The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1877-06-24
IN CARROLLTON.
second judicial District Court, Judge
Pardce Presiding.

second judicial District Court, Judge
Pardce Presiding.
John Bitter, Joe Bitter and Victor Bitter we're
tried in this court on Friday on the charge of
feloniously assaulting and beating one Aaron
Thornton, colored, on the 26th February last
The jury found the two first accused guilty, and
Judge psrdte yesterday sentenced John Bitter
to $500 fine and fifteen months imprisonment in
the parish JAIL and Joe Bitter to $500, or in de-
fault Of payment, fifteen months imprisonment
in the parish Jail, and costs of court, and stand
committed Ia default of payment
The severity OF the sentence Ia due to the gray
ity of the assault. which came near costing the
life of Thornton.
THE sTATEHoUsE GROUNDS.
Reference was made day or two ago to the
suit OF the State va. Bloomer and Girardey & Co.,
for taxes on piece of property standing in their
name. The history Of the case in brief is about
this. During the extraordinary egisl alton of the
Warmoth tenure OF uffice, commission was ap-
pointed to purchase land wherein to build q
State House. The commission, already named
In our recent report, entered in to q contract on
March 9, 1871. with Il. Bloomer and M. A. South
worth, for the acquisition Of certain tract CT
land forming part OF the Foucher property, at
Burtheve.
The contract, as already stated, was a re-
markable one and did not specify precisely how
much ground was to be sold, and the price was
contingent on the amount to be nsferred at
future date As an earnest Of the consumma-
ton OF the transaction, the commissioners gave
an order on the State Auditor and Treasurer for
sl0u,ue0. lhis order was never paid, nor any
warrant issued for the amount The comma
sioners also assumed to exempt the property from
taxation, pending the contamination Of the
agreement Meanwhile tthe agreement never
having been consummated) the assessors con-
tinued to assess the property in the names OF r
Bloomer and @. e. Glrardey Il Co.
HENCE THE SUIT
for taxes from 1871 to 1875, amounting to s6e74
1t does not appear how Girardey & Co. became
interested In the ownership of the land, but thew
represent themselves owning fve-eighteenths
of it.
The reasons OF Judge Pardee are given in the
following words:
In the case OF the State Vs. B. Bloomer and G,
E. Girardey & Co., relative to the taxes on the
property known the State House Grounds, at
Burthcville, Judge Pardee has given the follow
ing reasons for judgment against the defendants:
]. Ii the property on which taxes are claimed
belongs to the state, it ia exempt from taxes
U it does not belong to the state it is liable.
There is no claim that it ia included in any of the
less it is State property.
2. The question
FOR DECISION
the defendants under act 81 Of 1871, entitled an
act creating commission to locate the size for .
State-House, etc., amounts to sale of the prop-
erty in question to the state.
In the first place do rot regard the act No. g.
of lS7i as constitutional, because it does not pro.
vide for the debt cantracted-Constitution art Ill
xhe set appropriates 81, 100000, and only pro-