New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1877-05-26

Faire, appellant; Elizabeth MoutoD, appel
liant vs.. Abel Mangin. From Fifth Dis
trict Court Actions between principal
and agent are subject to the prescription
of ten years. Judgment affirmed.
No. 6632. d. Landry VS.. F. Victor. A.
Bennett intervenor and appellant.-From
Fourth District Coufss. The surety of APP
peal from order of seizure and sale is
table, with the principal for the difference
between the claim and proceeds of the sale
of mortgage property, and after judg-
ment and proceedings against the.prins
cipal for such balance, on the return luliG
bona, the plaintiff may proceed by,rule
against the surety. Judgment affirmed
Justice Mann dissents
No. 646G. Celina Boutte, wife, ct al. vs. !
executors of Francis P. Boutte, appel 1
lants. From the Second District Court
Joining of, husband and wife in petition
Of appeal is 0 sufficient authorization.
The executor is not necessary party to
q snit for the. partition of an estate.
No. 1891. City Of New Orleans VS.. L.
Madison Day, appellant. From the Su-
perior District Court:
"This suit was brought against the de-
fendant in November, 1874, for the taxes
Of that year. On the fifth of that month
he filed his answer, and on the fourth of
December following, his supplemental an
swer. On May 10, 1875, alter evidence
introduced and argument, the court gave
judgment for plaintiff, and defendant ap-
pealed.r The defendant now insists that
however right the Judgment against him
may have been, it must now be reversed
and this suit be dismissed, because the
act No. SO Of the extra session Of 1877
has provided new mode of collecting
taxes, and that all laws providing q
different mode are repealed there
by. 1t mayrbel true that the Legisla4
ture has provided new mode of collect
ing taxes, as stated, but it does not fol-
low that that mode is exclusive, especially
as relates to back taxes. We understand
that the assessment of tax against an in
dividual creates personal debt against
him, as well as lien against his prop
erty. If the property of the debtor sub
ject to the lien be from any cause insult
cient to pay the tax, he is personally
bound and liable ss we'll for the whole
tax as for any deficiency thereof; and if it
be debt due by him personally, we know
no law or reason why he may not be sued
in the courts by the corporation to whom
he is indebted and condemned to pay.
We understand the act No. SO to provide
d speedy remedy as against the property
itself, but we do not see that it takes away
the night of the city to proceed in the
courts to enforce the personal obligations
OF its debtors, and incidentally its liens
on their property. Be this as it may, the
law by its terms makes no reference to
back taxes, and seems to provide for the
future, and so far, therefore, as relates to
| the collection Of back taxes, the remedies
provided in the statutes are not necessarily
IN conflict with act ninety-six, and, there
fore, not necessarily repealed by it. We
would be 10th to hold to construction of
act ninety-six which would work so mani
fest an injustice and injury to the PUBLIC
interests sissdSy conflict, and, therefore, as we
Ia y,1, appeal OF the right Of the city to
proceed with her suits pending for delin-
quent taxes Of past years. Judgment
affirmed.
In the Superior Criminal Court Michael
Gallagher has been convicted, without
capital punishment, OF breaking and en-
tering in the night time, being armed,
the residence of Mrs. Bumfort, April 3,
1877. -'
Charles Lockaby, the same verdict, for
killing Matthias keppler. November 6,
1876, on Victory, between Frenchm4n and
Eiysian Fields streets.
DIR. r. Otto Moses was sentenced to six
months Imprisonment and $50 fine. The
fine might have been lighter, but this is
the least imprisonment the Law allows.
A writ of error has been granted in the
Jumel-Johnson case to the Supreme Court
of the United States.
Judge Rogers, OF the Fifth District
Court, in the case of State ex rel, Albert
Lemore VS.. Allen Jumel, Auditor, passes
on the constitutionahty of act No SO, Of
April 80, ls77. providing S14, 500 for the
mileage and per diem of the regular
session for 'those who may have been re-
turned as elected by the Returning Board,
but who not having been elected are not
I-entitled to seats; provided that no such
members shall be paid until the have filed
with the presiding officer of the House a
written disclaimer of their titles to seats F"
He considers it unconstitutional in not
providing in its title that money is appro-
/ priated for others than members. As to
act No. 1870, Of the same date, joint reso-
luton declaring on such conditions these
members are entitled to this pay he de-
cides that ii has no application to vouchers
\ issued previously, and those in suit are is
sued under No. 9S, He concludes that
the General Assembly has no power to
award payment for services as particular
State officers who by the provisions of the
resolution itself are declared not to be en-
titled to such office, and it is matter
immaterial to the court what reasons or
motives induced the passage of the reso-
luton. Courts can be guided only by the
provisions of the law, and when, by ex-
animation into the provisions Of a statute
they fnd public funds appropriated for
certain purposes and in certain con-
ditions, it is their duty to observe
whether they can be decreed by them
as Of bihding force The constitution
OF the State declares who are the officers
and how much they are to receive, and
when and how paid The General As.
sembly can not disregard this paramount
authority
Alfred Roman has sued John M. How
ell, clerk OF the supreme Court, for
1929 80, alleged to have been deposited
with him by litigants, which he has not
turned over TO him as his successor.
10 the Sixth District Court Steven J.
Memory has filed petition against James
Andrews and Co., contractors of the jet
ties, alleging q contract OF July 8, 1875,
and delivery Of thirty-tiVe barge loads OF
willows az, 500 cords) at 81 IS; that be
was allowed for only 4622 0S cords; that
defendants refused to allow the compile
ton OF the contract, which was COS barge
loads, and claims damages OF $685., ,223 so,
This unkind cut is from the Cincinnati