The Donaldsonville chief. [volume] (Donaldsonville, La.) 1871-current, 1917-11-03
POLICE JURY SUIT DECIDED.
Supreme Court Sustains Contention of
Defendants in Noted Case.

Defendants in Noted case.
The supreme court of Louisiana on
q Monday last, through Justice Somer-
u vile as the organ of the court, de-
cided that the district court was with
out jurisdiction to enjoin Messrs. JOS
eph Gonzales and Elisha D. Dixon
from serving as members of the police
jury of the parish of Ascension, under
appointment by Governor Pleasant IN
accordance with the provisions of Act
No. 100 of 1916, known as the Nor
gan bill, creating an additional police
juror for each the seventh and eighth
wards of the parish.
II will be remembered that in Au-
gust Of last year, after Messrs. Con-
zales and Dixon had been commission
ed as members of the police jury,
when they attempted to take their
seats on the jury they were enjoined
from doing so by an order issued by
Judge w. E. Howell, of the parish Of
Lafourche. Immediately upon the
service of the petition and order,
Messrs. Gonzales and Dixon applied
to Judge Calvin K. Schwing, Of, the
parish of Iberville, for an order dis
solving the injunction, which order
Judge Schwing granted upon their
furnishing bond in the sum of $4,000.
The police jury met the following day
and proceeded with its organization
by electing Joseph Gonzales president,
and also electing its other officers. On
the day following this meeting the
plaintiffs obtained from Judge Howell
an order granting suspensive appeal
to the supreme court, thus reinstating
the injunction, and since that time
preventing Messrs. Gonzales and
Dixon from serving as police jurors.
On the trial of the suit in the lower
court, counsel for Messrs. Gonzales
and Dixon filed exceptions to the
jurisdiction of the court, alleging
want of interest in the plaintiffs 10
prevent the defendants from occupy
ing their Office until the constitution
atty of the act was decided, They
also filed exceptions of no cause or
right of action.
Judge Workman, who decided the
case, held that the plaintiffs had the
right to proceed by means of injunc-
ton to prevent Messrs. Gonzales and
Dixon from serving, asserting that it |
was the proper proceeding and that
plaintiffs had an interest in bringing |
the suit. He therefore overruled the |
exception to the jurisdiction of the |
court, but sustained the exception of
no cause Of action and maintained |
the constitutionality Of the act under
which the appointments were made.
When the case was appealed to the
supreme court by the plaintiffs, coun-
sell for Messrs. Gonzales and Dixon
fled an answer to the appeal asking
that court to amend the judgment by
sustaining the exception to the juris-
iiction Of the court. This the su-
oreme court did in the decision hand
ID down Monday, the full text Of
which will be published in next weeks
Chief.
The effect of this decision means
hat Messrs. Gonzales and Dixon must
,e recognized as members of the po-
ice jury and cannot be made to de-
ermine the title to their office, or the
of the act under
which they were appointed, by means
I an injunction suit, brought by par
les who have no interest themselves in
he the two newly created officers. 1t
lso means that all of the acts and
oings of the police jury at its meet
IL in August when the new police
ary was organized are valid, and
nat Messrs. Gonzales and Dixon are
,embers of the police jury until the
ct under which they were appointed
declared unconstitutional in
roper proceeding, as pointed out by
w.
While the decision does not pass
pom the constitutionality of the act,
makes Messrs. Gonzales and Dixon
embers of the police jury, and they
q entitled to serve as such, and their
It's and doings and those Of the police
ny entitled to full faith and credit,
It'll such time as the act is declared
constitutional, should the courts
er hold that it is.
The plaintiffs in the suit have until
Idnight November IL, 1917, to file
plication for a re-hearing.
For resultsl Advertise In The
ehM arsxc%y,y,s aR The Chfn$