature of
tho object or purpose Of extinguishing fires it is
essential to efficient action; that the means used
the methods adopted, and the physical efforts
made in resisting the terrible power of the de-
structive element Of fire. should be directed by
one mind; that there should be unity of action,
that the power OF the Fire Engineer during the
struggle should be as complete and absolute as
the case OF Caesar at Pharsalia or Napoleon at
Austerlitz; and that his movements and opera
~cl1.. 49, AL ,.~ko Al,
by others using different engines and different
methods than his own; he being the judge Of
what constitutes impeachment or interference.
We find no objection to this doctrine. But we do
not understand that the plain ifs assume the
right to use their engines at fires where the fire
companies are in actioe, otherwise than under
the direction OF the managers and subject to their
orders. The evidence is that the Babcock Ex-
tinguisher has been often used in this manner by
the consent and ulder the control Of the direc-
tors at fires.
The proof is abundant that these engines are
capable of important services in cases often oc-
curing where they may hurriedly be sent to q
house on fire in time to extnguish the fire before
it becomes unmanageable, and which might de-
stroy the building before the heavier and more
tardy engines could reach the spot. Outstripping
these in speed, and successfully performing the
work to be done before their arrival, can not be
called interfering with or impeding them in the
exercise Of their functions.
the gas used by the Babcock Extinguisber is
within contracted limits, and in the incipisnt
stage Of fires, most potent in the destruction Of
flame, and may be productive OF incalculable
benefit in saving buildings from destruction by its
prompt and efficient use before the fire gains
the ascendancy and bids defiance to all effort
to suppress it.
Surely in all such cases-and we may easily
perceive that very many such may occur-there
can be no wrong in resorting to the use of these
engines. While, therefore, they are used with
out, by such use, interfering with or being IN
the way of the operations Of the Fire Depart
ment, the plaintiffs or others may lawfully use
them without mourning responsibility.
We must regard the resolution or the Board
Of Directors Of the Firemen's Charitable Asso
ciation, passed on the Goth OF January, 1875, as
more stringent and sweeping than it had right
to pass. It's purport is to abolish the use Of the
Babcock Extipguisher within the limit of the
city OF New Orleans under any d all circum-
stances whatever. The Chief Engineer is clothed
with power and instructed "to prevent the Bah
cock engines from running to fires," and the
resolution provides that if they persist, the En-
gineer shall "sen1 them and the men working
them + prison."
This is an unwarranted stretch Of power.
The decree Of the lower court was properly
rendered.
Judgment affirmed.