New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-12-24

doubsedly defendants position in excepting
to tho Jurisdiction Of the Superior District
Court would be correct.
For then we would be In the presence Of
Q statute defining particularly the jurisdic-
ton of the Superior District Court, under
which it could not be pretended that the
case 1T bar came within the domain OF that
jurisdiction as laid down by it, the law
organizing said court, and in presence OF
q subsequent statute which gives cogniz-
auce of such cases to "any court" which
it 10 claimed would give the Supe-
rior District Court jurisdiction of the cause.
In this contingency it is clear that this
court would be compelled to say that there
must be some reservation in that term "any
court" And that the reservation was and
meant "any court" of competent, original
and ordinary jurisdiction. Then, OF course,
the arguments used by defendant would
have Q peculiar force in this State under
our present constitution. The laws of
which plaintiff seeks to avail himself are on
particular subject expressed in their title
as hereinabove set forth. 1t is manifeet
that no provisions in euch laws on such .
subject matter could repeal or amend q
previous law on the subject matter of the
Jurisdiction OF q court when their title
does not SO express the intent Nor
could any provision in such laws affect
the jurisdiction of Q court established
BY spe cial statute, no reference being made
in the title thereof to the Jurisdiction of
said court.
Hennen's Digest, page 783, No. II: "a
special controls general statute" Waldo
Va. Bell. Is A., 329 See constitution. arts.
- and 81; Rev. Stat, sec. 1927.
But such does not seem to be the light in
which this matter must be viewed.
The power is such as the one given by
law to the judge of the Superior Court as
q district Judge to perform marriage cere-
monies and to grant to married women au-
thorizations to borrow money. The acts
above referred to confer the additional
power to him, a. we'll as to all other district
Judges, to place purchasers at tax collect
Ors' sales in possession of the property pur-
chased by them. It is power within the
jurisdiction gracieuse of such district judges.
See Hennen's Digest, p. 7S3, No. l: IA
construction, which would render important
expressions of the law useless, can not be
adopted; effect must be given to them all,
NJ. 635; 2 N. s, IS; 4 N. s 80, $50; L ,
365; L.. SIS; T. r.. 236: IA A.. 4l9"
Idem No. 4: "Tne intention is to be
deduced from the whole and every part Of
the statute, taken together. Where in the
preamble or any particular claim, an ex-
preston is used not 90 large in its import
as those used in other parts, effect must be
given to the larger. A statute should be
construed, if possible, that no claim, SEN
tence or word shall be euperfuOus or iDsig-
nificant. Inciuile est mis-; totelege perpeluie
ejus properita ja4dican eel rcspondere
Look at the phraeeOl0gy OF act No. los
of the acts of 1874, approved March %, 1874,
section three.
The act is upon a certain subject IN after,
enounced in its title, to wit: 'AuthOrizlnR
the sale of property by tax collectors for
delinquent taxes, and providing for the re
demptiOn of the same, and requiring the
Auditor Of Public Accounts to make title in
the name of the State, ard regulating the
the issuing of ipjunotions il certain cases
and fixing the term OF prescription of &C
tions of nullity of titles at tax sales, and
| for other purposes"
Section three particularly states: "ADd
such title given by virtue Of this act. shall
be held in and recognized by all the courts
| of this State as valid in law" and adds fur
| Their, and upon presentation of a title &c
given to-whomi Any court No; for this
| versy as to the competency of the tribu
| nal-such q question is here raised; 'tC
| any district or parish judge, in open cour,
| or at chambers" concluding with the in
| junction to the judge; and lit shall be The
| duty OF such Judge to order the sheriff t
| put the purchaser in possession OF the
property go purchased by him."
The power is given to any district or par
ish judge to order the purchaser put il
possession OF the property, and to carry
| out the provisions OF the acts above re
ferred to. Will it be contended that tb'
Judge of the Superior District Court To-
| the parish of Orleans is not distric
| judgel The judges Of all the district
courts of the Safe are conferred with
power under the above act.
1t is said that the process resortet
to should have been via ordinaria. Their
il nothing in the laws above qQoted to war
rant this assumption. This State adopte'
the mode prescribed therein for the enfOI CT
nent and collection of it's taxes. The put
ting of the purchaser at such sales in pos
session is one of the penalties that are in
flicted upon the delinquent taxpayer. an
"a a sequel is as summary as possible
Union Towbost Company vs. BordeleI
Auditor, etc, 7 A., 1875; Geren va. Grube'
"a A 69i; Morrison vs.. Garkin, % A., 69s
IC. p, 90
The defendants have received ample NJ
tice; they have been served with copy 9
the petition aud notice of the rule, and
summary procet di GO this is all that
ne c esssry or reGnir-t to ba given. % A
23s: 10 A, 76i, 20; II A., 375.
The third ground in the exception is ths
the supplemental petition changes the su
stance Of the original demand. Such is NJ
the case, it is believed. The principal d.
mand was the posse ssion of the propert
ths other demands were merely incidents
and by their abandonment caused defen
ants no injury.
The exceptions of the defendants shou'
be overruled and judgment rendered fl
plaintiff, as prayed for.
List judgment be accordingly enter'
, | herein