The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-04-10
THE BANK CASE.
ANSWER OF THE SOUTHERN BANK To
THE PETITION OF TIE CITY
ATTORNEY.

THE VI TIE
ATTORNEY.
The city of New Orleans instituted suit
some time ago against the Southern Bank in
the Fifth District Court. The petitioner claimed
from defendant the sum OF $8O5, $685. in bonds
issued by said bank in accordance with the
provisions of act No. IA Of 1868. Defendant
averred three grounds OF exception to this
action In order that it may be informed dis
tinctly on. whom to fasten the responsibility Of
this suit
aJudge Rogers gave judgment in this case
on March 26, 1873, by dismissing plaintiffs
exceptions, and holding that plaintiffs objec-
ton that the suit must be dismissed because
the city has failed to tender the sum OF
s537, $40 %, paid by defendants in extinction
OF the police debt, does not hold good in the
case III the city has any cause of action, it
arises from the fact that the bank was its
mandatory and has failed to account.
In answer to plaintiffs petition, defendant,
through E. Berrnudez, Esq. filed an answer
Yesterday sustaining it's exceptions, and
averring:
That while It wa, the the of fiscal al agent
issued by the city under provisions of act Il
February n, 1869.
That it was the duty of said fiscal agent to
apply the said bonds according to state
| nient of the Treasurer, which was furnished.
That in said statement is set forth, as q
debt of the city OF New Orleans, in conform
ily with section 3 OF the act OF the Legislature
approved February n, 1869, the estimate and
apportionment made by the Board OF Com
ulssoners Of the Metropolitan Police, as the
share of the city of New Orleans, for the year
ending September 80, 1862 under the pro
visions of act No. IA Of the Legislature OF
Louisiana, approved September "A, 1863, say
and airport onment for which said amount OF
SS05,635 the fiscal agent was by said state
ment directed to issue at par an equal amount
of per cent bonds, authorized by the act ap-
proved February n, 1863, lS805, $3.50. in salts
faction of said debt
That over and above the provisions Of law
making it the duty of the fiscal agent tc
give said bonds in the manner indicated by
the statement the Council Of the city passed
an ordinance directing said bonds to be ISSUED
that they be delivered to A. Dubuclet, Esq.
Treasurer When the bank ceased to be fisca
agent Of the city the bank rendered to thu
city sworn account, showing the disposition
made OF said bonds. which was found cor
rect.
That the city of New Orleans has further
approved the application of said bonds, b!
causing to be prepared and by accepting the
statement of the debts due by said city, made
under the provisions OF the present charter
n87O) of said city; by adopting ordinance No
1914 N. S., on the twenty-secOnd OF January
; 1870, whereby the Southern Bank was directet
, to transfer and deliver to its successor, a;
Il seal agent, all the 7 per cent bonds 1ssue'
by the city, under said act OF 1869, other thai
the 1906, 900 per cent bonds aforesaid; whic
uuissued bonds said Southern Bank, Oh
proper checks or orders therefor, did trane
init and deliver to it's successor, the sal
bonds being, thereafter, as respondent Is IN
formed, destroyed by fire.
That since the application as aforesaid {
T said per cent bonds the city of New Orlean
has, time and again, recognized its liabillt
/ therefor by imposing and levying take
4 within it's limits to pay, and actually payin
t the matured interest coupons thereof and b
9 funding all or part OF the very same bond
3 under the law generally known as tn
0 premium Bond law" No 81 OF the acts c
. 1876, p. 81, and issuing in exchange thereto
sue.
g Respondent further AYERS, although, stric
( ly, it be none Of it's concern:
7 That the bonds issued as aforesaid, hay
= been disposed of, and have realized a larg
amount of money, no less than S537, 40 2
I which was applied to the retirement OF tt
j police warrants, to meet which said estimat
. and apportionment had been made, and tn,
9 the warrants so retired were subsequent
r cancelled and annulled by order OF court, mac
: in proceedings brought for the sequestratic
g OF the same, and that the liability OF said cit
therefor was forever extinguished.
Defendant further AYERS:
That this suit was instituted without prot
! able cause, for wicked designs, and with
i view to harm, and therefore maliciousl
e brought, viz:
: That it was not preceded by the usual am
:, cable demand; that the petition was first p'
e la print, and many copies thereof struck o
= for purposes Of immediate distribution; tht
g it was not filed during court hours, in II
Ii clerks office, but was filed or received by tt
clerk outside OF the courthouse
y 1t is further alleged that it is the desil
n OF this defendant TO have the differences b
tween the city of New Orleans and this Oh
fendant. arisen and at issue in this cas-
- thoroughly investigated by enlightened, u
u right and competent accountants, with tt
y object that thereby The honor Of the bar
ID and the course which it has pursued, ar
q. which are drawn in question, may be full
% indicated and proclaimed.
a Wherefore this defendant prays that tn
.. case be tried by special jury OF merchan
that plaintiffs petition be rejected, and epe
y talnlly, that this defendant be awarded judi
'e ment against the city of New Orleans
z. least for said sum Of S537,940 %, with leg
II interest thereon from the time when the san
was applied, say from or before the, first
Novem her, 1869, to payment, and all cost
:. and that this suit be decreed to have be-
- to defendant the right to claim hereafter 81.
~ exemplary and other damages as may
,, proper, and defendant prays for such 9th
~ and further relief in the premises as the z
: ture of the case requires and the law permit
~ THE POLICE BOARD.