The Donaldsonville chief. [volume] (Donaldsonville, La.) 1871-current, 1916-11-18
POLICE JURY SUIT ARGUED.
Decision Expected from Judge
Workman Next Tuesday

w OfGhan. ln1S suit, iiicu aug uot 1o'
1916, is an injunction suit enjoining
Joseph Gonzales and Elisha D. Dixon,
appointees of the governor, from act
ing as police jurors for the seventh
and eighth wards OF the parish OF AS
cension, or in any way interfering
with the duly elected eight members
performing their functions as police
Jurors. An injunction was granted
in August by Judge WE. Howell, act
ing in the absence of Judge Workman.
Judge Howell's order was subsequent
" dissolved bylVadge c. K. Schwing,
and from this Abter order the plain
tiffs, four Of the members of the po-
lice jury, appealed suspensively to the
supreme court, thereby re-instatlng
the Injunction. The cause is now be-
fore the supreme court on that issue.
The defendants filed motions to dis
charge, recall and dissolve the inJunc-
ton, and exceptions of no cause and
no right of action, and the case ar
gued Thursday came up before Judge
WORKMAN on the face Of the papers.
The matter was thoroughly argued
by both sides, the argument consum-
ing the entire day. The case Of the
plaintiffs was presented by Attorneys
IYlsser Lemann, Edmund Maurin and
E. N. Pugh, while the defendants were
represented by Attorney c. c. Weber.
The plaintiffs argued that Act 100
Of 1916 was unconstitutional because
it violates Articles 81, 48 and 40 of
the state constitution and the bill of
rights of the state and the 18th
amendment of the federal constitu-
ton. 1t was pointed out that the
act, having for it's sole object the crea-
ton of two additional police jurors
for the seventh and eighth wards, was
unconstitutional because it contained
two objects; that it was purely and
simply a local law, operating not
throughout the state, not even
throughout the parish, but only in
two wards of the parish. Numerous
recent decisions of the supreme court
were quoted to sustain the PROPOSE
ton that the act is a local law. The
act itself isso styled, becauseeit re-
publication for thirty days as re-
quired by the constitution. 1t was
contended that the act violated Ar
Aicle 40 of the constitution because
it is local law and is an attempt in
directly to repeal the general law of
1908 which fixes the basis of repre-
sentation of police jurors on juries
throughout the state, in that this act
ave to the seventh and eighth wards
additional representation on the police
jury Of Ascension irrespective Of
population, while an act of 1908 pro-
vides that additional representation
is accorded ward only when it has
5000 inhabitants. 1t was shown by
the census of 1910 that neither the
seventh nor eighth ward had 5000 in
and the federal census, it
was contended, was the only guide
by which population could be de-
termined in this state
Mr.. Pugh in opening his argument
stated that he was glad to represent
the people in this litigation, for once
the right of the legislature to create
additional police juries at will was
permitted, the right of local self gov
eminent would be at an end. He
contended that this act had singled
Ascension parish out of all the par
ishes of the state to thwart the will
of the people as expressed at the last
general election, when eight police ju-
rors had been elected and duly con-
Quoted into Office. Authorities were
quoted to sustain the proposition that
plaintiffs were entitled to keep intact
the police jury as unit, and to pro-
tect that possession from interfer-
ence by resorting to writ Of iniunc-
ton. 1t was pointed out that Judge
Howell had granted the writ original
~ because he was thoroughly con-
Vinced that the act was clearly illegal,
null and void.
Mr.. Weber argued at length for
The defendants, contending particu-
arly for the proposition that plain
lifts were not entitled to resort to a
writ of injunction. He argued that
IN act of the legislature was to be
'beyed and respected until declared
unconstitutional by the courts, and
hat no court had declared this act
unconstitutional; that plaintiffs had
mistaken their remedy, the only pro-
;edure open to then, being, through
luo warranto proceedings instituted
n the name Of the state against
hese two defendants. He claimed
hat the plaintiffs had no interest in
he offices held by the defendants, |
md that injunction could be resort
ID to only in cases where the plain
ifs in injunction were interested in I
he office which defendants were seek
ng to obtain. He quoted authorities
# the supreme court to support his
POSITION, and contended that the au-
horities submitted by the plaintiffs
we're not in point. He contended fur
her that the act was not local and |
pecial law, but a general law, and |
Iuoted authorities from the supreme |
curt in support thereof, citing the |
ase Of State VS.. Dalon, 35th Annual, |
nd the Benedict case in the 115th |
louisiana. He passed over lightly the
ontention that the act contained two
bJects, and asserted that the act is /
aid and constitutional.
The case was taken under advise
nent by Judge Workman and it is ex-
ected decision will be rendered
ext Tuesday when court reconvenes.
Succeeding ON the Stage.