The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1876-02-05
THE COURTS.
CulteS States Circuit Court.

Cnifea States Circuit Court.
Rosalie Maenhaut ct 81. vs.. City of New o.
1e,ns ct ais In this case it was ordered tina
the decree of the 2lst Of December, 1875, q
amended on the Sd Of February, 1876. be re
enQr0ssed upon the mir u les, and said de Gre
nov read as follows:
This cause came on to be heard on the bill
answers, aftid4vits and the motion of th
plaintiffs for an injunction and receiver.
And upon consideration of tbs premise
the courG declares that tn, collection OF take
made for the payment Of the interest on tn
consolidated BOMBS issued under the cnafte
of the city of New Orleans OF the 25d day
February, 1852, and which are Oh deposit II
the Louisiana National Bank, are trust funf
for the payment OF the coupons OF lntere'
which are due and becoming due on the sa {
issue of bonds. and ought 10 be applied there
for, except where the holders OF the said cou
pons have consented to accept portion o.
the sum SO collected, according to the term
of the ordin nee of the city, No. 1880, APP
proved July IA, 1875.
II ia. therefore, ordered that an injunction
issue to the city oi Now Orleans and to the
Administrator and to tie said Louisiana
National Bank. erjoinirg and Restraining
them, aad each of them, IRON paying out, for
any purpose whatever, 80 much OF the sald
funds SO raised and deposited IS aforesaid
except the sums that may be necessary tor
tho payment of interest coupons on said con.
solidated loans, The holders Of which have
not consented to the terms of the seid CITY
ordinance No $3.50, approved July IA, 1910,
and the city of Ne. Orleans, and The Louisi-
ana National Bank, its depositary. are FULLY
authorized in the event OF containing oes
fault.
And it is their duty under the acts OF the
Legislature, to apply such sums to the pay
ment Of the coupons so de signated, and not
paid in the ordinary course OF adminlsra-
tion. .
tits further ordered tia. the appointment
Of . receiver be continued, with privilege to
the plaintiffs to renew the same.
Eusry Wendt and IL I'll .ner Vs. A. Brown
h Co. Motion for new trial filed.
Norman Whitney vs.. Prnnix Fire Insu-
rance COMPANY, of Brooklyn. Motion for a
now trial continued.
On motion OF the United States District
Attorney, the Grand jury was yesterday lis
caarged until Monday, the 1lth day .. Fcbru-
ary, 1876
Z. Fernandez VS.. B. s. HARRISON OF al
The jury having been locked up all night,
came into court and stated that they could
not arrive at a verdict The Judge ordered
them to retire, and they returned into court
Ut 4 p. M. and stated that it was an impossi-
bility for thom to agree They were accord
ingly discharged.
The petty jury was discharged until next
Monday a. III A NJ
Superior District Court.
August Richard W.. Abram Haber ct ais.
The injunction in this Case was perpetuated
without damages.
In the cases OF Samuel Smith and Andrew |
Smith vs.. the city Of New Orleans and Eugene |
Waggaman, Civil Sher Fl and A. w. Smi h |
vs. the same, r. Ii. Mari, attorney for plain |
flffs fiIed An eXceptIDn and n motion accom- /
panied by all affidavit for the removal Of the
c4use from this Court to the United States |
Circuit Court by consent OF counsel.
john n New VS.. Louisiana Central Steam |
Railroad Company. Suit for professional |
services rendered $4,000. Judgment rem
dered in favor of the plaintiff. and the court
had f Q Of $3.50 taxed as costs for the cura-
tor ad hoes fee.
James Wauick vs.. Otto Kratz and the Cen
trail Diffusion Process Sugar Manufacturing
Company. Suit tor services rendered as civil
engineer, Oio Kratz Individually and the
company. Judgment in favor Of plaintiff in
the sum ct S4UU
Geo. F. Brott W. Eager, Ellerman & Co.
Gen. Sheldon, of counsel for plaintiff has
filed a petition in this court to enjoin the de-
fendants iron the collection of wharf charges
upon the steamboat Martha, on the grounds:
l. That the steamboat was wholly built
within the State of Ousiana, and is OF more
than one hundred tons measurement; claim
ing that under the act Of My 2S, 1874, such
water crafts are exempt from paying Wharf
charges.
2. That the ordinance Of the city govern I
ment imposing wharf charges is in violation
of the Constitution Of the United States. be-
cause it imposes duty on tonnage. {
j. That there is no power granted hy the
Legislature of the Safe to the city govern l
msnt to release or contract away the city's r
revenue to private parties for their individual
use and benz fit.
The injunction was issued.
Superior Criminal Court
SENTENCED.
Joe Harrison, convicted Of an assault and
battery on police officer, sentenced to serve =
. term Of ten days ia the Parish Prison.
Joe Frank plead guilty of carrying a con-
ceaed weapon; was sent do gn TO keep Capt. \
Pegram company for ten days.
CONTINUED.
The cases of the State vs.. the notorious
lanes Woods and W. F. Durham, charged
With forgery. were, on motion OF Assistant &
Attorney Genera! Dlbble, continued indofn- :
tely. -..-...
The court then adjourned until Saturday, at =,
10 A. nj. =
Second District Court.
The succession of Robt Geddes, on the op-
~ Virginia '. anu MaIy Il. GeddeS,
,rano children OF John Geddes, Of New York, q
brother Of the decedent. was opened f. =
Warren, Esq, and A. j. Where, ESQ, attor- 81
eys for the opponents. These opponents
we're left out in The tablsau of distribution, G..
lence their opposition. j. Ad Rpzer, ESQ. :.
ppeared AZ attorney for the legatees
The executor of the will Of decedent was
represented by Fl. W. Renshaw, Ed, who po
Eas assigned as attorney III fact for the heir. =
he opposition was dismissed.
Fifth Dist. let Court. m
VIM. Oser vs.. j. Roses. Judgment for the
lsin'ff in the sum of $165, with costs of :
curt and protest. oeI
Foarih District Court.
Mr.. and Mrs. Philip Vidou VS. Mrs incline =
largaret Adams, alias VIM. Hays. Default =.
gainst defendant .=
Geo Jacobshagan vs. John Maylan ct al