New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-05-19

der Mckee, William A. Thomas, w. G.
James and John McWhirter.-The follow
ing jury was impaneled:
John Black, ALICE Lesassieur,
Alvarez Sinders, Jules Desallee,
Edgar Thezan, Ulysee Populue,
Andrew DumOnt, Placide BOutin,
Eugene Rielleux, William j. Keller,
A. Geaux, Charles Joubert.
District Attorney Beckwith. after con-
suItation with Spe cial Counsel New, moved
nolls prosequi as to c. w. Wills, which
was allowed.
Indictment read, and case opened by the
prosecution.
Supreme Court.
Present-An the Judges.
The following decisions were rendered:
REHEARINGs GRANTED.
No. 1883. R. G. Taylor vs.. John N. Con-
way.
REHEARINGS REFUSED.
No. 1927. Teutonia National Bank vs.
Southern Bank.
No. 1880. NJ. l.. Block vs. A. Bonnet.
No. 6O79 j. Faust, Brother & Co. vs..
Glynn & Wintz, Caviar &C Il Ricketts,, Jr.,
sureties.
No. 6l42. L. M. Routh vs.. Citizens Bank
~ No. 6ao7. State of Louisiana We. W. D.
No. 6al3. Mrs. Pitcher vs.. Schwartz &
Wslter Pagh.
BY CHIEF JUSTICE LUDELNG.
No. 1862. James Reid, appellant, vs.. Lou
isians Lottery COmpsny.-Suit to recover
$4,000 upon lottery ticket alleged to have
drawn prize of that amount. Defendant
alleges fraud on the part OF plaintiff and
others. Held that the testimony and letters
of co-conspirstor are admissible against his
accomplices, as q pert OF the res gestG
Greeniesf. sections l0S and Ill, and page
1913 That this court will not disturb the
Judgment of the district court or the verdict
of q Jury, with regard to questions OF fact,
unless such judgement or verdict are
msnifestly erroneous. The judgment OF the
lower court, which was in favor OF defend
ant, is affirmed. Justices Howell and WHY
dissent.
No. 473l. Horter, Peterson e. Fenner,
appellants, vs.. Merchants Mutual Insurance
Company. = From Fifth District Court.
Suit to recover $745, value Of certain goods
insured by defendants, which were lost
while on board the steamer Victor, from
the perils Insured against. Defendants
allege that there was no contract OF insn:-
ance in regard to these goods; that the Vic
tor was past due and news of her loss had
reached the city when plaintiffs sent their
clerk to effect the insurance, before bust
ness hours and in the absence of the officers
having charge of the business de partment,
who procured an emplOye OF defendants to
make the Endorsement; that atterward the
president notified plaintiffs that the FISK
could not be taken.
The evidence shows that pla!ntlns had
general policy with defendants: that on
Saturday evening plaintiffs received bills Of
lsding for the goods, and early Monday
morning their clerk went to the insurance
Office, presented the policy at the marine
clerk desk. and that clerk or employe OF
the company "wrote up the Endorsement IN
their policy book" that sometime during
that day the president OF the company
wrote to notify tne plaintiffs that the COIL
pany declined the risk
Held that plain if. had the right to pre-
sent themselves g.. the company's office,
whenever it was OPEL n, and to presume that
the employees in the flee we're authorized
| to transact the business which they I'M
dertook to perform, and whether the COM
pany would take risks on vessels pact due
or not was q question within the discretion
| of the company
! knowledge that any accident bad befallen
the steamer when they applied to have the
| insurance affected.
Judgment reversed and another rendered
| in favor of plaintiffs for the amount
claimed, with legal interest from judicial
demand and costs.
No. 49l5. s. Watson, trustee, appellant,
vs.. Edward C. Billings ct al.-From Filth
District Court. Action to recover POW,
| alleged balance collected by defendants tor
| plaintiff. Defense is that this balance was
| detained, under agreement previously made,
as q fee or compensation tor professional
| services.
The evidence sustains the judgment,
| which was for defendants. Judgment al
| firmed with costs.
| No. 1928 City Of New Orleans vs. George
| w, Campbell, Samuel and A. w. Smith,
| piaipliffs in rule, experimentation the Su-
perior District Court. Proceeding to cause
erasure OF registry of judgments for taxes
| and tax liens.
Held that plaintiffs in rule have no right
or interest to inquire into the legality or
regularity of the taxes; whether the lots OF
the female asylum be exempted trom TAXA
| ton or not does not concern them; the IN
provements placed thereon ~ Campoel.
| were liable to taxation by the city ana
State; the law of the State prohibits the
| sale of the property unless the taxes are
| paid. Revised Statutes, section Ioi9. Jadg-
ment affirmed.
Justice Wy;y-The remark that the sale
| was prOhibilel was not necessary 10 the de-
| cisiOn. concur in the conclusion.
Justice Howell, Justice Morgan with him
| dissents.
By JUeTICE TALIAFEREo.
| No. 577.. l.. II. Gardner s. Co. VS.. Levae'
| seur & Co, app. llants.-FrOm Fifth DIS
trict Court Defendants settled with their
creditors for thirty per cent and gave pl Ain
| tiff. seven pr0missory notes amounting to
| $lS27 35, the latter surrenderipg notes
eoual to $456S 81. They subsequently
l 10 n tfQEc
notes. There was n0vatiOn. The inten.
! ton was to extinguish the old notes and
| substitute new ones. Plaintiffs had no legal
right to enforce payment OF the origins
notes, which were no longer obligations Of
Levasseur & Co. Judgment reversed:
No. 6O58. Howard & Preston vs.. Missis-
sippi Valley Bank, sppellant.-.From Fourth
District Court. To recover the amount OF
forged drafts by plaintiffs. suPposlng
them to be drawn by one OF their Gus.
toners. DEFENDANTS claim plaintiffs should
have known his signature; the latter that
defendants took them on Endorsement and
led them to believe they had received them
directly from the drawer. Story ON notes
1876, 1870. The facts are different from Nc
Call vs. Corning, A., 9l4. The drawee is
presumed to have better knowledge than
the holder. Plaintiffs had other genuine
drafts. The loss should fall on them
Judgment reversed.
| BY JUSTICE HOWELL.
No. 6063. F. E. Chanut va. Ed. Leon
Levasseur ct al; L. 81. Gardner Il Co., ap'
pellants.-From the Fifth District Court
Contest of creditors over defendants goods
l. Claude Tiblier, testamentary executor
against his claim for rent, with privilege on
the proceeds of sale. 2. j. c. Jaubert d
Co. 5000, with privilege on goods identified