The herald., 1912-08-15
SUSSLIN CASE BEFORE JUDGE
SKINNER.


SKINNER.
The case of the Louisiana State Board
of Health VS.. AdOlph Susslin was ar
gued before Judge Skinner in the Civil
District Court upon the exceptions filed
by Susslin to the petition of the board.
The board asked the Civil District
Court to enjoin the operation OF the
Susslin bakery, Vallette and Alix ST,
until Susslin could show CONTRADICTIONS
ly with the board that he had remedied
the conditions which the board alleged
existed, and which the board charged
constituted a nuisance and great
menace to the health of the community,
and particularly to those who might be
served with bread or other food pro-
ducts from Susslin's bakery.
The exceptions filed by Edgar NJ.
Calm, the attorney for the Master Bak-
er's Association, who represented Suss-
lin, were to the effect that the boards
petition disclosed no cause of action,
and Mr.. Calm argued to the court that,
under article 319 of the Constitution Of
1898, the Board of Health of the State
of Louisiana had no jurisdiction in the
City of New Orleans, and that if the
City Board of Health and the City of
New Orleans did not act in any matter
the Board of Health of the State of
Louisiana was powerless so to do.
DENIES AUTHORITY.
Mr.. Calm paid his compliments to the
State Board of Health in no unmistak-
able terms, declaring that it would soon
be a crime to put soup meat in plate
that had been used for soup or to "use
a toothpick five days old" Mr.. Calm
also said that the State Board OF
Health was busying itself with affairs
that did not concern it, and that it
should be taught to mind it's own bus.
iness. He argued that the City of New
Orleans was entirely exempt from the
operation of the State Board of Health
and that in consequence the injunction
could not be issued against Susslin's
bakery on the petition of the board.
Benjamin T. Waldo, who represents
the State Board of Health, replied tc
Mr.. Cahn's contentious at length, and
states that the conduct and actions Of
the State Board Of Health needed nc
defense at anybody's hands; that the
work of the board in this parish had
been necessary, and that it had beer
done in accordance with law without
fear and without discrimination. Mr.
Waldo said that it was impossible tt
conceive that it was the intention o.
the constitutional convention to isolate
New Orleans from the remainder of the
State, and to erect what would be vir
tually State within a State. He con
tended that the paramount health au
thority, under numerous acts Of the
Legislature and decisions of the Su
preme Court, which he quoted, was IN
the State Board of Health, and that i
would be impossible to. exempt the city
of New Orleans from the activities and
operations of the State Board of Health
as it would be to exempt the city o.
New Orleans from the operations Of tn,
Railroad Commission or any other Stat,
board, or from the operation and effec
of numerous acts passed at differen
times by the Legislature, all of which
were exercised of police power of tn
State, applicable to the city of New
Orleans as to the parishes.
At the conclusion of the arguments
Mr.. Calm submitted brief, and Judg
Skinner took the matter under advise
ment.
MRS. JUDLIN SUES FOR SEPARA
TION.