Year: 1872


Unusual Proceedings in the Eighth Dis


trict Court-An Honest Officer Impris-


oned for ReEusing TO Deplete the state


Treasury -"MOrnIly Right, but LIE.


galIy WrOng.'


The case of the State of Louisiana ex rel
the board of State assessors of the city of
New Orleans vs. James Graham, Auditor,
which has created considerable excitement
and comment lately, came up yesterday in
the Eighth District Court on rule for con-
tempt for refusing to execute the judgment
in that case"


The facts of the case, the amount of the
claim, the persistent endeavers of the re-
lators to compel the payment of their claim,
and particularly the singular connection of
certain high legal officials Herewith, had
become partially known and had drawn a
small crowd to the courtroom to see the de:
noument The proceedings were carried on
very quietly, and occupied but few mo-
ments, but the proceedings of those few
moments were so strange that the effect
was felt long after the court had proceeded
with other business,


Immediately upon the opening Of the
court, Judge Cooley, presiding in the alb
sence of Judge Dibbie, called up this case
on the rule for contempt, whereupon Joseph
F. Hornor, attorney for Mr.. Graham, read
the following answer to the rule as his rea-
son why he should not be punished;


Now, into this honorable court comes
James Graham, Auditor of Public Accounts
of the State of Louisiana, respondent here
in, and for answer to the rule herein taken
upon HIM on the - day of --, 1872,
to show cause why he should not be pun
shed for contempt of this honorable court
in refusing to issue the warrants called for
by the relators, with respect shows under
oath


l. That on the twentieth of June, 1872,
the respondent obtained from this honor
able court suspensive appeal from the
final Judgment herein rendered to the Su-
preme Court of Louisiana, and that the
transcript of appeal has been duly filed in
the said Supreme Court on the twenty
fourth of June, 1872; that said appeal stayed
execution of said judgment, and divested
this honorable court of all Jurisdiction over
this case until the same should be passed
upon BY the Supreme Court; that respond
ent is advised and believes that this hon
orable court can not legally take any fur
ther steps in this case; that the Supreme
Court alone is vested with jurisdiction to
dismiss respondents appeal, and to decide
whether or not respondents appeal is still
pending in said Supreme Court.


2. That respondent is advised and be-
lieves that the Attorney General has no
power to consent to dismiss respondents
appeal in this case, and that such consent
is an absolute nullity, and amounts to moth
ing until passed upon by the Supreme
Court,


3. That respondent believes the claim of
relators in this case to be unfounded, ticti-
tious and fraudulent; and, with that belief
respondent can not conscientiOusly, in aG-
cordance with his oath Of Office, even allow
himself to be compelled to participate in
what he believes would be robbery OF the
State treasury until the Supreme Court has
passed upon the matter.


That, with all due respect to the court, for
the reasons above set forth, your respondent
has refused to issue the warrants claimed
by relator, and shall persist in such refusal
until the Supreme Court shall have passed
upon this case, with the full belief that he
is only performing his official duty IN the
premises.


After the reading of the answer to the
rule as above, counsel for plaintiff, E. Fill
luel, Esq, said:


This seems to be an aggravation of the
offense."


Judge Cooley remarked; It looks that
way to me. The facts upon which the an
swer is predioated are questions that have
already been passed upon. 1t has already.
been decided that this appeal, which the
Auditor sets up as an excuse, was with
drawn by consent of the appellant.


find myself in very awkward position.
That is the honest truth about it. be-
lieye, as much as the Auditor believes, that
the ju igment in this case should not have
been rendered.- Ny own impression ia, that
it is incorrect. But there is q judgment,
and l conscientiously believe that judgment
is exigible now; and that the appeal taken
by the Auditor, James Graham, represent
ing the State Of Louisiana, was legally
Withdrawn from the Supreme Court by the
General By consent between him
self, as appellant, and the appellee. There
fore. there is nothing now pending before
the Supreme Court upon which the Supreme
Court can act.


see no reason, legally speaking, why
the Judgment should not be executed. OF
course, officers are often called upon to do
things which they do not approve of. I ana
now called upon TO send man to prison
for refusing to do what he believes is