New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-02-12
sLAUGHrERHOUsE MONOPOLY.


The bill of Mr.. Kummel, to give to all
licensed butchers and stock dealers the
right to slaughter and yard cattle and stock
within the limits below the city prescribed
in the act creating the Slaughterhouse Com
pany, having been referred to the Judiciary
Committee of the House. that body invited
certain legal gentlemen who had been en-
gagged in the study and argument of the
question as to the power of the Legislature
to pass the act, to favor the committee with
their views, the following brief was pre-
sented to the committee by Mesers. j. B.
Cotton and Alexander Walker, in favor of
the power Of the Legislature to enact the
law in question:
THE POWER OF THE LEGISLATURE
The whole question as to the right and
power of the Legislature to repeal the grant
Of exclusive privileges to the Crescent City
Live Stock Landing and Slaughterhouse
Company. by the act No. llS, 1869, depends
upon the character of the corporation and
of the franchise granted to it.
If this corporation is exclusively private
corporation, and the franchises granted 1t
not Of public, political and police charac-
ter, there can be no doubt that such grant
constitutes . contract and creates vested
interest which can not be cCnstituti0nally
violated or abolished.
1t was not necessary to present authorl-
ties on 80 simple and elementary PROPOSE
ton. ~.>sz
But if the corporation is municipal and
police in its character and objects, or the
| franchises granted are of . public and police
character, they are under the control of the
| Legislature, and may be repealed, amended
| or changed at the will and discretion Of the
Legislature.
The Civil Code, article 429, clearly de-
| fines the Two corporations, political and
private. Political corporations are those
| which have principally for their object the
| administration Of portion Of the State. and
to whom a portion of the powers Of gov
| ernment Is delegated to that effect"
All others are private corporations.
| 1t is not nece ssary to adduce authorities
to chow that the grants to corporations OF
| political or police powers are within the
control of and repealable by the Legisla-
ture Our own Supreme Court has lucidly
| expOunded this proposition in tho case of
the police jury of Bossier vs. corporation
! of Shreveport, Fifth Annual. page 6oS. This
case arose out Of the claim OF the city of
| Shreveport, to the exclusive right of estab-
llshiDg ferries within the limits of the town.
| The Legislature after ward granted to the
parish OF BOssier, having the jurisdiction
over the opposite side of the river, the right
| to participate in the regulation of the III
| termediate ferries and to share in the net
profits.
Upon the question whether this grant TO
Bossier destroys the vested interests OF or
impairs the contract with the city of Shreve-
| port. Judge Preston, as the organ OF the
court, declared ''tbat all such grants were
not contracts, but ordinary acts OF leeisIa-
ticr, and that the powers they confer are
nothing more than mandates of the sOver
eign power, and that these laws may be re-
peaied or altered at the will OF the Legisla-
ture." The privilege Of establishing fer
rles and deriving revenue there1rom. was
given by q law which the Legislature did
not deprive themselves by express or I'M
piled contract OF the power OF repeating OF
altering at will.'
Angel Il Amee in their standard work OF
corpor ations. clearly define the distinction
between the two corporations. Page 2l.)
The main distinction between public
and private corporations is that over the
tcrmer the Legislature, as the trustee Of
guardian Of the public interests has the ex
elusive and unrestrained control and acting
as such, as it may create, SO it may
modify or destroy, as public exigency re
ou;res or recommend, or the public interes1
will be best subserved. The right to es
tablish, alter or abolish such corporations
seems TO be principle inherent in the very
| nature of the institutions Themselves, since
all municipal regulations must, from the
nature of things, be subject to the absolute
| control of the government. Such instltu
tiCns are the auxiliaries of the government
in the important busine IS OF municipal rule
and can not have the least pretensiOn Il
sustain their privileges or their existence
upon anything like contract between
them and the Legislature. because there
| |. 1,$ o<rn lot md ho
cause their objects and duties are lDcom
patible with anything of the nature Of q
compact"
And on page twenty FIVE the same author
says: 'If the power conferred be granted
for public purposes they belong to the cor
poratiOn in its public and municipal char
acter, but ii for purposes of private ad
vantage and emolument, though the public
NAV derive a common benefit therefroB
the corporation quoad is to be regarded al
q private company"
From these and lnnumerable other authori
ties, to the like purport, it follows that {
! private corporation. invested with pOlltlca
and municipal powers, is quOad subject Il
the same control Of the Legislature, OF ex
clusively political and public corporations
, 1t would be gross perverslOn OF all Law
and reason to pretend that the private cor
| porations could claim an irrevOcable righ
L
powers and franchises which could not b.
given to municipal corporations like thu
Corporations of cities, police j1ries, etc.
Does not this act of 1869. No. ilS. create
a corporation to exercise political and mu
nicipal franchises of the most importan
characters This is Indicated
First, in the title of the act, which, unde
, the one hundred aud fourteenth article O.
the constitution, must express the object o
l - - n.< q q
of the city of New Orleans; to locate tn
stock landings and slaughterhouses, and t
incorporate the Crescent City Live Stocl
Landing and SlaughterhOuse Company.
The two objects first stated are clearl.
governmental and police objects, th'
powers and the instrumentalities for exer
cieing which are under the absolute contro
of the Legislature. The last named oblec
!, is the creation or recognition of the lnstru
mentality to carry out those objects. Th'
instrumentality must necessarily be unde
the came control as the objects. They ar
both included in the same range of power
| thew are inseparable. and on this groun'
alone have the exclusive rights OF this col
poration been maintained by the courts.
Associate Justice Miller, in the decision II
the Slaughterhouse case, l6 Wallace, afte
showing the power and authority OF tn
Legislature, by virtue of its police power, t
pass laws restraining private liberty an!
rightsfor the protection Of the general wei
fare, the lives and health of the citizenf
even by grant of exclusive rights to COZ
poratiou to enforce such power and re
straint, proceeds to say:
"If this statute had imposed on the CIT
of New Orleans precisely the same duties
accompanied by the same privileges, whlc
it has imposed on this corporation, it is be
: lieved that no question would have bee
raised as to it's coDstltutionality. Why ca
| not the Legislature confer the came powe
on another corporation created for Lawful