New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-09-15
COURT RECORD.
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER IA, 1876.
Supporter District Court.

Pierre Lacaze vs. j. MachadO ct al.-On
attachments tor contempt for violating in
functions against free markets-JOhn Wish.
er, an empioye of Adam Wagner, was
proved to have carried on his market for
him and was sentenced to ten days i'm
prisonment. Stephen Vidovich. an empIoye
OF b. Barthe, received the same sent ,nce.
B. Barthe was not found. The sheriff was
directed to place six deputies at his house
and send four more to hunt the city.
1t being reported that the Third District
Court, on q writ of babeas corpus, had dis
charged the prisoners j. Machado and Adam
Wagner, attachments were Immediately Or
dered for their rearrest.
First District Court.
nFORMATIOEs.
Assault and bsttery-Charles johnson
and 1sam Man.
Petty larceny-Jully Judd.
Third District Court.
Judge Meunier has rendered the follow
ing decision:
State OF Louisiana OK rel. j. Machado ct
al. va. William Fagin, criminal sheriff ct
al.-AppllcstiOn for writs of habeas cor
pus.-J. Machado, Peter A. Wagner and
Sylvan Vidulat, the relators herein, COM
plain 'that they are uplawfully imprisoned
in the Parish Prison in the city Of New Or
pretended commitments issued by the Su-
perior District Court of this parish, for pre-
tended contempts of the o, ders Of said court
in sundry suits thlther pending, which Or
ders or ipjunctiOne have been issued to
enforce criminal or penal statute of the
State of Louisiana, to wit: An act to regu-
late the private markets in the city of New
Orleans and tor other purposes, being act
No 81 of the session of the State Legisla-
fyvro of1 fhor hot
the Supt riOr District Court is court of
purely civil jurisdictions; that the cogni-
zsuce of the acts OF the relators COM
planned of pertain exclusively to courts
of criminal jurisdictions; that said Supe-
rior District Court is without jurisdic-
ton whatsoever, and, therefore, its
orders and commitments in said suits null
and void. The relators represent also that
they were never tried on the said pretended
contempt of the authority Of the Superior
District Court; that they we're sent to Jail
without any witness having been pro-
duced in court in their presence, and that
the court declared that they should not be
heard by counsel, contrary to and in viola
ton Of the letter and spirit of the constitu-
tiOns of the United States and of the State
Of Louisiana. And said relstors pray for
. decree declaring that they have been
illegally imprisoned and ordering that they
erty." TIE mittimus under which the re-
lators are now confined in the Parish Prison
being in due legal form, the only question
remaining op.n for examination by this
court is thi-: HAS the Superior District
Court jurisdiction of the actions or suits
out of whlch the orders or writs of iDjunc-
tiOn said to have been violated by the rela-
tors sprung2 In order to determine whether
the Superior District Court has jurisdiction
of roir nAftr rsti fa6 hvvT 7
Gaze against the relators herein, and
whether, consequently, its iniunctions are
void or not, deem it proper to recur to
the petitions filed by the plaintiff IN said
suits. The plaintiff, Lacsze. alleges in his
petitions th..t ''he has been for many years
pact. and is now, engaged in business i'll
this city as d butcher, aud that for the past
five years he has carried on said business
in the Magazine street market, public
market in the Fourth District Of the city of
New Orleans; that j. Machado B Bsrthe
and Adam Wagner. of this city, are truly
indebted unto him, Lacaze, in the full sum
OF $500 for this, t. wit: That said J. Ma
chsdo, B. Barthe and A. Wagner have, for
many months past, been keeping, conduct
ing and carrying on private markets in this
city within tho space of twelve squares of
the Magszlne street market, q public mar
ket, where they have been vending pro-
try, etc., contrary to law and in violation of
act No. 81 of the acts OF 1874, entitled
AN act to regulate the private markets
in the city of New Orleans and in direct
violation of the rights of the petitioner;
that in cOnet quence of the aforesaid illegal
and wrongful acts Of said j. Machado, B.
Barthe and Adam Wagner, said Lacaze has
sustained great loss, injury and damage in
his business as butcher, and that the lOes,
- -
suffered thereby already largely exceeds the
sum OF $500; and said Peter Lacaze prays
that writs Of Injunction issue, enj lining. re-
straining and prohibiting said j. Mschado.
B Barths and A. Wagner, their agents,
clerks, servants, employees, from continuing
their said private markets within twelve
squares Of the Magazine street market;
and he prays also that, after due pro-
ceedinge. said J. Mschsdo, B. Bsrthe
and A. Wagner be condemned in solido
to pay to said plaintiff. P. Lacaze,
the aforesaid sum of $500, with legal
interest and Gusts; and he further prays
that the injunction be made perpetual"
The act No 81 of 1874, section first makes
it unlawful to keep private market for
the sale of fresh meat, poultry, fresh fish,
ETC., within twelve squares OF q public
mark t. Section third subj-cts the party
or parties violating section one to q fine of
500, OF imprisonment not less than three
months or not more than six months, or
both. at the discretion OF the court. Sec
ton fourth makes it the duty of the Judge
Of the First District Court to charge the
grand jury as to the provisions of said act
These provisions are purely of the nature
0f a criminal or penal statute; they belong
to that branch of jurisprudence which
treats of criminal offenses. Penal statutes,
says Bouvier, are those which command or
forbid thing ''under q certain penalty"
The act NJ. 81 of 1874, regulating the private
io the city o Now Orleans, conforms
70 that definition; iG iOrbids, under the PEN
alty of line and imprisonment, the opening
md Conducting OF private markets within
,welve squares OF any public market. There |
ire no other parts Of said act which |
ieem necoescry to consider, as the author |
ty given directly and specifically by the |
ecOnd section TO the Administrator of Com
nerce. under certain circumstances, to close |
he private markets, is not here in question,
md the authority conferred on him can not !
70 construed as authOIi to any one else. |
ic officer who is authorized and directed to |
,iOse the private markets established for |
he sale OF fresh meat, poultry, etc, in VIC. |
alton of the provisions of act No. 81, is ex-
lusive of the authority of any one else to
ct ON foot or institute proceedings to that
fleet. The second section of said act, di-
ecting the Administrator of Commerce
lnder certain circumstances to close the
'rivate markets can, at most, be considered
- IN additional" means of enforcing the
ct, and affect neither the party nor the
emeOy beyond tie purpose of it's provi-
ions. NJ "citzeh" can derive authority
rom that section t.. bring an individual ac-
ion. Tue act No. 81 Of 1874 being Grim
Nal OF penal statute, the question now re-
ure, is court OF civil. or equity powers
lone vested with jurisdiction to enforce it
nder such proceeding as those instituted
gainst the relstor herein by Pet r LAcazs
efOre the Superior District Court There