The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-02-05
4 GARD.
CITY CONSOLIDATED BOND MATTER

| Abstract ftota the decision rendered by Jti1es
| W61ds. In the tauss Ut Hdsaiie Maanhatit
| and others VS.. Tie city 81 New Orleans and
| RI an II opinion that the aeb of 1864, abdvs
| mentioned, contains u contract oatia and
| binding OH tbs city. and that the b6tidhdlders
ath entitled ~ esa6t the substantial pstfoftn-
anee u the contract | havs 80. held ibon the
former hhatins 81 the case. Mashhattt Oh al
ys. The city of New Orleans. q Woods, los.
The thirty section u tha act VI 1874
constituting as II dbhs a contract between The
city and the bnnlholders, stunts unttHseteI
iWpniy " rfpaot Hs Pfebisi0nss. But The rettiz
sly II the a6tnplainants 10 enforce their eo1l.
tract is clearly. MOI ~ equity. btit, Mt Inv, Ivy
the recovery u . Judgment q, their coupons
| and bonds. and bF ths writ " tnHndatntis
lax required by law. ne ,slief III tay II
pinin, adeqtats md eomptets, md tqsbitg etus4
mi be rfsg,ted IA
ABSTRACT
from tho decision rendered by Jadge Billings
IN the case ri Morris Hunger vs., th6 Mayor
and common Council ri New Orleans. dated
Et,t among the statutes n the State with
references ~ the city Of New Orleans, and
found h6ts tint give the absences Of any pars
ticnlar means II payment III q city ordiz
nance creating % debt, u special Significance
"yhf RI 4 ls52, " III r. snt,Ilea tAn aes 70
pide fw Me popf,nmeat,' rio, seetioa ~, phDs
81. ronfttiy,a He f1ttotoiu0 Iy0yisiont
"'And no ordinance tot the city of New Or
leans, creating II debt or loan shall he valid
unless for Eotus single objs6b or work dig
tinetlY specified thefsin, and unless such Or
1inhnee shall provide ways and tnehts for
the prinef,al payment Of running interest
during the whole tims for which safd debt Or
loan shall be contracted, isnd for ths full md
pttnetunl discharge at maturity Ut the capital
borrowed Or the debit iueurred'"
ABSTRACT
from tho report of Judge r. Wharton CoIsns,
special master in chane6ry,' approved by
Judge Woods
"Et On Ill points Of inquiry generally,
report,
n. That the net II 1864 was assigned as an
itfeyoeabls check md safeguard for the b6rlt~
lit aud advantage Of ths holders of the CON
soIdatsd bonds No debt could be contracted
except according h, its provisions. The hold
Org ri the bonds hre entitled h. precedence in
the collection III taxes on lands and slaves.
and to the suppression If my demand for
payment ~ any Subsequent debts MAT would
Interfere with Or prevent tbs payment u tho
| consolidated debt. unless such subsequent
debt was contracted upon c6rnpliaues with
the terms and conditions Of tho not of 1867
IN THE CASE or MAaHHAuT vs.. new ORLEANS.
before the United States Circuit Court for
Louisiana, Judge Woods, In the written rem
sons assigned by him for Judgment, uses, the
following language:
''In the argument upon tho motion for IN
junction it WIS claimed by counsel for the city
that tho net Of 1869 was In violation VI tho
constitution Of ts45. which YVES In forces when
that act WIS passed md which declared (artl-
Gle tzil that taxation shall be equal and uni
form throughout the State The provision Of
This act Of 1852 which Is deerned to contra
yene this constitutional requirement il this.
The rate Der cent of said tax In each rnuniei-
paiity shall be in proportion 10 the indebted
ness Of each l can7,Ot sec any conflict be-
emit advised, / do not think the objection u,
the Inv well founded"