The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-09-25
GUARDING CITY PROPERTY.
What the City Attorney Proposes
TO Do to Save the City's Assets.
How Judgment Creditors Are to Be
Fooled of Their Prey.

Monday evening next City Attorney Me-
Caleb aud Mr.. Farrar will leave the city for
Atlanta, Ga, by appointment with Judge
Woods, to try thirteen applications for IN
functions against writs of Jaeri fncias issued
against tho city from the United States Cir
cult Court, under which various properties OF
the city, and notably the franchises OF the
railroads, have been seized by the United
States marshal.
The City Attorney will plead act No. 3, ex-
ira session of 1870, which prohibits the issu-
anoe OF wrts OF f. ia. and mandamus to COM
pei the payment Of money out OF the city
treasury. and requiring all judgments TO be
registered In the Office OF the Administrator Of
Public Accounts, and that provision be made
for payment thereof Ethe next annual budget.
The oonstitutionalty and validity Of this act
has been uniformly sustained by tho Supreme
Court OF this State.
In 1872 Congress on the first OF June adopt
ed the Practice and Process act for the Fed
eral COURTS requiring them to conform to the
practices and processes Of the courts OF the
several States respectively It Is contended
that by this process" act OF Congress,
which was subsequently, Incorporated into the
Revised Statutes OF 1876, the United States
courts OF Louisiana are required to conform
TO the act No 5, OF 1870, In executing their
judgments against the city OF New Orleans,
that aside from any statutory provision and
upon general principles recognized IN Eng
land and throughout the United States, the
writ of mandamns and not the writ OF il. ia.
is the proper mode OF executing Judgments
against municipal corporations. A number
Of authorities and decisions will DO cited to
sustain this position. notably the case OF
Morris Ranger vs. City.of New Orleans, deei-
ied by the United States Supreme Court in
City OF New Orleans, and Maenhaut VS.. City
of New Orleans, In which Judge Woods held
that after obtaining judgments the writ Of
mandnrnus was tho proper mode OF exc
cutting them against the city.
Finally, it will be commended that aliens and
nou-residents cap have no greater rights upon
the property OF the city OF New Orleans than
the citizens OF this State possess. To hold
otherwise would encourage the creditors ct
the city living here to expatriata themselves.
In order to acquire the superior rights OF
sutors In the Federal courts.
The constitution OF the United States only
gives to the citizens OF the several States tho
rights and mmuBitfe5 possessed by the citi
zens Of the State themselves. The idea Is to
place all creditors OF the State on the same
footing as to the property of the city, so that
the municipal authorities can sell such prop
erty Us ts not required for public use and
apply the proceeds to the reduction Of the
bonded and floating debt, AZ provided for by
section 10 Of the premium bond act OF 1876
II the city's position be sustained by the
court she Can dispose Of at once from one to
two millions OF property and reduces her debt,
as can readily be explained. enormously.