r was coquettishly tnsed in a heavy green silk under jape, with over dress of magaleat Brussl loe aend white tile drapped with pink loses-dotolletBe and short sleeved, showing to ouch advantage her riohness in creamy white shoulders sand arms. A caplete set of diamonds and miraeulouly small white sati slippers. Kiss A-e B-r, an heiress, whioh the war has little affected except favorably, the lapse of yeers developing the dark-eyed pensionaire of I the Ursulines Convent into a blooming girl of eighteen. Her maje eio appearance comported well with her blue silk dress and tulle penier " strewn with flowers. From her ear hung splendid e drops of lozenge shaped opals encircled with bril ulant diamonds, and her neck was imprisoned in a . ansmive gold necklace artlatioally chased. Truly, n she was admirable, one of the queens of this as. semblage of beauty. Mrs. T. F. F-r was attired magulfioently In a a jope of cherry-colored silk, panlerof point d'Alen- r' con, berths of same over a corsage d6eolteM; e diamonds and white roses in the hair, diamond I ear.drops, costly bracelets, slippers of cherry. I colored satin. i The whilom Miss L. T--s, belle of Esplanade I street, now Mrs. J--n P-k, of Royal street, i wore a rich mauve and white colored silk, panler ti and wings of white tulle, dotted with Parma violets 11 and daisies; ooiftre of the same flowers-one of I the most tasteful costumes we have seen for a B long while. tl The three cousins, Misses B-d, (what glorious memories this name kindles in the breast of war worn soldier ! spreading like a meteor from rank to rank, at Shiloh and on the retreat from Cor- e Inth, and making Charleston lmpregsmu e aesise b i the most formidable armada the world has ever i" seen; a name like that of Sir Launoelot dn Lao, the b · ost chivalrous of the Knights of the Round J Ti able, Miss D- te, (s pet name,) the daughter, e a paragon in form and mien, and Mis H--a, the tI niece, a blonde beauty, both attired in white t1 tarltan, symbolical of their youth, beauty and 0 purity, and Miss G-l, oIn pink silk over jpe of C pink tarletan, pink roses in the hair, and pink satin o slippers. 0 Mrs. H- 11, sister of the latter, wore a rich h white silk robe en train, white slippers, and head a dress of roses. SMrs. E-t M- r, a young bride, wore a fine a white moire jope, corsage of same, bertha of tulle, trimmed with foUage, follage in the hair, ii and a parure of diamonds. e Miss M-a I--x, of Bourbon street. A chatain displayed her elegant and lithe form in a d toilette Pompadour of white tarletan, dotted with blue, ,retelles of blue silk, trimmed with lane and catching the skirt at the sides, coiffure of rotes. Miss C--e S--a wore a grey ohinbe dress, ;with roses in the hair. Mamame A- e C---e. a very "handsome e brunette, was much admired in a blue silk, long peplum of white lace, and brilliant set of diamonds. Miss D- a I e-e, wee never more handsome, t Pier dark eyes wickedly inviting flirtation. This r sprightly young lady of Hospital street, had sim ply but tastefully selected a white tarletan drw, I draped with white satin and clusters of golden balls, coiffure of sprays of lowers and golden c balls, and white satin shoes. Mrs. N- e D--1, a blooming young bride, wore her bridal dress. t Miss G --, wore a white moire and diadem of I roses, while her sister-another young bride I me. D- r, was notioeahle for her graceful emotions. She wore a pink silk covered with a tuile. I Mme. I:--d M--y, of Esplanade street, whose presence is ever remarkable for the rich news of her toilets, her grace and amiability, was on this night splendidly attired in a pink silk under-dress, an over dress of fine white tulle, draped with garlands of pink roses, a coiffure of i roses similar to those of the garlands, and a. gor geous, complete parure of diamonds. We can only slightly remember the display made by the following ladles: Mir E-a [----le, i a brunette and a beauty-white silk dress corsage I of tulle, deoolle:te, a cuquettish band of tutle caressing the milk-white neck. Her sister, Miss J- e, attired similarly; hair arranged with roses. The youthful black eyed beauty T-e Y---s, white tarletan sod Scotch plaid scarf-an admit. able contrast ; myosotis in the hair. Miss Z--e, a handsome blonde, was very prettily dressed and I wore wild flowers of the fields in her hair. The two 1 petite brunette beauties, ---ys, Miss C-e, with a short white muslin dress and Sootch plaid belt; braid hair, entwined with fl-urs des champs and forming a diadem at the front; hair falling at the back and Miss R-a, her sister, with straw colored alpacca, trimmed with cherry-colored i velvet; garland of red marsh lilles. Mrs. A- t V---e--A peach colored moire an Stique, very rich. Bertha of paint d'Alencon, grafeas of pearls, long diamond earrings; head I dress consisting of three gold passes, or bands, I attached with diamond agrale. This toilet was I ulperb as the lady herself. Miss M--n, of Planche street-White alpaca, trimmed with white satin, guimpe of tunlle over a Srange dCoollet, and a magnifieent necklace and .rnre of pearls. Cotiffure of olusters of jasmine. Miss B-r, a bright sad lovely girl of scarce idxteen summers, was deoldedly one of the most beantitol and lively ladies of the assemblage. Her attire of whbte and cherry--Innocence and ardent love-exquisitely comported with her soft, subdued complexion and sparkling eyes. A de lightfully cut Crobe cotie of white tarletan, with designs in piping, or biais, of oherry colored atin, forming a false tunlo; passes of scarlet vel vet in the hair. Mss Dl-d, of St. Martin, we believe, wore a white dress trimmed with blue satin; coiffure of blue and white flowers. To sum up this year's production of the Mistiek Krewe, it can be said that it was inferior In noth Ing to what it has hitherto given to ito friends, and superior to some of its former representations. That the adair was at the Opera Honse, oinstead of the Varieties, was a matter of congratalation to all parties, because the scoommodations were not only much larger, but much more oonvenient The attendance was of course larger than ever before, for there wore more seats to be filled. Vale, then to the Mistick Krewe for another Syear, when they shall again appearto show to the people of New Orleans what a olub ean do when it attempte to cater to the pleasure of its friends. Long may the Krewe wave, nd may ye be on hand every year to see it wave. 'uE PIrHo Wa.--In our advertistaing columns w: ill be found the first lucid statements we have seen in regard to the question, which for some reason has been enveloped in unoertainty, what piano was deolded at the Pars Exposition to be the best in the world. Mr. Blackmar's card shows from the oEioli reports, 1st, that there were four gold medals given, all of equal value, although one exhibitor (whose name was seoond on the list,) clalms that his medal was the first one. 2d. That the cros of the Legon of Honor was awarded to the Chlokerlng piano aoae, to testify that it is superlor to all others. 3. That not only the members of the Jury on pianos considered the above facts a fully established, but the met emd psent pianists and eemposere enthusfesteislly con gratulated the Meera. ChOlkering on their well mrited accass in reeviring from the very highet authority in the world the recognition ofthe de cided mprioety of tsir piese to all other. Oaee Bsow Coer .-We dtrect the attetmo ef our lady readers this morng to the auonace -ut of Moers. Breilman & Co., relsativet their perior fhcllls for d of al goods below ket priace. The lpf of ars-b tslligncea to the fair sex wll, we are stianUd, t only be meaete wi pleasure, bet also re d as the intrutat which adds a new Iaeen towards the may attraetce that their bome lar allgo possessed i pliat eof eemy t ts 0on. THE GEAT LTT'ERY Ct0E. ; Loisisana Lottery Company vi. Alabama t mutual Aid Asmiation, Dave C. oP Johnston, et als. Lt .._ ad d8 DECIBION OF JUDGE LELUVONT. ies It No. 243-Loulsiana State Lottery Company vs. j Alabama Mutual Aid Amocistiec, Dave C. John . seon et ala. On acoount of an order of injunction ssuned by co the 81xth District Court for the parish of Orleans, sl which is contrary to the orders this court before as which the matter is pending, a brief history of the to facts of this case becomes naeessr. the The petition of the plaintiff i this case, In addressed to this court on the 2d of January, 18 ~, ve respectfully represents lan substance that by virtue t of ano act of the Legilature of August 17th 1868, on etitled "an set to Inorease the revenues of the the State, to authorise the incorporation and estab. stc lishment of the Louistana 8tate Lottery Company, lin and to repeal oertla sets now In force," and hay. Th l complied with all the necessar p uisites, ca t has been and is now an incorporated boy ear. v ing the above name, and is granted for and during ag the space of twenty-five years to begin from the tr let of January, 1869, the sole and exclusie privi- so lege of establihing a lottery or series of lotteries, tbh and seling and dispoeing of lottery tickets, etc. de Said act further provides a penalty of not more tio than five nor less than one thousan4 dollars for stu My person or persoes who shall, after the 1st of tin January, 18869, lnfringe upon or violate the sole I uad eoludve rights of the above corporation by fet selling or offering to sell any lottery tokets, eto, th except those of the above corporation. tie The petition further apm thet 0r hams ieuls Aid Aoiate, ehmrtuered by the re laws of Alabama and domilcllted in that tate, in but represented In this State by uone Dave C. an Johstoo,as prlncipal agent, and other persons as th sub-agents, has In violatios of the above-named on aot, and by a direct and Illegal Infriagement upon the the rights of plantf, sold lottery tickets other en than those of petitioner In this case, and will pro- col ceed to sell, unless restrained by a writ of injuac. le tion. That petition having ben duly sworn to by Cha. T. Howard, president of the above-named co oorperatlon, and a proper bond given, this court the on that very day issued a writ of lnjunotion pro- to hibitlag said Dave C. Johnston and his subagents t from selling or offering to sell lottery tickets of any kind except those of petitioner. r On the 7th day of January, 1869, plaintiff filed fe another petition, which this court considers to be tit an original petition, from the fact that this court Bt required a new bond, and granted a new order of seo injunction. That petition may e considered as pa an Isoldental one, because its fate depends upon that of the original one. if the or one be tic dismissed, the second one will be dismissed; if it the first one hold good, the second one must hold th good, too. or That second petition states In substance that al the plaintiff is alraid that the defendant's agents al and sub agents without a shadow of right under ,s the act of August 17th, 1868, or under any pre* e viou existing laws (for they were all repealed by th this law), would apply to another district court de for the parish of Orleans by sult for legal process, b In order to vex, annoy, harass, injure your pelt- w tioner and stop the legitimate business of pla n tif and temporarily, at least, deprive him of the oa rights acquired under and given him exclusively th by this act; and that In order to protect his just wi rights a further order of injunction became abo $2 lotely necessary. Another bond having been , given and the petition being duly sworn to, this N court issued another writ of Injunction preventing o and forbidding the defendant, his agents and sub- to agents from bringing any nit, for the purpose of 14 obtalinng any process by which the rights of a the plaintif in this case might be in anay th way or in the slightest degree impaired, th destroyed or suspended, before any other di district court for the parish of Orleans. It was order that this court had a right to isse, did lssue, de and shall again Issue, If the facts of the case war- to rant such an order, for the protection of any part that will trust his rights to this court; for, thongh that writ of injunction be and is incidental to the main one, yet, In the scope of Its action, it was an original one, In tbis, that it prevented the defend ants, agalnst whom It was Issued, from doing a of thi that he was not prevented from doinl In the mind of say one, if the articles of the (ode of m Prctleo, relative to injunotions, mean anything, g or have any force of law; that this oonort had an unquestionable right to issue that order of in-ono lion, whether it was legally or illegally issue., is a question which this eourt alone, in its original jurisdiction, and the Supreme Court, in its appel late jurisdiction, have a right to determine. No other district court for the prish of Orleans P can, with any dignity to Itself, or with any respect Cl to the court which has Irssed that order, decide such a question. unless it tramples under foot the sacred and clemetary principles of law and stir up the arbitrary will of Its judge agaiJnsthe settled re doctrines of the law and the unquestionable re spect due to judicial orders, for, as well said by a I French author-even if applicable to this court, to the opinion of another Judge, " d'un magistrau ig norant o'est Is role qu'o5 mlue"-(of an ignorant 5 judge 'tie to the insignia of oice that we bow. Cl A third petition, bearing date January 25th, t 1869, was iled by plaintiff in this case, alleging f that notwithstanding the two orders already issued by this court, he was apprebenmve and afraid that the attorney general, in the name of the State of Louisiana, would proceed to brinag suit and take out legal process from another court to annoy, I harasn and tJure plaintiff in his business and sus pend his rights under the act of 17th August, 1A- , by the unavoidable delays of the law, though the Splasintiff, In bthis case, had complied with all and singolar the requirements of the charter Inoor Sporsting it under the name and style of the Loutsi- tl aa Btate Lottery Company, and prayed this court by such order as it deemed proper to pro tect it from al further injury. That petition being duly sworn to and a new bond given, the court isned another order of injuncton prohibiting the attorney general or Sanybody elte, In behalf or in thebs name of the e State of Louisioana,. from briing beftore any other a court of thbe purish any sult to obainegal proceas by which thi plaintio's right might In the silght est degree be nlojured, except before thisb court, d and empowered and ordered the plantiff in thise , casue, apon the legal preumption (omndapreum. l . ur recta re acia, that an nat of the Legislatore, duly authenticated, must be presumed to be con. stitutional and to have Its full efeot antil declared I void or unconotitutional by a competent trtbunal,) .te act as specified and prayed for in hts orilrtnal and supplemental or Inciadental petitioons in ing lottery tickets, any order of any district court for a the parish of Orleans to the contrary notwith f standing. a And on the 30th day of January, 1869, on motion of oouonel for plaintff and upon aoggesting to the k court thabt the defendsdant, D. 0. Johbsmton had oh h tlaed an order of injanction from the Bixth Dts I trict Court, and thereby violated the order of this ooort, sad in further protection of the rights of tplinti~, the court ordered the sheriff of this par Is Mto seeth the plaintiff in this case be not dis 0 turbed or molested in any of his rights under this t act, even if there should be an order of another court to that effect. On the 5th January, Isti, the oounsel for defendants in this cuase appeared before r thi ourt and toos a rule to quash the injunction issued on the 2d of January, under Art. 307 of the , Ccde of Prsatice, by giving bond. This the oqurt refused to do, for the obvious reuasons that for the o pnrposes of that role the act must be presumed o constitutional, and as uch it oonceded the fiact Sth thtthe plainUtfhad the sole and excldusive right of selling lottery ticsets. Now, sparing that riht for the pusposee of that rule, uas very well said by the SuPopreme Court in the ase of Knobe vs. Ternot, 14 A. BR., they were entitled to the i continued and uninterrupted (not evsen for the re 100th part of a second) eujoyment of that right, e and the deprivng the plaintiff of that right for the t smalleset period of time imagineble would work an 1 irreparable injoury-that is an inojory which no money could compenrsate. On the 12th and on the 30th of January, 1869, r the connsel for defendaots took two rules, both containing the same grounds, to quash the frst two injunctions isued in thi cae on the Sd and he 7th of Jan~ury, 89. upon fthyollowing roundar e. and that is the matter whloh ths counrt s called u upon to decide: That sid Injuntion here issued on account of a right claimed by plaintif, under and by virtue of ly an et of tbe General Assembly of the State, bear e lg date August 17,1868, entitled "An act to in alt crese the revenuesof the Stats, and to authorize the incorporation and establishment of the Lo.us *an State Lottery Company, and to repeal eertain acts now in foroe," wbih said act is unconstitu s tioal. for the following resos: That the title of Sld sect is fale; that it dose not expressm its ob jeot, s required by article 114 of the Constit tion of the 8tate of Lodsian; that said title is o ot coemisteat with the body of said act; that id act is destrctive of equality nd uniformity so- of tailosa throughout the State; that it exempts er from taxation property not actually used w for school, church and charitable purposes; that hit expempts* ou ta Lotter Co anpy from the paymmeu of the r-o rp a t, u eon , d, oontrary to Am IU S of m oidaataon; that said ,en of t HeeSmof cpeatesw of aid Asemr y nd th the prrseedie g o ite toand M th Ue e oft e Al p tae id Mt concerning said act, wre eInegular end wooum* tootosal; that satd act is ia vlatdoo of the Coa- be stitution of the United States in this, that it ti attempts to regulate commerce among the several in 8tats by retrietag and regulatig the sale of is lottery tIokts, by said act recognised as artols all of commeree, and confining the de thereof to as special chanels; that sald sot is generally on- thi trary to the provisions of the Constitutioa of the au United States sad of this State; that said act, if no allowed to have Abot. create a pernicious sad dangerous monopoly, sad it contra bonos mores. do That said writ of injeoeton aed been ed issued unadvisedly and without authority of law. Jet It is necesaryto proceed a little further i the v judioal history of this ease before this court to lei uederstand the conaflit of orders existing between this court and the 81xthtistrlct Oourt for the par- sa ish of Orlesans. On the 12th of January, 1869, the to counsel for defendants also filed an exception to thu said sit, averring the meonsttatonlity of that Cc act, in the sme words sad figures that their ratule be to quash m written. They also Aled an answer on LI the 11th January to the merits of the cae, bring- up ing up again to the souaderstios of this eourt the s very same grounds of unoonstittionality,urged tinhi their rule to quash and is their exception; the i only difference, if it can be called a diference, is ly that in their answer they alleged that the capital If stock required to be subscribed before commeno- IA ing operations is not yet suabscribed and paid in. th They deny the corporate entity of plaintiff, be cause said act is alleged unonstittional, sad an very properly reserve their right to claim dam a ages," if this court decide the sot of the Legisla- q trte unconstitutional and void. The obvious rer ra son of this reservation of their claim in damages is th that in order to claim damages the sot most be up declared unconstitutional; if declared Oonstitu- or tional they have no elaim whatever, not even the shadow of a claim, in damages against the plain- ei tli in this nee. de Now those identical pleas, proceedings and de- lei fenses of the defendant before this court and in no this case are made the subjeot matter of his pe- th from that court, otively prohibiting the plaintiff ve in this court from exerising its rights, privlees an and immunities as a corporation, notthtanding In the fact that the plaintiff In this court, long previ oau to the issuance of that writ of injuncaton by th the Sixth District Court, had a positive and per- ar emptory order 'of this court to exercise and It continue to exercise its corporate righte, privi. an leges and immunities as granted in the act of Au- ts gust 17, l168, inoorporating it, any orders of any hi court to the contrary notwithstanding, but until the further order of this court. So far for the his- pr tory of this ease as it appears from the records of wi the Fifth and Sxlath District Courts. tic The court will now prnoceed to examine the os grounds of unoonstitutionality urged by the rde fendants against the act of 17th August, 1869. en- su titled " an act to increase the revenues of the State, and to authorize the Incorporation and establishment of the Loulsiana State Lottery Com- w pany, and to repeal certain laws now in force," of The defendant avers that said act is unoonstito- oc tional, because it is false in ,title is this: that is it is entitled "an act to ln3rease the revenues of to the State," whereas, on the contrary, far from in- tic creasing the revenues of the State, it does efectu- p. ally dminish them. The ruling of the court, ex- cc cluding any evidence on that point, does of it- th self do away with that objection, for there is no jo evidence, under that ruling that the revenues of A the Stste are ffectually diminished. But as the evi- w dence is annexed to the bill of exceptions taken by the defendants' counsel, tbe court might as 51 well examine it and decide thereon. An extract (1 from the books of the anditor lot the State show re conclusively the fact that the whole revenues of pi the State derived from lottery dealers in 1866 as were $36,636 28; in 1867, $34,s93 36; In 1868, at $28,77i 01, and in 1869, under the act in question as as it now stands, the annual revenues shall be $4o,000, showing, therefore, an Inerease of $3,363 72 m over the most prosperous year of revenues from ni lottery dealers. Evidently the Legislature In the legitimate exeroise of its legislative functions had a right to conclude (seeing that the revenues of o4 the State from lotteries were yearly diminishing) In that it would be better to determine positively and vi definitely the revenues at a sum exceeding any previous revenue from that source of industry or iC dealing, by granting certain rights and privileges 04 to the Louisiana State Lottery Company. 4 But it may be contended by the counsels for de- ri feodants that the words "to Inorease the revenues u of the State " must mean all the revenues of the B State as a whole. Such a construction of the title B of that statute might fall, for ton the interpretation 0 of the title of a statute all the words of the title o must be taken and considered separately and to gether, just as in the interpretation of the body of a statute. so that no sentence or word shall be superfluous void or lsignifoant. (See I A. R. 162,5 A. R. 61;, 11 A. B. 122.) Now the acot is 1 entitled " an act to increase the revenues of the 8tate, and to authorize the incorporation and es talishbment of the Louisiana State Lottery Com- t pany." That last sentence evidently leads the court to the conclusion that the words in that a title, "to increase the revenues of the State" limit the interpretation as effectusily as if the a title were reed, "an act to increase the revenues of the State In lottery matter." F Again, It is contended that the title is untrue T and defective in this: that it only authorizes the t incorporation and establishment of the Louisiana Btate Lottery Company, whereas the bdy of c said act does effectually incorporate and establish P the said company. This, In the opinlon of the * court, is a play upon the grammatical construo tion of words. In the interpretation of the title of a the law, the words of the title are not to be b strictly and technically interpreted; if it state r the object according to the understanding of re. t sohable men, It satisfies the Constitution. (See 6 a A. R., 605 ; 9 A. R., 329; 11 A. R., 145. 671. 722; 13 A. It., 301.) (See, also, the authorities re- v ferred to by the court In the preceding ground, t and the principles therein laid down for the in t d terpretation of the statute.) lut admitting, for the sake of argument, that the title does not cover a the effectual Incorporation and establishment of the Lootlsana State Lottery Company, the ooort u would answer that it is net neoessary that it should, for the incorporation and establishment of r a company authorized to be tncorporated and t established Is an Inoident whloh (if the deoasio of t the b. C. in the 11 A. R., p. 722, 145, 671, and 13 e A. R., p. 301, and others above referred to by the Scourt, be correct,) need not be expresed in Its title. But the court contends that the title does effectualiy cover the faot of oIncorporation and establishment of that company. Just uas if the I title of the aot were to read: An act to increase the revenues of the Butate and authorize the In corporation of, and to establishthe Loa ia Otate Lottery Compansy," for If the Legislature d not bed that twId their mind, and the title did not cover it, the word "establismeut' found I In the title would be superfluanus and have no urmeaning, fer the words "to authorie the in Scorporation of" would have met sall the require ments of the Constitution placed upon that title Sby the defendasut' coounsels, and the fact of the Sestablishment would have been a matter of doing beyond the power of the Legislature, dependent simply upon the will of the oorporaturs to estab I liah themselves under that authorization of In corporation or not. The word " establUshment" I was evidently put by the Legislature to cover I the faIct of the existence of that body as a corpora tion. But counsels for defendants further urge that I mid act is unconrsttutloial because the title i not e conttet with the body of said act. Tie court 1 S would see no apparent inoonsistency uas allege4 by the defendant, if in their argument they had not rt explained to the court that by the word " title" in their sentence, they meant the preamble or reasons accompanying that statute, and whloh the t egislature signed for is peslge. That incon- I SIsttenoy, if really existing. (and it is not necessary t for the court to decide whetherlt des or does not I I exist r can very well be gotover nuder the settled rulies of interpretation of statutes which, as laid S down by our Supreme Court in the decionsa e already referred to by the court, require that if I Sthe literal text of a statute lead to an absurdity, Sthe court must, if It be possible, give It that lanter n pretation which will do away with the absurdity and yet maintain the idea and intention of the Legislature. Under that rule the court could not Shold that the Legislature meant to sanction that th which they gave reasons for not sanctionin. But e ounsels for defendants have tfurther objectioes still to urge. They aver that the title of the act is defective in this, that it should mention the titles of the special acts then in force and which are repealed by that act, though the titles ofthoe repealed acts, then in force, are given in the body of o the statute. They fuorther urge that the title is rdefective in this: tha it contains nothing of the in- penalty inficted by the section three of that act as for a violation of its clauses. Cl- Tle court will oonldder these two objections tin together, beeause the same anthoritieus apply to n- them. and for the purpese of deiding tbes of objections the court wants no better authority ib than the one relied upon by the defendant's coun t sel mahking these objections. is In the 11 &a. , p 7J2, the 8. C. ays : "The at doctrine of all American court is that a legisla Ity tive sot will not be declared void or auoonstito pei tioal less Its tacompatlbltlty with, or vitolatleee ed of the paremonat law he cler beyed a nroeu hat ble doubt.' The court contlines the quotation: my "The design of a title of a law is merely to s, indicat e the eral subject of the law, and ot t id furnish a deted exposltio of allu pr ;" al ifthe Intmr weore the s e t would id uatothe ld absuard oonelusion tht the title aodid be u long o atheasot. e What good mese weald Intodete i what the et,Constituian exats, namely,!a b some geneal gt- proviionat the head of the law, te lateatlom both Leglslaeas and iteon should be Axed epon the the main esubjeet matter to wheh "all thi detals stall in the body et the sttatte aee suzllsry.' there et is na debt La the miaa of this caoro t ae the pee g alty (dIoted by the seotion 3 of that sot, as well o as the title of the law repealed by that aet, are in vil tbhe words of the abeve deisio of the. C., sa Us aeuxliry in the body of the statute which need slo not be expressed In the title. de The eeers now leaves the title of the act, md t doubtt whether the inteligence of the most eera- T ed counsel of the land could find any further obh- fet jectios to the title. As to the court, ft has in site vein searched the perhaps barre fields of Is own tier legal attainments for further objections. bar The next ground is that art, ec. 5,ee. 1,exempts on aid corportioe from the payment of any other T tax but the one of $40,000. The Lenlstare hae that right, under a late decisioa of the spreme moc Court, not yet reported, but a copy of which has T been reed to thi court (tt of Mew Ortes, O. the Laesy and BR Reihimae). The constroetion placed rea upon that article of our Coostitution by the So- of I preme Court. Is that the legislater is not pro- the hibited, by the tems of the article, from exempt- thei lug other property from taxation, save that actual- t ly used for sh col, church or charitable purposes. coo If not prohibited, it has the right to exempt the of I Louisiana State Lottery Company from say fer- mo ther taxation. n Bat it is said that that set exempts the Lolhd- and uan BStIs Lottery Company from the payment of Iis a pro rata tax on inoome. The article 118 In is a question ays "all tax on Income shall be pro ag rata on the mount of income or busnese done; the General Assembly may levy an Income tax reel upon all persons pursuing any occupation, trade of or calling." poi There i nothing to show that the Genesal As- Ot sembly has levied that tax; that article ie evi- stri dently permislsive and not obligatory. The Legle- ant latar may or may not, and until It does there is no aneoselty for deoldinlthat question. But, on m the spposition that It does levy that tax, or that def vent the Legislature from exempting the Loosei- el sue state Lottery Company from paying that sec Income tax. eo The only prohibition that the oourt can Snd in his that article is that the Legislature cannot tax ali arbtrarily one inoome more than the other. The ma tax has to be levied generally upon all Isoemes i. e and then each person pays that proportion of the me tax according to the amount of business done by ate him. tnt The fact that the Legislature exempts certain hat property or persons from the payment of taxes do would not contravene that article of the Counstite- co tion, which says: "Taxation shall be equal and cal uniform." I But on the supposition that the court should a0 sustain the objeotion of defendant's coepsel, that peat aloes of the law waould be anoonshtntlonsl, it not being a material part of the law; a part without which the aot should cease to have any by effect; the other parts of the law would remain constitutional. The next point to be oonsldered nel is that that act was not passed in the manner and form provided for by the articles of the Constitu. ha tion of 1868, sad required by those articles. The Ity pages of the journal of the House referred to the court by counsel, are pages 95, 96 and 114, but go the oourt by looking at page 90 of that same sat journal finds that on Saturday, the 1set day of de August, Mr. Faulkner called up House hill No. 66, wi which I the act in question. Ht Mr. Carr of Orlesans moved that the bill be con. lIn sidered engrossed aend placed on its third reading. a I (The counsel for defendants do not question the hit regularity and constitutionality of that bill at any cll previous passage; therefore its passage on first th sand second readings is admitted to have been coon in stitutionally correct. It is only the third reading '* and final passage of the bill which is questioned.) ini Mr. Antoine of Orleans moved that the bill be ca made the special order of the day for Tuesday ha next. Motion laid on the table. qn On motion of Mr. Car of Orleans, the bill was th considered engrossed and placed on Its third read- thi Ing. That follows forcibly, for that was his pre- L( vious motion. Yoe 33, nays 28. Total 61. oo Now, what the other pages 96 and 96 of the inl journal have to do with the passage of the bill this c t court cannot see, for the bill, as appears by page th 90 of the journal, had already passed Its thlr4 reading, and therefore could not properly come be up again, no motion appearing in the journal of of the HBose to reconsider the vote then taken. fe* But the court will examine, out of respect to so counsel, the pages 95, 96 and 114 of the journal th of the House. th Mr. Carr moved to take up House bill No.6. pc Mr. Brewster, of Ouachita. moved to lay on at the table the motion to suspend the rules. br Yeas and nays called. Yeas 11: nays 49. To- m' tal 60. Several amendments offered. et Mr. Carr moved to lay the amendments on the ti table. Yeas 48; nays 11. Total 69. Mr. Carr called for the previous question. Yeas th and nays called and ordered on the adoption of of the amendment offered by Mr. Burrell, resulting as follows: Yeas 49; nays 1. Total 49. No quorum voting. Call of the House ordered. Fifty-three members answered to their names. The chair decided that the question recurred on ,c the adoption of the amendment. Mr. Carrappealed from the decision of the cI chbalr. The chair was not sustained. AU that proceeding thus far shows that the members In wanted no addition to the bill. t But be that proceednlg llegal,though the court b shows It was not, for to decree it Illegal it should w s be shown aflrmatively that there was not a quo- It rum present, voting, when the vote was taken on e the motion to sustain the chair; but the journal al I shows quite the contrary, for, on the calf of the House made previously to putting the motion hi whether the bstr shoould be sustained, 53 mem- a! bern habed answered to their names. The court has, m therefore, no right to presume, with this written va r oficil declaration in the journal, that some of the ft r members had withdrawn, and that there was no 1 If qoorunm present when the vote was taken on the b I motion to entain the chair. It But, on the eupposition that there was no quo. F rum during all these proceedags, does It followr d that no regular aotion could ever afterwards be f taken on the bill? Eidently,no! r 3 And the journal goes on: Mr. Our moved that Sthe bill be now oonsidered engrossed and plased a on Its third reading and final pesage, and oalled for the previos qutiton. CaOuried. Yeas 4, n nays3;total 57. d e bill was ordered to be sent to the Senate Sfor concurrence. e There is nothlng unooastitutioesl in th pi Sa of tshe biU on ie third readling, In the optinion a othis court. The metropolitan police board bill * e to whom the counsels for defendaot referred In a this oee presented an entirely different question I from the one now raised; it presonted this oes- u Stion which does not arise in this case: How many 7 - votes does it take to prevent the reading, discuo - alon a·nd plsrage of a bill on the samen day; and C e since that discussoln is referred to, will take this C e to y ; that is the court is satisfied that if that tl g samne question were to come up again it would de- t it olde quite differently, for this court feels no e a Sloctance ln acknowledging an error of judgment, b - and the court feels relieved of its error is know- c Slug that in a ,se before the Seventh District b r Court, in wbib that very same question oeme up - the judge of thts court very properly refaed to be suided by the decision of this oourt an the me t tropolmtan poli.e bill, and very correctly ruted th ththe four flihs of the House meant the four rt fifthe of thle members present or the fourfifths of t The next point urged, Is that said act violates U the Conetitutlon ,f the United States in thlt: that r it attempts to regulate commerce among the ser e eral States of the United Butee in confning the a- ale of mid lottery tickets recognized by said act Sa articles of commerce to certain special chan- I Snels. r d 'Ihe court cannot see the application of that i article of the Constitution of the United States to as the facts of tts case. If the court noderstand that if articlt, it is, fur instance, that tbi State has no , right to prohibit the importation of goods, to levy r-an impoet upon them, to tax them, to pase any c y law on the subjeot of commerce derogatory of a that article; for Instance, to seize, eoniscate, o sell or destroy the goods imported, to try to puan. t ish the importers or commieson mrbants who t sell them, either by fine or ImprIsonment, or In s any other maoner, scd such like cues; bst the is Constitution of the United Staltes or the laws of s Congres nowhere speak of lotterleo or lottery e tlckets as article of commee, or olim the right to eexercbseexclnluve jurisditionor non.concurrent ly jaredlotion with the BSes; on the oontrary, it I ioI ves it entirely aunder the exclsive control of he the Indivldual States, by aying, ain its interal n i revenue law, for Istance, that nothing In the ar. tele is tto be construd so uas to authorise lot- I a terles: and If that aerticle of the Costitution of to the UniUted tate did apply, the oonrt would then s hold, according to the more modern deieston ity on that point, that the State may legislate in mat- I . ten regulating commerce, tn matters ot leglis - lated upon by Congress. (6 Wallos Beport. he page 35, Crandall vs. Nevada. - If the btate allows it, then the United States n nets itsresene bom It as a lawfut oeoaptioe, as but nething morne; it msttir entirely nder the - control of tim State,ana upon whlch i ca seta n: please. Thls issotro, thatnot longao theL sto eis nd daling in @ lotr tiektIs wee a lm p ure ryo bn u tha laws; meje · t ,t c n~t.to fo the Criminsi Courthel Severy violaMion of tha set. JAd to qas. te constttitona ttoof thse mote of our L .gsleara m aking the d~an In lottery tieket. a elem., a bei bdel elation of the article of the Coastitu o of the Uneed Staes reulatin commerce among the State, would havs bees an eaterprsse as striklogly surprsldg to a strala ef argueet in that line. Therefore if the State has the gater right to ontiredy 4rone aly psaldla taesae or, iott eyticesw n its boudofsH, wiout vielating that article of the Costitatlon of the Undted ate, it ,- a f rtoriori the lesser right of allowl nto ssh persea as it phLe5.. and eam der sob restritlons, privileges sad eoaditions in itmaypl pe to mpose. The N athorlaes arred to by ouseet Tor de- p fendants oa this point are good law, and oris- R site, as far as u they go; but they have no appica- T tion, in the opision of the oourt, to the case t a bar, for the resoms already assigned by the coart v I on the merits of that point. The next point is that said t, it permitted to co, have eebot, oreate a pernaclons and danagerous monopoly, and is contra bonos more. I There is no doubt in the mind of the court. as al the court has jest demoestrated by the preceding t resesaing, that as far as the selling ad disposing a of lottery are concerned, the Legislature having r the right to prevent that sale in Lfob, and has therefore te lesser right, in ts wisdom, to modify the that right, to grant It under such oonditioh as the bill court thinks best, and to such individuals, or ets of individuals as it may think proper, creating a mi monopoly, it Is treo-butthen the legislatore are of i such a case, ecountable to none but to G A No and their consonlece-for the power of the Legis- g lature is upreme; it can do everytianl which it is not premlsy or plidly prohiblted from do in by rtu of the Constitutlio of the UDnited Stes and thbe CoastlteIos of this ~t te, not eveS restricted in its legitimate funotions by the laws 6 of morality. There are but two bounds to its i power. First, the Constitution of the United Btate. Second, that of the State. When net re stricted by these two, it is an omnipotent as the Eil autocrat of Russia. (ee page s2.) SThe next point is that that st is scontr bosos wa ma ores. That point would aot avail ooouesl for I defendants, for if the ooort could be led to decide sell lottery tickets. But this coont cannot decide t such a thing. As an individual, the judge of this i court has hm own deas of moralty. Ae a judge, a hi ode of moral iso the law. What e law Sallows the court will jadiollly decree to be legally moral, though it may not be legally moral in se, i. e., in the abtraot. There thedyof the judge a must end. The law i hls morality ; and if e the r attempts to go beyond the law, he can but substi- I tinte his ow o Mes of morality, or these that he le a has lot from some philosophical thinkers, aed thes s doctrine of the higher law whch the judge of this U* i* court was once unfortunate enough to hear advo d cated by an eminent member of the bar. be Bo true, correct and legal is the opinion of this ml d court on the question of exclusive rght conferrsd t by the set of the 17th of August, 1688, on the o0 I plainti in this ase, that the learned judge of the S ixth District Court concurs a It, as it can be seen y by the following extract taken from a charge m a delivered by himto to the jury I the ease of Mart cl a net vs. City Railroad, pending before his court. d The last point is, that said writs of Injunction have been sued unadvisedly and without autho Sity of law. e The court having decided the aot of 17th An- A t gust, 1868, constitutional, it will strike the common e sense of everybody, that there is no neceaity of Is t deciding those two other writs of injunctona, which wrmee merely incidental to the main srot. However, the point is made, and should be looked . Into. The court understands an injunction to be a mandate obtained from a competent ooart, pro e hibitlng one from Impatring a right which he y claims. If such be the oae, there is no doubt it that, upon the allegations of a certaon right veted Te in a party, the court must protect him, and pre- Tt g venany impairing of that right, ntil a final hear ) ing. And, if after a final hearing, the court feels e convinced that the party, alleging to have a right, Shas it in reality. why the the injuotiona most stand forever. But that is not the main point; the P question to be decided is, whether this court has s the right to issue ts writs of injunction, asit did in t i. this case, to prevent the other party from bring- 8 g. in suit. There is no doubt in the mind of the court that it has that right; and, without entering e Into a discusesion of the merits of the ease, the is court would refer to several oases establishing e that fact beyond the posalbility of a doubt. S The first case is that of Leaumont vs. Viavaat. e before the Sixth District Court, In which tih judge H ,f of that court issued an order directed to the de- . I , fenadant in that case prohibiting from bringing a t suitt before any Stste court against the plaintiff in ol Sthat case. Another case before the same court is that of Lee and al. vs. Thiberge, sod a case re- P ported in 14th Annual, page 5S, wherein defend- r n ante in an injunction suit were enjoined from N bringing any suit at law to enforce the paymeut of ri . mortgage notes.4 The ast of the Legislature of 17th August, lR8, p entitled " an act," etc., being constitutional for e the reasons above set forth. It is therefore ordered that both rules to quash a the injunction in this case be dismissed at the col.m o )f of plaintiff in rule. d - -. -- Prepaurte the Orrend for rLt.atas Cotte. 1I e. Here is an article from the Vicksburg Times, an containing matter of especial interest to a large %e class of our readers: at Mr. Editor-As the time approaches for this ri rs Important work, I wish to call the attention of o those engaged in it to an error which prevatied 0 d where was so much depending on its correction. It was a sever of time, and was not visible to the eye, though the results were always felt, bat never 0 1 attributed to the right cause. It wce that prao tlee of leaving to the center of the otton ridge n bard ground for the cotton to take root in. Of C n- all the crope grown cotton requires the deepest and mellowest soil to root in, having a long top v ,i root, which runs deep into the ground. How per he fectly absurd to suppose it could penetrate hard d soil and give more nutrimnent to the stalk and its breaches and fruit than it would in the well pul. 1 verised sad deeply plowed ground. Cotton bhas but few lsateral roote, sad draws its suetenance from 'I ,,the depths of the earth rather than the surface, a be Uad it moust be sided by the Intelligent planter resohing these sources of supply. Bt to prove a the folly and absurdity of this pratie so nulver. rally believted in, and I willt give a few fete. In 1866 the writer had allowed n immense bank a of cotton seed to collect at his ginb-house, and not c having time to spread it on distant par of the tB fLeld, he had it bauled on a 16 sre oaut elose by, I which bhad been cultivated bor Alty rer. Some t * f the beest teams were, putoo this cut sod plowed in the middle of the row, as deep a tlrrow e poe- I l slble. Then the seed was thrown In this furrow, I i and filled In to the top; he then bad tthe radgee thrown writh this rtted cotton seed in the ; o center. bl was all done in March. About the let of April the cotton was planted in the usual way, with many misgivings amongst the laborers d as to the results,, and the overseer said that the S cotton would die out. Whben the top root reaobed at the cotton seed beneath, the cotton grew offbeau- i le- ttfully, was the rst to bloom, the first to ature, Sand the grat to open, and on the frst of 0Sepm at, her we gathered flfteen hunodred poods of seed Scotton to the acre, and picked it again 1s t Octo lotber, when we gathered fifteen hundred pounds I more to the aore, sand had another picking from it Sof sowme three or four hundred pounds to the acre in December, making a yield of near 2 baies. -it. of Psoaitizr o ioa To ra Aaiv.-A bill for the reorganisation of the army will be brought in by G en. Garfleld, from the House miihtary committee, at ad moved as an amendment, in accordance with I .the understanding resehed on Friday, to the army e appropriation bill. I is based in a irge part o t recoimemdatinons of (eeral Tboumas, ohedeld, n. Hancock. McDowell and other ofieers who have recently been examined by Gen. Galbeld'eomn 1 t mittee. It provides for reducing the number of to fantry regimeunte from 46, the present nuomber, tat to 30. The men of the regiments broken up are no to be mustered into the others so ua to give the I y manxmum streagth to thoe retlioed. The pay, commisary and quartermaster departments areto o be consoliated, and the new'branch will be called I &e the supply department. The ordnance arm of the Sservice is to be broken up entirely, and all its ho officials mustered in as ofers of artillery, with a in chief ofpartllery and a bureea in the war dpert. the ment. There is to be a redction of about one of third in each of the staffdepartmente. The Indian y boureoau b to be transferred to the war deprt iht ment, and the extra is cad staff officers are to ant be put on duty lin place of the present civil o ers 1 it among the Indians. Thee are merely the outline. of of the proposed plan. It looks to a reduction of l at leras al hundred ln the number of army oocers, ar. ad It is thought the measure will reduce the ox lot- pease of the goverdaent folly $10,000,000 pet of year. Nowew oieerN areto be astsrued isa Sthe committee think that by death, discharg god Sresignation, the present force of oietail can in . es than three years be reduced 0 o the avage . requirement of the service. The first step toward the new order of things was takes in ihe Hooe, on Saturday, whben teon millions redaction was made at etre en th*e agrogate of the amount repi* ad by the army il. The ladia breao She setS deparmet will of cours oppoe Wteodispates. jW~ AoLIA WAIS.-5-3e or is t e bed isa. the ny the only sewleg mastrn a I rbe nllage, Sthe Grover & Baker. Warraned hor ye arm. Qunlter, braider nd emmer gIseo witteheh ma. ag chine t 1.2 Caral street. The LIMaes Lt gasers. ' THIRRTYT-INTH DAY. 1 ---- f SAmnUrAY. Feb. 13, 1R69. Bernet. a t at on, Liettest Governor Duna la the ohak. A full quoream preset. Pryer by Rev. Mr. Turner, ohplUio. Reading of the minutes dispensed with. Mr. Campbell oalled up the special order of the dey, according to potion of the previous day, via: The bill relative to the new o01 oharter. rhe Benate refused to entertain the call tin a 0 cordance with the rules of the senate. S3mPOT OP STANDINo OODEMINSY . Mr. Lyach. from the doance sommittee, reportei " favorably opea a bill exempting from taxltion Sthe New Oreas MethodIst Reposltory. 5 Mr. Pmchback. from the committee on claims. i reported favorably pon a hill for the rellef of SPike, Lapoen A Co., with the recommundtlo 7 that it be referred to the inace committee. The * bill was referred uas recommended. S A unfavorable report was made by the coin Smittee on commere opon a bill orseetin toe office of lumber and timber epetor fee the ity of SNew Orleans. s By the internal Improvemeate eommlttee, fa t vorably upon a bill for the relief of 6. James. s orroas or anu.r.s. d By Mr. Campbell-Of a bill for the relief of the SSBouthwestera Bible Sooiety. r By Mr. Lynch-Of a bill exemptlng from levee Stxation certain persons of Lake Providence. ACCODNGO To rsavious NoTIOs. ' Mr. Todd Introduced a bill inorporating the lot Sfilling company of the city of Jeferso. Also for the retef of Lucy 0. Carson, which was referred to the eommittee m ohlas. By Mr. Chmell-"A bill for the relief of the isea Bosrey ReerrPed to We ad. espolwn of to rt se. W. ay ntaro l" doced a bill relative to the conveyance of title t In auccseasone and losolveeles. e, A bill eoferrfg additional powers to parsh J udgees. Both bill. were read twice and referred S to he judiciary committee. P JOTIm ssoL~tTOwe. Ie By Mr. Campbell-A resolution to invetigate te the affairs of the Usited States Bankrupyto Court ti- In this State, and a resolution prohibitlng the Slea or disposal of, io any manner, of the water. ' werks by the city authoritles. Both reseoltion J ie over o- By Mr. Day-A resolution for the relief of Bo bert Harris and others. Referred to the cor Smittee on claimse. he By Mr. Futcb--A resolution ereating a standing he committee on immigration. Me Mr. Pollard was not in favor of immigratIon; he Sthought there were enough Immlgreate here al P ready, and to invite more, was to orowd out his Sclass of people The resolution ise over. 3i5OLUTIOWM. on Mr. Lynch-A resolutlon for the relief of J. E. o- Trimble, for per diem, ste., as a witness. By Mr. O'Hara-A resolution for the relief of SAnugstus Davis ; also for per diem as a witness. 00 Both referred to the committee on contingent ex of peoes. ', LYING OTVL A bill relative to the protection of the levees was taken up, ordered printed, and made the ape eial order on Thursday. A bill regulating the terms of the Bapreme Courts of the State was similarly disposed of. A bill creating the parish of Tanatpsoa waM read and made the special order of the day tTouesday. ORDnB or THE DAY. ht, A bill to expedite the constructlen of the New .t Orleans, Mobile and Chattanooga Railroad Coan he pay was taken op and finally puassed. as he bills relative to the city charter were taken in p, but pendin stion upon the first section the SSenate adjourned. Hense of kereseaaatrves. he Sixty-one members present. ag The motion to postpone for one week the bill granting State aid to the New Orleans and Texas SItailroad Company, which was pending when the House adjourned on Friday, wee taken up and ear rled. A motion to reconsder the House refused ai to table, and finally adopted by a recorded vote n of42 to23. t is The committee on educantion here, under a nse re. pension of the ruls, reported to the House a bill ad- regulating publio education tn fMtsiana, and om moved that It be at once fially passed without Iof reading. This modeet proposition wa subse quenuy withdrawn when the bill was ordered ii, printed and deferred until Monday. for Mr. Wiltz, from the committee on public eduae . ,.misLsd Seiowiag manrttity report: The undersigned, a member of the committee es on public eduooation, respectfully report that he dissents from the report submitted by the majority of the committee, and recommends that the pub. n. lic schoole continue to exist under the present system, which has already been tested and found ee, tifactory to all towe directly Interested. LotIs A. WrILv, rge Of Orleans. A memorial from several cititens of Orleans, his right bank, relative to E. Macarthy, justice peace of that pariuh, which was referred to committee ied on address. acy The petition of Jacob Zoelly, asking compensa on tion for building a levee in frot of his place in the St. Charles parish, was referred to committee on ver sclams. an- naroars or oowYxires. Age Claimn-On an set for the relief of A. P. Field, f bChaney and Belden, favorably by substitute. )set On n acet for the relief of B. Ewell, favorably, top with an amendment. )er- On an aot for the relief of Chinette, of 8t. Lan ard dry, unfavorably. I ts Judiciary--On an act to carry into effet the tul. 132d arttole of the Cotositution, favorably. but Ways and mease--On act to exempt the rom Turners from 8tate and mual'pal taxation, favor e, ably; Isabelde disslenting. Bill ordered engrssed. tier Bill for the rcllef of T. F. Monroe was nldoA o ntely postponed. rer The G eranprltnlg queuset wae ke ll. The bi1l to aid in the conmrooon of the Misle ank ipplt and Mexican Gulf Canal, was made speolal not or oder for Tuesday nst. the leave of asees to Mr. landers, of Union, for by, ve days, and Mr. Presoott, of St. Landry, for me three days, granted. red Appropriatione--On act for relief of widows oe- Pope and Chase, favorably. Communittee of the ow, whole. gee On Senate bill relative to auctloneers' bonds, the favorably with an amendrent. the On bill appropriating $50,000 for reglsitration mel purposes, favorably with ant amendment making rre amount $48,000. Commlttee of the whole. the On bill for relief of (Chartly Hosptisl, favorab'y hod with smendmnt reducing amoar by *10,000. an- llme dispoeitioe. ore, On bill for relief of widow Huot, favorably. am. Sme dIsposition. med On bil spproprirtlng 8000 to repair records of cto- I atte land offce, favorably rwth an amendment mde making amount $4000. Same diepoeltion. m it OTICeU OP ILLRa. re By Hleldenhalo. for relief on Conrad Atrader. By ,nrell of Orleans, to regulate business In district courts. By Morsy of Ooachlta, to reorganize the bureau the of immigration. r by 1 ren of Bkasier. to Improve Lake ilateneso. Alsto to prevent New Orleans and Jefferson from pith levying yce aeL. rmy roDCO O BILL. S By Morey, to allow somebody to :dlasberit his 1d, sen. Judciary commlrte. ave Also an act appropriatilg 50.000 for public o. printing and publishing. Referred to committee r of on ways and meaMs. ber, Also an act to oincorporate the Oasebita 8laek are Water Navigation ('ompany nsod to lese Rttse the bonde thereto. Referred to committeeon ternal pay, improvemeats and ordered printed. reto ByIsabelle, an act relative to cost and fee tiled Referred to jadilciary. ithe An eatto amend article 2294 of tha CIvi Code. I Its Judiciary. a An act toamend artlle 2299 of the00vl Cod. er. Jodiciary. one- By MoVean of Caddo, an set to icorporate the dims ILoislan Transfer Company, and provide raflroad art telegraph communca'on with the Paeidle nt. eto Ordered Iprinted au reada to railroad comnit aof A st for thre fl of B.BloomflaM. Appro rs, priation committee. x An acst for the reliefof Albert Lastrappe. Set Per to committee on lrary. .. An act to pd erbery of witnseses. Judicitar ad committee. Sin An aet mhregnl g somebody to all theo rlight r of t on Lefeerche Navigation Comaani cad Corpotrats commttee,. 5 As aot eastesgml th pe po jury of St. J S to lsae bead. Finully doptd. a a ouat A jras reaoltioe reatire to portralit c ree Thomas.. PFirnly passed. .mfw poe te emendment to the metropoite p " Vereadopted. Sent tothe S ,eat . l Ib o The bill Lmproving St. Chatsm eb, referred to the committee of l.me WhL e tsde An set auhoritin - Warmoth to j to be rise. sdam t to aalw bl to h"-D-u tp , Bl postponed ntl Fridaoy une has eihL tO An at fehr the obsernwee of Bill ledelatly postpoed b-,n amd Ie Odresa ine- atoS. s Sw Ish .le d * sad terwad thei owa Ssteume- bolietlda the