The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-01-11
THE COURTS.


~A~
"a. p,,,,nas Yesterday rendered the follow
decision:
q! - --Daniel A. Wilson. administrator Of the
a Innis Hanson do Kewers w. Leon
- ~ The plaiptiff sues AZ the afminis-
81 De Kewers Tne tscse are sb saat thsre Smd
Ndsswaraad to The French. Consul at the
= VI sw orleans the cum Of s2s5 which be.
ssd TO the decedent. Il was sent IN 2 = I .sa
N here Tor account Of the dece ient; II
~ mt appear In what manner the decedent
s}Gred title to this money.
S,rtiv after the draft arrived here Dc Kew
nisd. demand was made By the widow
Nv INA raditUrs Of De Kewers for the prop
\ Tie money was received To the absence ICE
~, md he. constituting the law TO be that.
"A the death of De Kswers he must return
ia Nan to France, sent 1t back 10 the foreign
~ "a defepses are interpcsed. First. the de-
x.Ssnt pleads that. being q cone ul OF the ne.
N.l,S Me 81 France. and having transacted
business pri e consul ING snts sss1
action: and, second. that The money ,sy
- ii ali times subject to the control q ths
q France sayng pt sss sen rec
1mad NJ the foreign Office In accordance with
~ lev 81 France; that. therefore the deiend-
rst M ~ f 70 tbe plea to the jurisdiction
HI Constitution OF the United States; article
x rsssvsrraph .. gives 10 the Supreme Court q
tnsd States Original shIs ialsaa u all
NJ sxcusiys OF that Of the state courts, IL
~ lssrcIusiye Of the Jurisdiction Of the other
Ssurts Ok the United states. when py reason
the sueiect ar, matter those 81 courts s would
Nv jurisdiction. Indeed. the judiciary NV OF
~ rave 10 the District Courts Of the United
stes jurisdiction 10 an cults sRnss con c
Ssnsd ia the sixih subdivision. which relates
Il quits brought by an alien for tort In yloia,
i1on Of the law Of the nations Or q .ree.y e.
srsctad. bes. paragraph II. OF the Revised btat-
~ ~ the United states
Il IA clear then. that the fact that the defend.
~. being the consul Of foreign government
a lar from being any reason against The luris.
7iction 81 the court. II Of itself ths yefy reason
NY Congress gave to this court 1urisdic.ion;; III.
prst,oe, OF the date Of February ~. 1858. kn0wI
= The Consular Convention" article 2. iouns
"A the Statutes ut Large. vplume ~ age W.
6ls court is denied Of jurisdiction. Inat artici'
aGonsuls general, consuls. vice consuls Of
consular agents Of the United States and Franc
as spSs q az So oce such Il
Immunity. except In case of crime. exempti2l
1rCm military bill etings. from services IN To-
militia or national guard ana OTTER duties o. IN
iioH. whether Federal. btate Or municipal II
However, said consuls- general consuls or VIC
eonsp Or consular sges aT9 fzn rs or 81 b
Soin D they shall be subject to the. sam
6xcg and imposts, and with the reservation 9
% the came jurisdiction AZ other citizens OF tn
eQuntry who are owners o. property Or mer
Il a manfeet that the personal Immunity her
referred to. is an immunity from the Quite
which citizens owe to the government. eithe
Federal or State and 1t wis not intended TO trene
mon the liability Ut the representatives OF tn
government Of France TO b. sued In the Fed
fsdsed. the qualification snhieeting them Il
certain case. y M same iIposss a ana , tsaes
whole article had reference Z, personal serylc
& Of taxation upon property. and had no refer
ence to the liability tn be- sued. ! think. there
fore. the plea to the Jurisdiction IL not we
laoe 81. Lakes Hospital vs.. Bacley, . Blatch
ford's O. q. Rep 25e.26S. and authorities ,
Rep. pages 5o-ss where, Judge Nelson. 10 tn
year 1857. holds that the Circuit Court ha
Jurisdiction OF suit against foreign consu
kee also Lowry ys. Lousade. ! American La
Secondly, as 10 whether the representatives {
Do .Kewers caD., upon the merits. recoye
kevers received inf5rmatl n from the burea
Of tho French government fro a. the consul thu
Il held this properly for him. all claim that th
defendant was acting merely BY virtue 81 "a
=
upon him By the laws CT his country. must /
abandoned. The transaction bad reached
point whore the rights Il De Kewers be cam
hxed. and II becomes unnecessary to .considt
what would have been the law applicable
the case, II the transaction had been lets CON
plett-thAt is TO say. II no notice had bse
given. From the time when the defendal
notified De Kewers that he held this money Il
him, be became responsible to him indlvidl
Aly-he became his mandatory.
It ID not pleaded that the defendant receive
any special o. der which required him to sen
this money. to France. nor Do ind any po
would require him to have done anything MI
The money. except 70 submit It to the q
ninistration Of the law here. Tn
truly portion OF the estate oil. d. Kewel
= everything else which be held here. m
since the estate 10 tpsolvent and the adminil
traitor Is actine for his creditors. SEQ no q
gwor to the claim that II must be treated ~ 81
sets whose sitls 10 In Louisiana. and upon ID
death. OF De Kewers. whatever. right he ba
vested IN those who. succeeded To. his estat
etory's Cor flct Of Lave, paragraphs ~. s2s.
Lat there be INDICTMENT for the plRtnti6.