The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-01-21
THE COURTS.
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
Monday. January 70, 1870.
Present-All the justices.
BY CHIEF JUSTICE MANNING.

Present-All the Justices.
BY CHIEF JUSTICE MANNING.
No. ee4l. Mrs. F. G. Oliver widow Bienvenu
No. 600. John Chaffe & Sons vs.. Ernest Hey
ner.-Rehearing granted.
No. TIL. Joseph A. Shakespeare w. Aexan
der Mcneil ct al. appellants.-On rehearing o.
In a, bond for an appeal from a Judgment
against several defendants IN solido, 1t is suffl
isfy whatever Judgment may be rendered
..against said principals" without specifying
or either OF them"
Motion to dismiss overruled.
BY JUSTICE MABR.
No. 677O. Thomas W. Bothick, appellant VS.
Society TeDine Dereche-Appeal from the SUI
perior District Court. parish Of Orleans.
the. rule for the appointment OF a liquid ator
and IN other respects reversed and case re-
No. 57s3. City OF New Orleans, appellant vs.
W. G. Wimot. agent for Faucet Il Son. Appeal
from the Second Justices Court parish Of
Orleans.
dues upon boats moored along the river banks,
at those places where 1t has constructed nc
wharyes or landing places.
No. 7os4. Marin Lannes ct al. appellants, vs.
Jean Courrege ct als.-Appeai from the Third
District Court, parish OF Orleans. On rehear-
Where several suits have been instituted in a
Justices court by the same plaintiff against
different defendants, based upon the promis-
sorry notes executed by each OF the latter sepa-
rately. and amounting together to several hum
dred dollars. district court is competent to
sequester the notes In the hands Of the justice
and to enJoin their being used al evidence in
those suits upon the application Of third
party. who alleges that he Is the legal custodian
OF the notes, which had been placed in his
plaintiff In the Justices court has illegally aud
fraudulantly obtained possession.
Former decree affirmed.
Justice DeBlanc dissents.
No. 1928. Joseph Maumus vs.. Beynet. Mandin
Z Dufour, apDellants.-Appeal from the Sixth
When ali the Documentary Evidence In the
record is marked by the clerk on the day OF the
trial, filed as evidence" no other note of EVIL
dence iS required.
Motion to dismiss overruled
No. 575l. New Orleans Mechanics Society, ap-
pellant, vs. H. Fl. Harris tax colector.-Appeal
from the Superior District Court. parish OF Or
A free library being public charity lot of
ground which constitutes the entire capital
enues from which al 8 employed In maintaining
and improving the library, is exempt from tax
alton under the act OF 1871 (p 1867. and such ex-
emptiYn Is not violative OF article 11s of the
Judgment reversed.
BY JUSTICE DEBLANc.
No. $685.. Paul TrevIgne. appellant va. School
BOARD and VIM. 0. kogers-Appeal from the
Relying on the fourteenth amendment to the
constitution of the United States. which pr roo
yides that no State shall make or enforce anv
law which shall abrldge the privileges or immu
tiles OF citizens OF said United States and on ar
tfees 1875 and 1856 OF the constitution OF Louisiana
which declare in substance that there shall he
no separate schools or institutions Of learnino
established By the State or any municipal cor
porati9n Tor exclusively the children Of any
race. Paul Trevgne. resident of this city
and citizen OF the United States and Of this
state. seeks TO enJoin the Board OF School Dr.
rectors OF the parish of Orleans, aud William
U. Rogers. superintendent OF the public schools
OF this city, from dividing said schools into
schools for exclusively the white children and
In his application plaintiff expressly ar
knowledges that the division, which he de-
nounces as thrice unconstitutional was. at and
before the date of his application. an accom-
phshed fact, and. nevertheless. he merely asks
that the board and the Superintendent be re-
strained from doing what he knew that thew had
then already done. and does not ask that they be
compelled TO conform to what he conceiyes to
pc the reQuirements OF the Constitution of fhe
Republic and OF our State 'Ao
The ayerments Of plaintiffs petition do not
Justify. they contradict. repel and negative its
this Is manifest Whatever NAV
% MS pretensfon or his right, no court can
Justly allow that which is not asked-an enTnrr-
'no oroer IN neu OF restraining one. It would