The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1877-11-04
THE d,dpU R'Ts.

| THE COURTS.
| Merchants and others Interested in cases in
the district sour =, ~ principals or ms witnesses
can be notified by telegraph when to appear In
| court thus avoiding the necessity OF constant
Fifth District Court.
in this court The rule for mapdamug aeainst
| the Aud tor on tho rela ion IT Henry G. Dtbbls
| to pei the Is nance to the relator Of war
rant for an unpaid balance Of SALARY claimed TO
p ds Ths resor eas
balance II s67G duo b m on his shlhry rs Assist
ant Attorney General from January I'LL March
| az, 1877. when his s,1ce ssOr waR qualified and
| he asks for n mandamus against the Auditor
compelling him 10 warrant In bis tnvor for Tint
ssm ganss ss NJ h for ths year it1
Tho Auditor, BY the Attorney General. Tor an
| swer. denies TINT rclator
WAS EVER LEGALLY APPOINTED
Assistant Attorney General of tho state and
| specially that he occupied or discharged any Of
the duties Of that office from january tn
March ~. 1877. but no hv"rred tn y he hn1 been
duri & that time in sctual hostility to the legal
dischnrging any Of the duties IF that office. by
his neglect he hh permitted large nccnmula-
ton Of ! Dor whic h had to ba performed by
Judge Egan. tho present Assistant Attorney
Cen ral.
THE INTERVENTION
| on the part Of Assistant Attorney General Egan
Whsn the f Ks IL e
ceased to exist. by tbs express terms Of net No.
81 Of 1874. under which he held. Helmor, 1t Is
nvcrred was In open hostility to the legal gov
ernmept Of the State. and by reason If said con
tn macy could not be considered ns one Of its off,
cars The intervene further claims hat the
appropriation of $4,000 made in act No. II Of the
extra session of 1877. for the year salary Of
the Assistant Attorney General. was meant
SOLELY FOR THE OFFICER HOLDING UNDER ACT
NO. 10
Of the same year. under which the intorvenor
claims to any portion of said appropriation. all
Of VIII ch the ntervenor IL entitled to, for which
he ,pks in igmsnt in full,
ator' and Henry & Miller. Esq. ior defendant
and intervcnor.
ON BEHALF OF nELAToR
evidence was aduced by which It was made to
missiOned by G. @. Antoine. Lien'enant Gov
ernor. to tho office Of Asst .ant Attorney Gem
duly Installed In that Office and performing it
functions ut the date Of the inauguration Of
Coy. Nichols. on January 0, 1877. 1t was also
made to appear that he
HAD NOT RESIGNED OR BEEN REMOVED
from office till h s ucsess0r the present incum-
bent. was apo nted and qualified under the
same act No. IS Of 1874. on The END OF March
1877; that he had pot drawn pay for any portion
made by act No Al Of 1877 to pay the yearly sal
ary Of the office. and that he had made amicable
demand for warrant for the gum Of 1916. the
balance he ella ms as due him from January /,
1877. till his successor was appointed, and the
same had been refused him by the Auditor.
Upon his showing the relator clos cd his case.
ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
and intervcnor q number Of witnesses were in
trodured, the snbst lance CT whose testimony was
that all the actual work that had been done
by any person In the capacity OF Assistant Asst At
E GasoiA''" W '''' D''''A' 'A'"A'''A'' Judge
ATTORNEY GENERAL OGDEN WAS THE FIRST
WITNESS
examined. and he testified to the circumstances
of Judge Egans appointment and qualification
under act 35 Of 1874 on he 22d of March. 1877 and
of his subsequent qualification on March 9th.
under act No. 10 Of the extra session Of 1877 He
also testified to the immense accumulation Of
| caseaa in the Superior Criminal Court, which he
| in office. all OF which eases had been attended
to aud disposed Of BY his assistant, Judge
Fan He also testified that he found all the
affairs Of the Office Of Attorney General con-
involved.
RELAToR HAD PERFORMED NO OFFICIAL ACTS
as Assistant Attorney General since the 9th of
January, 1877. Witness gave it as his legal
opinion that ,the present incumbent was emit
tied to the whole Of the $1,000 appropriated by
act No. 4 Of 1877 to the hsay Of the
not qualified until March % OF that year. He
| thought that the appropriation was intended
SOlely lOF me SALARY Vi the OLlce hCI
| No. 10 Of 1877.
| JUDGE whitaker, THE NEXT WITNESS,
| s1bstanti9ted the testimony of Mr.. Ogden as to
| the ac Emulation of cases in the Superior
| Criminal Court. and the further facts that these
cases had all ben prosecuted to judgment by
| the present incumbent. and that the relator
| D'bble, had not appeared in his court as the
representative of the State, a. any time from
| January 9to March g. 1877.
! ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL EGAN
| took the stand and substantiated the evidence
| Of the preceding Witnesses. There was great
deal Of irrelevant testimony in the shape of
| opinions. legal and personal. adduced, but
| these were the substantial facts established by
| the defense and intervention. viz that the re-
| latOr had never performed any official act as
| Assistant Attorney General after January 9, 1877
and that Judge Egan had performed al such
| ing the discharge ,of labors that had accumu-
| lated prior to that date.
| H. C. DIBBLE WAS NEXT EXAMINED
| in rehuttal. He said that under the act of 1874.
under which he held. it was not his duty to an
| or absence of the Attorney G. neral His duties
were specific and related solely to the collection
| Of the revenue. He stated he was not respon-
| sible for the accumulation of work the = it.
nesses for the defense had described He had
| performed all his duties as laid down by law.
| During the ri5d spoken of no legal business
| in the courts had been performed by any one
| because Of the
PECULIAR CONDITION OF AFFAIRS,
the very. legality of the Superior Criminal
| Court being assaaled. the same not being de-
cided till April, and alter his renewal He had
never lad OCCASION ID pass on The question
aaytr