The Rice belt journal. (Welsh, Calcasieu Parish, La.) 1900-19??, 1919-05-17

them, and upon two allegations that
follow them.
The allegations that follow them,
and which are not included in the
! above statement, declare that the po-
! lice jury has paid to j. n. George &
! Sons a pretended claim for loss OF
profits on alleged long hauls, based
on the elimination from the George
x Sons contract of certain short
hauls, which pretended claim amour
ted to $16,00O.0O and that the police
jury intend further to pay said
George & Sons S20,000.00 without
any consideration whatever, in VIC
lation of their oaths Of office.
The petition for the injunction
| then declares that because of the
wrong, collision and fraud of the
police jury and the engineer with
the contractors that petitioners are
entitled to writ of injunction re-
straining the police jury from paying
out any more money under the con-
! tracts.
The police jury, as body polite,
and j. Sidney IRENE and George
Hathaway as individual members OF
that body, and COLI. L. Stevens are
made parties defendant
Upon this petition, the court, in ac-
cordance with the prayer thereof, or
dered all Of the above defendants
to show cause on a day named why
a preliminary injunction should not
issue as prayed for
Geo. Hathaway and ]. Sidney
IRENE. in response to the rule to
show cause, filed exceptions of nc
cause of action. which were main
tanned by the court, and the suit dis,
missed as to them. The police jury
and Col Stevens filed exceptions OF
misjoinder of cause of action and OF
parties defendant. which exceptions
were maintained by the court, and
the suit dismissed. All dismissals
were made as in the case of nOn-Suit
The judgment dismissing the entire
spit was signed on November 18th
1917.
Arthur T. Jones, the plaintiff in
the case now before the court to be
decided, and who was member OF
the police jury at the time of the
letting of the contracts for the con
structiOn of the roads. and who has
ever since been a member of thai
body, feeling aggrieved by the allie
cations in the injunction suit charg
ing conspiracy, fraud, conversion
and misrepresentation of funds, anc
asserting that the injunction suit haC
been terminated in favor of the de
PENDANTS by dismissal upon excep
tons, and claiming that the allega
tons just mentioned included him al
a member of the police jury, and thai
said allegations, in so far as he il
concerned were and are unfounded
and were made without probable
cause, and with malice, for the pur
pose Of injuring and OBTAINING him
instituted this present suit for libe
against seven Of the fifty-two plain
tiffs in the injunction suit for 81,
10000, with legal interest from jul
dicial demand until paid. These dam
ages are asked for as compensation
for the injury done him.
| In order to properly appreciate
the issue presented for determination
| il is necessary to quote the seyera
allegations in full. contained in thi
Injunction suit, and complained o
by plaintiff, Arthur T. Jones, as Ii
belous.
The first of the allegations so com
planned of constitute three, and are
In article % of the injunction sui
it is alleged by the plaintiffs there
in now constituting some of the de
PENDANTS herein, THAT the polio
jury, on or about the 18th day of DC
tober, A. D., 1916, advertised TO
bids to be submitted by contractors
furnishing materials, particular
gravel, which bids were to be submit
ted on or about November 18th, 19lt
as will more fully appear by refer
ence to a copy of the advertisement
for bids, hereto attached for refer
ence."
In article "a of the same petitio
lit is alleged by the plaintiffs in ths
E suit:
"That the Alexandria Gravel O.
a co-partnership with social domicil
: in the city of Lake Charles, Calcasie
parish, Louisiana, composed of Perc
, NJ. Perkins and one Bridgewater
, Fullerton, Louisiana, was the success
, full bidder, and awarded the contra
with the Parish to furnish from 100
E00O to 10000 cubic yards of graV
: of 60 per cent metal or rock, as wi
4 more fully appear by reference to
+ copy of said contract hereto annexe
for reference"
In article ~ of that petition Il
= plaintiffs therein further state tina
i petitioners further show that Il
: certified check filed by the said Ale
v andria Gravel Co., the exact amour
Of which petitioners are not inforr
/ ed, but verify believe that the san
4 exceeded Five Thousand ($5,0O0.0'
+ Dollars, was not and has not been a
v counted for by the police jury, Al
h which, under the provisions of Il
4 law, was forfeited to the Parish
o the bidder on its failure TO furni
$ bond, as provided in the contra'
q within ten days after the acceptan
g ofsits bid.
e Plaintiff Arthur T. Jones, alleg
p in the suit at bar that the defendan
r in the suit, who were Of the plaintiff
h allegations charged and intended
u in the injunction suit, by the abo
! charge him with the wrongful II
70 and conversion of public funds 9
I'll rived from said check, which alleg
> tons were unfounded and defan
10 tory, and when the defendants hel
N in knew that no certified check W
/. required to accompany the bids
g. gravel, and that none was receiv
l. by the police jury.
n =