The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-02-15
THE COURTS.
THE BELLOCQ-NOBLOM CASE.
Eleventh Days observation-disclosures ts
of MIR. IsiafT for the Prosecution, and
MaIgr Austin for the Defense.

OF Mr.. Blair for the Pr0seCut ton. and
| MaJpr Austin for the Defense.
On yesterday the arguments commenced in
the United States Circuit Court the opening
speech for the prosecution being made by
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL BLAIR.
To the Court-Mr, Blair read the act Of
March 3. 1863 section 5, under which law tho
| claimant nutat be the owner Of the cotton at
| the time of capture and entitled 10 the pro-
ceeds Tho law permits two kinds of owner
shp-general and special, If the defendant
| made his claim as general owner when he
| was only the special owner, it was a fraud if
the defendant claimed to DO the general
owner when he was only the assignee Of a
special owner, it was d fraud; and II he made
claim for the proceeds when he was only emit
tied to recover for advances made, it was u
| fraud
To the .JuryZI stated when commenced
two weeks ago that we would prove to you
affirmatively the fraudulent nature of the
claim presented to the Court of Claims in 1868,
| Tor which Judgment was rendered In May 1874.
Out Of the 1861 bales there were 1913 bales or
80 of the whole, as to which we have shown
| that Bellocq, Noblom II Go. had no right to
enter the claim, or make the statements which
| Roy originally made in support Of the claln !;
that Henry Peychaud had no right TO repent
those statements In the amended petition filed
| by him as syndic in March, 1874. and that he
| had no right to recover against the govern
| ment on account of the cotton set forth in the
petition.
Mr.. Blair then took the tabular statement
Niled with the several petitons) Of the cotton
| for which the claim was made. and went
through the same In detail, showing by the
undisputed testimony Of nineteen untnpeac-
specified did not belong to Belloea Noblon Il
Go. at the time OF capture, and that they had
no right or title in the same. He showed that
Of the 1861 bales claimed, certain 80 bales
|
of Claims. and that for this reason the prose-
eution had offered no evidence of the fraud in
voved in them. So that out of the 1861 bales
claimed only 1876 bales, forming three lots, had,
through the non-attendance and death Of wit
nesses. been omitted In the proof of the fraud
ulenee OF the Belocq Nobom claim.
He argued that while the court would
charge that "a man must be presumed limo
cent until proven guilty there are stages:
In the progress of q cause when the burden of
proof. shifts, and that when the prosecution
has shown-as he thought it had that the de-
fendant In this. case was Tie plaintiff In the
one alleged to be fraudulent and that nothing
could be done in the matter Of the prosecution
of that cause without his knowledge and ap-
proval, then the burden OF proof shifts upon
| him and he must show his innocence by trans
ferring the responsibility to some one else,
and showing that he was misled in the acts by
which he participated in the fraud.
| Mr.. Blair further argued that II Il paper in
connection with the case be signed by. Henry
Peyehaid, which paper affected the Judgment
of the court iii his favor, he is presumed to
Bile for the truth of It's statements. and is
| liable both civillY and criminally.
Thedefense has introduced no testimony at
all to show any right, title or interest vested
| In Bolloeq, Nobiom IL Co., and no attempt has
been made to impeaeh the testimony OF the
government witnesses establishing the fraud
ulent nature of the claim for 1913 of the 1851
bales, for which the original claim was made
though they have produced mnny witnesses
| to show the bad character of Bouchard and
the good character of Peychaud
In 1868, after Peyehaud had been syndie OF
the estate Of Bellocq, Noblo1n 81 Co. two years
one MCGUIRE filed the original petition in the
Court of Claims, and Mr., Pierre Roy, menl-
and without examination of the books OF the
| firm to see whether the allegations Of the pc
tition were correct the statements OF the pc
tition filed by Mcclure and swore thereto;
and on May 10, 1873, five years after the insti-
tuition of the suit, and four years after he had
entered into his contract with Bouchard. Pey-
chaud for the first time appeared as the plain
tiff before the Court Of Claims.
pointnent as syndic Peyehaud swears to the
amended and third petition, accepting "a, Nc,
CURES and Roy's table SO far as It benefited
his case. but rejecting the allegations of Roy.
who had been a member OF the firm, when
they conf1icted with the new aspect which he
was about to give to the claim, for McGuire
and Roy only asserted lien for advances,
and claimed their amount. while Peychaud
alleged that Belloea, Noblom q Go. had re-
dueed the 1851 bales TO possession, prior to the
fall of New Orleans, and increased the claim
| from $121 763 ~, the amount OF advances. TO
s4oo 900, the net proceeds.
| Mr.. Blair argued that the omission Of Val
LADIES' name from the receipt in settlement
which Peychaud took from Bouchard and
Mrs. Bernard in 1874. while the name Of every
other recipient of the fund WIS carefully set
out, demonstrated that Peyehaud did know
Of Vallades contract for one-third of the
amount realized for 2G3 bales Of cotton claimed
by Bellocu. Nobloin d Co, and omitted Val
| ladies' name from the settlement because Val
lade had been a witness, and to prevent the con-
cuson resulting from this appropriation to
Valade that Peychaud had been aware Of
| the Vallade contract. o
Mr.. Blair then insisted to the Jury that tn Q
amount Of this allowance for VaIIade was
| circumstantial evidence of Peychauds knowl-
edge Of the contract Of September. 1872 That
agreement set out that certain specified 1853
bales enumerated in the tabulee, and claimed
by Peychaud belonged to Vallade, and 1t pro-
vided that OF the proceeds OF these. 1858 bales
Vallade should receive one-third. The Court
| of Claims rejected III its Judgment, 81 Of these
bales, and fixed the average value OF the cot
| ton at S1g2 per bale, and Mr.. Blair argued
that by only one process OF calculation could
the $t4. S4s set out in the settlement be reached,
as follows: 1853 bales, less 81 rejected, leaves
1872 which, at $192 per bale, makes 4,5A,
one-third of which Is Sl4,S4s.
He also reviewed the Testimony of Mr.. Con
rad here, and his deposition taken on the
point, urging that tits evidence established
that vallades interest was known to Pey-
chaud prior to February, 1874 at which date
Vallade swore that he had no interest, and
prior to March, 1874, when Peychaud swore
that the cotton belonged to Bellocq, Noblom
Co., and had been seized by them before tho
fall of New Orleans. AS to who it was that
duped or msled Peychaud into making the
petition and swearing that Vallade's interest
1874 ut which date Vallade swore he had no
interest, and prior to March, 1874, when Pey-
ctaud swore that the cotton belonged to Bel
loco, Noblom Il Co, and had been seizedb y
them before the fall of New Oreans, Mr.. Blair
said that the case was bare of any evidence to
show that any one had so duped him, and th"t
| it followed that he was the active mover "a
the matter himself, and the Claim being tra'tI-
ulent and Peychaud aware thereof. the ndi"t-
ment stands and the accused is shown to be
/