The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1880-01-29
IMPORTANT DECISION.
The City Ordered to Pay Judg-
ments Obtained Against II.
Opinion Of Judge Billings on the Ap
plirstiou for Mandamus.

damua to iaaue. commanding tlln CITY authnri
tiles 10 nay certain Judgments aaaina ~ out q
money ~ the city t,naaurr.
lii making The otier Judge Killings delvere
the following
rNrrnpsrtNa rHt'iatoNs
United Htntea az tal Andrew COLLINS va III
city of New atleana., Uni'e,i Aates ~ re-
nnn,y Hiar W. came Nos Rp1H - Blig ineIuajye
excepting gpaE, when Ia a cause ib equity
Ii all iht 90 nHnpa thn ,elntnra hnya .htnina,
Judgments NJ law nRninst thu lnfanannt upui
interest nauDnna OF snvatnl 1T the latiea ~ th'
bonds ~ the eitr af Now Dreams mud nnw ~
IL iar wtita If man 'atnua tn nomra i'a ia"A
nfflnota nav anid judgements nut ~ nnnpya II
The citr treasury which wnrn rniand hr taS ~
~ nay The Interest . 3nrnna ~ the honda Of thf
oaea Oh eerias 10 witch relat,ra' anurpns re-
rpnativPis belong.
AT thptrini u Jury wac y alirnaiton, waived
Upon the hearing If motion ~ uupah tho ~.
turna II wa commended Nv the nnunaal far thr
city That no pleading responsive To thu ratnrns
wRa under The practices ~ tho euutta of the Rtnt'
of Louisiana ali wahin. hut that liunn tho irinl
taetta u 4uld hn doomed ~ hive hanu tnjn, upou
All tho natera nf law "ud feet ma n "a ropllna
tlum ~ demurrer Ind y ,en hlpi rhia vlew u
the INV, whtah waa olaRtlF anatninna hr The AZ
thpritiea oited. waa nnaninaa"d In Ivy REALTORS
counsel The raaas W4lo enbmitted nff"r ~,
elaborate argument. md Tho fRoa hnyn haan
found hr wttIton ARGUMENT Nc thu pnrtlra
which IL ~ ha uaed ~ n special verdict ia tho
raaaa.
Tho duty Of The count Ia therefore oonfnaa "a
the determination ot tho uuoationa OF law aria
Ing "a the fante hUa fnuni
The apeeta Andinea are ~ the franI That tho
JndKmanta ct tho falat ta. with tbs oNeantian
n enc aud portion e. another tap1s and rnt
lion of Rpa0f are hlaad uppn wha term 4
half paid intetnst coupons h ltnnaing c. aayan
riRaRea Of honda iaaupd Ivy tho city Of Nav o..
lpaha or ttnnaapti Unnn II hy thn amendments M
Tia charter al yaft"na tnna down 10 thu year
tnft, that these oruunna ware for anmi annual
interest upon hanHn far tho teRr lafR md due
ON the arat dapa OF January and jay uf Tint
Feat TINT In tho yanr mia teSaa were levied
nutfGintt ~ psy MI tho .ntatnai nHnruInr Ia the
year 1916 npon eaaH aart 81 handa involved IN
these nasea. that pincn that time no lnvr hAn
been matte for thn ultrpoan of paving nubaa-
uuent intorapt that III July W the rear ipiE Tho
city made default ia tho payment If ita inter
Get eDupona. that tho Common Council az the
city pRsani IN ordinance whereby II wap pro-
vided th4 90 ~ cent If theea nnupnna might
be paid oht ot tho r"apaniva interval nallaoftnna
ub 70 January I, tHiG. proyiind the holdata
would aGraa ~ aueh payment IN writing that
under the authority ot THE ordinance the hoii-
era nf eeMr0nn who received half payment
were REQUIRED ~ align. aud did align. mn pgrea
tnnnt whereby thew not only anprayod 81 tha
ordinance but atipulaIed that after ha pay
ment NJ the half intpreat collected aud Ia h d.
collected M 10 January !, 1919 tho other half
Of Huch collect oua might be uaaa hy tho city
Ter any other purrnae, with q ranervati"n TIM,
10 tho extent ~ nnv diversion % the mnneya
npllro'eh. the COUPON holders ahould ha bald
ny tive city thai the rolatora or thoae from,
whom they derive title. were paid one- hnif Of
theRo ooupanR which were atamrea .half
naid, aud sianad nRid agreement; TINT thu city
continued g collect the intnren, ,exrn and pny
due prior Ia january (, 1874 ~ the hoala,a who
were wlinE TO- nisu. and did nfgn. Rsi agree.
nent, dawn ~ henealhet ~ 1afp. that he ween
the lRRt mentioned dat q .hara hna haa ,ollnet-
oil and Ia now in tho treasury IL the attv
pnffntent amount to pay each of raatore'
itulgmpnta levied 10 raY tha int rant nnupona of
the aerien OF houjn to which they rnanpetivnly
belong. that there ia not enough tn pay tho Ia
taraHt half paid onupanR " aemp Of the aarina
of honda. aud thW with reference t. aRrh anrlaa
III honda tho amount ot wholly unpaid ooupnne
aSoneR the amount nf tax collected nut now
on baud hat tho nonpona whtch form tho haaia
Of the Judgment In NJ RaR. mud a. thu extent "
sisp1 70, the basic of tho Judgment ia M apsG
are wholly unpaid upnnn maturing upon and
einea January !, 1870 Of the aeiiaa known
the Waite warka hbaan
So far 10 rnlnfea a. all tho julgmontr except
the tive haaed wholly or PARTIALLY apan fha pnn-
nunn Of ihe Waarwnrka a6i iaa, tho drfenans
are two: !. Tho nfRs that the rrlntora or their
priyiaa signed The aarnamnnt nud serond THAI
there not having henn taSea enough collect "a 10
pay all. there . 4ula he demanded by tho ro.
Iatorn only Il pro ratn amount. which cannnt h.
asrertafnpd IT awarded hr mandRmna Ut any
other proceeding ht law. hut muat he reserved
hr bill In equity,
So far ma relates to the agreement Mother tho
erdinanee authorizing tho stipulation. nor he
stipulation Itself rannerna The taxNa collected
since January, 1876. which alone tina Ruh
INct matter of dispute hare. Nor tinaa II apuunr
that there haa hern any aiveraion OF tho Interest
tasea from their l,Ei innate destination. norany
appropriation af them. exc II ~ thn payment
atwhtnh they could pr@potls have boon appli 4.
The agreement, therefore. ns u ground of do
EenRe. iisauret q from tho case.
The only question remaining t.. dnnR tho fact
that tho enupons which have not hann paid at
all more TINA ahs 'th thn collected inter.
cet. or tue fact that In aoma instances tho
amount az the collected ihtorrst dana not q Iual
that Of the courona romaining half unpaid
constitute de ehae 10 the rolatora rnara2 Tho
answer depends uroh whether iha deeisu of
the Legislature ~ directing the levying 81 theac
taNea was thai Tho holders ~ maiured coupons
shond he paid ut the limo AM in Tho order az
presentation, or whether there waa to hn no
pas mnnt until The result " tile entire annual
OF taxes had brnn asacrtainad. aua iii
case cnly an inairuutte amount had boon roal
lied. merely pio rata amount paid ~ each |
holder
During the argument much was said with |
the decisions " thia court in the |
cases Of Maenhauf VI I 10 city and Feterkin ". |
the CITY both reported In W DDS But In
neither & these cases wern the half-paid cou
pons renreScnftd II the case Of Macnhaut /
Inc erect was by hil In equity O. prevent the /
city from dtvertinE the thNns ievitd and collect |
ed under the sthtulato pln interest coupons to
any other object. The ttmnfor tha illinE of the
hill AND 90 the submission of The cause shows It /
coalu only maya REARED @ tntnrtsi taxes collect
Cd pttor oJannaIy iSfR nnf thars was. there
Tore. An absence OF tltuiArity the case now hn-
fore the 'onrt. The case of Feterttn IN still fur
ther from tnH case nero Thy ,lvad. fur there the
Mar ,E,I