Newspaper Page Text
" FIFTH LEGISLATURE. 1ECON11 IUOSM.OW--TII9TT-THNlD 1 The Rnate. i Thre H~eate met Ol. m, endwns oril0idto order b1 Lie't. o . Wlll a qcuor"tm resent. Hennt", t ill No. it, he .ohal os fet ost d, twis tllkln up And poethollnd half an hour. 'he rrt r of the hate tongine nor w read Jn cwhlh ho etimates the cost f repalrs of the Mininto louse at Uaton HRouge at $170,o00. lRe veolved. 1'Tt'IflOtt , MnMOaIAIAL, Wft(. 1f Mr. HRandiford: A memorial from the oftil aento of (joushla It. nskins that act No, 9s of 1l79 In repealed. Rleferred, IkPOSTS oFP (OMMITT1ia. Judlciary--fJ voralIy op tHenate bill No. 141, trans ortlintg te donatlona to the rintilng House for the Blind to the lttate treasntry. lfe celved, Flnance-Ftporably on NenaW bill No. 107, amending act °o.W140 of i5lt.el ve to the reor ganiaaliou f the 8tat(BlJoart or .nignaers. S'utll. Edu Btion- avoral ton Hpuse bill No. Is), Incorporating the Attakv no neolege. INTRODUCOTrON OF BILLS, fly Mr. obelrton t by treqeat el Mr. White: An act o nut or .e le t uLtiOnofl New Qr leans 'to fill all vEacan la lit offoe. . eterred. fly Mr. Garland: An act ordaring tIe litate Engineer to survey 1BIyOu eeotli an report the cest of erectlng looks rendering it naviga bie. eto. teferred. Also, an act ordering the Mtie Engilneer to examitne and report to the n t~et a. l Arem bly the cost of dredging and loring Bayou 'laet l oll et, .Referred. SMr. odored. An not Inoprporatist! the Na poleontaile Fire tinpnY No, 1 The bill wa kon no and .msJ t0 its second eding, lMr. Kelly in th eiaairt. A(rrIOON Ol oUoMMI.!10 l1PORTs, House bill No. O9b, to etAbh il atd maintain a police force for thOblioly1 o deW Orane, I ltnt ig tie oexpinees to b,I.I.,., wi taken u p. Made the Speoal order for O-dty at(R p, m, . Senate bill No. 01, alob at D ielnental to an ant vegtlnt the titl of c ialto in the olty Bennie bli . r,.a YOUng sl, legitl mnnttiing children born of arents not married. Mr. Ypung moved the 111 be considered eon ri. T witb 11 amended to strike out the word .te o of lT n e ana" ad ltort "wrdsn 1lthlh to e l fI tllV arieh Of (on ordola thl t n to the flrt se6tlot. Mr. Allaln ameded by a..g "'and the pear iRh of Red Blver.' A motion to indaflnlt5 y ostone the bill, and a motion was mh e to labls ? h1 h m t eipit Youn8 cal etd for oven,.n bae, re marlt tt he ttetli to tcla t hlis ftllnd on record In this mattr. yo1 ,asy Bi [Liet. Gov.. ll the hIl Mr, gnethas lled r ie yep and nays to it deniltl postpone e t bill Yeu1, lnays 0.t The Waterworls bill wam postponed Until bat urday. The s.ecalt order tot the bhr, Senate bill taken tupa na lty.1t pasgsl an.te bi o. Ne. was t.Okn at and laid on tlnate bill No. 99, rpealtfl onl act grantiln ferry rivi1leas to Marx "tzoibergand Wmn (rr61/at Donaldsonyll, eoomlitteýd, uptse bill Noo, ;el ie to the Nw Orleans Wa*erworlt Wa take1n tup and made the spealat order for Saturday at1 l.m.. om"r.fo "rhvr, the C~sealtte on eorxuora. I~orporatingte letOWu l Of Flaquenll, Re he calendar ben haut 9r h move to take up 'ad It to a ,V1o1lt ansi di root the Louisianal oard of Tr tee. s . the Areoat Prlnhl. .fotr the Blid to ey corinth a d s.niut the tt t tt0otety for thr blnelst of tile L.ur atna It.igntie n ' or the Eid tucon of thne p I ad b fldstlot&i d for treasurer ora t ld u oh0A to eullove fro reanonsibllty aeu f fi t t s, of sthoierluan PrlagH5ti, en .t id' Thbil. e . oti intd a etled tlained tharaler., soiowin t tit Was for a mr tton 6 mtoilintlaltH ato JA lun at fiat ago. 'c Salso lteo of th ilI which vrevailed, Lad thl bill was finally Iat et b it . 61, by Mr. White, Was taken up hndealendr_ The House as ald tup order Itst noond roeaku~ s ash in th e chlar: It members anor to soell, rter or e alnigt any personal or real vr Qe.ts yuon Wh ig 1101 eIute. he er o ed t the bill. ir,.Whiteoip0aed andto aiZaara urxged sir. &oottoe eo. ta lo bl l.ba r mioinmltted to i om mlt, rt lmed.. Ad the Hournse smo t me e.entyve or nt The Tpeker l The House was called to order at noon. Speaker , sh in the chair; 101 members and a quorum. Prayer. ludge Yoorales moved a reoonsideraton of the vote ly which the anendom.nt proposed by him waslost, Iliitin tro e umber in members of the House so that t he all notbe l than seventyýflive or nimr than ety- ano, The epeaker ruithaI the gentlan qould not move a reoratio ~lne r p r ll a ot vottd with thte prevailing lde. tnhough withte 1u1e noorhaes appealed from the rulin nf thire hair,pt before the motton was pIt Mr. Kennedy. who noted ralinst the aendment., releved him o1b le eaUarrasment by moving a reconsider ton. The reoonsideratioa was ordered by a vote of 1rtr. Diokenson aroseeo privilege In _egard cOrLsideratlon was ordosed Iy Ye yeaSa n. Iays, t1rMODM CrOIN ^e BtJrI, ABy Mrf, Vowe.AAt lutiitl Itstrudting the Atto ne 7 evtolelpifts o tiiilfori, toeorfeiture p . arr ettto.i. the Socsety Tiro Sp ; hat.fteor Monday the seb l ton s of the td"l4 Kahall tfrn 2In. to t p.m.e, a. ftrom7. M. . . over. f ldy M. Botry:jaitttU thata ooatd ttee of five eapponted to ro the oepoa he most Lmnort t A t.*. order in WiOh e a be,ý •d . povper. The snate nt 1 nPoYdian for a joint oOuilit t . IAtp tlt rry privi lgtes Of Mark0 g'oJb ,WaS OaliJd ip. ov. Hahu moved to refer to uommnitte on Parochial Affaltes. Mr. Hill, of Ascension, moved to lay on the table, whloh wa lost. and reference made as moved. Honate Joint resolution. reu.stling the Prest dent t ) appoint (e. 0, P. Green a commis i oner to ,he Paris Ex positin. Mr. Jonas asked the unan louSB consent of the Holios to pass ti resution. It was a mna who. In the dlsogarre orf te dmoultg and doli.nate duties devolved upon him as ohlef of staf of the military command in :this iely, had ondeared himself to all etasoss of otir oitiens. Mlr. .)ickenseoj moved to roter to the Commit too on Federal Relations. Mr. 11111 of Orlas. seconded the motion, which motion was laid on the table on motlop of Mr. Kly, of Winn. and theresolution pnesed. The followinl respluton, introduoc,d on Wednesday by -(o. Warth wa called upno and its passage movend by lllt: Rcsolredri . the lous f resentaatives of th1 ,tate of Louttana4, That the Committee on the Judiciary be directed to report without de lay w the or not the prosecutIon of the oil. cur of the late leturnin3 Board not in viola tion of the pledge of the governmeont, made on the twentieth day of April. w17r. in words as F irou of ndin the dissensions that have disturbed thtate or years past. and anxious that the cit. .i-t political parties may be free fro th lever :! anxeties of po ltlical atrife and j onetlyrestor i-gtho the prOS a. the ioholl government will diaountenanoe any attemt ed erseutio. from any quae"r, of Individuals That the Govero bre reoueted to forward a copy of ttme resolutiona to the 'resident of tihe United atte. e80. 2. That the eoommlttee shall have power to send for lraostaad pan rs and examine witnesses for ue purpos of thisuýpoi .. In movin the rgaauhlons. Av. wermote said he had but l tt.. l . The olution exlafned theme li He oved their passage. Mr. Jonas op ed t ae of the ro tion. As he und td was a matter that the judiciary: leeatrol of and any such aotion as was >l b would be a moet unwarranted lnterfeýeno no the part of the d ceeral Astebl1. CertaVn parties had violated e t.lmilntl laws of the State: had been ar gtedad &td were held ft tti1rtiOese. (Jte o theW patties ad lten o irl9 IDi? y a iur h oi hls..eIa, a f7oun ut o t oni. ant how it Was 0lalM td, Niee tll ordin ary rem ledies at law had failed to rd him reliqef that his roseeution and ponvieton was In vio ation an atreetnent betweenj the gnVein ment of Louisana and that of the United btats. te denied that any each tlgremefnt had ever been mud oh the part of the Nicholls government and he olalmed to know whereof hte spoke. iut had any one assumed to enter into any such birgaln, either on behalf of the United 81ates or t oe State, no matter how high the Contoctllng parties, he repudiated their authority to bind the people of title Btate, who weres alone cooerned. The resolution of the lastPesilon, referred to In the resolutions, were afsed by the ( eneral Assembly in a s drit of kindlln s , and to pssuae a treat and bitter popular feeling ; but in pas ing th mthe Legila ture had not assumed, nor adt te powert b rogate or embarrass In any way, the right of the people to pro acute anf a all person(.who may lave vlolatrdth crl nteal.W uol tene s'a'utel t books of the taete, The offensethe members of the Returning Board staed charged with is not a plltlcal offense, but it is a vlolation orf the ptial law, the crime Of f-rgery, This is t ile trim t of wh oh Anderson has been convicted, atud he had to learn for the flrst time that orgery was a political offense, Hs trial had ben a fair one in all reeeeate, codndeted with ll the formalities of laW, and he had beengiven the beneft of every presumntion favorable to imself that the la etallsesand tho pre uttnion mustnet nee had t een fairly convieted, and so itwould remain until the con trary was proved and eroven before the proper tribunal and by the methods the law supplies. It was a matter that concerned the people of Louislana alone whether they should brlng her otiminals to justice. The people of no other ttate has anything to do with it and anyu iter ference on their part or on that of the a *overnment with the ilternal affairs of ti tate would deserve and provoke nothing but resentment as an imbertiient imeddliii. The Sate is with the cour a d there it mus be de ded. If Anderson has been Con tt viao lation of the constitution of the United States, he has his remedies, and thtehe muut seek as other convlctJed ersons doa nd no bargain has ever been Imade to whlic he can appeal to es cape the just rewards of his tetlme. GOo. Warmoth. In reply, said that it had not been his intention to dlsense the uestlon until it had been reported upo byihe Jud icar Committee, but after what Mr. Jonas had sald he felt calld upon to sette the other side of the question. If there ad been any agreement as charged, and he must say as was generally be lieved, it should be observed, He believed that uoh agreeent as sad a t se tweeninidividuals, If it ie ae that the NaoitIho governtnent had ledged itl to namnesty for l ast "'poliitta condua '-a-n the sota with Chch the remr e s ood a d wets oeytlt -l political totidtct'ý-then a breau hoffath adbeen committed in their proaeet on, He remembered the ttme when these ritolutions tmased and the i st& atted their passage, It was when the Paiad. gov ernment was in actual existence, and blood shed aond violence were ally threatened. SIe understood that h.ly had been drawn y a disting.lshe D mocratie member t Congress, and that their bturtose had been to assure the suppoferd of the Paek rd government and the people of the eouatry hat there should be no persecutioh for the o I otical eodittOf the ppponeuts of tte itheii iovernment, It auld not be possible that thy Were meant simply as a deoeption to get those pertsons into th- power of the Nicholls govern ment with the dellbdsate pu.9pose of voelating the pledges they contain, These resolUtIops were as mtuch the law of this State as was the tatute making forIteo y a orime, whiob the geh lomana eta was violate,. And what doest hist aw say? Itpledges in the plainest terms that the Nicholls government Would disoontenance li prossentiaes for atnst political contduot. I , does not oover these 0ases, What does it oean-what practical effeot does it have? Does it simply mean that eublicans Would be allwed tO live if they remtualed In Ltulefiana t that they shoult not be killed for having been nemberts of the tepubltian parly? NIo, it meant no such nonsense. It meant that all the supportere of the Packart government should be assured imintmulty agalnst trosecntion for l plintoal offenses committed by them. Yes, and this was the construetlon out upon It by the Demooratio pross an sembers of the Legislature at the tloe. Th ieaturning Board was nothit. to him, but nhe id believe in stand. Ingnp to "'bargans"--if you will, Your grnd tries had at, and yet no Inditments had been found against these men. The fifth sat and refusead it ndltt them But as soon as it adjourned a distriot at taerst files an in foration d unaer instrUo t ons from Tilden's headqaarters that an exam. pie must be made in idusiana. This looked ery like ers ton, hen how hd the ry been drawn-Xe lot? No. It was publioi, chart- 'that this jury had been packed for osvleoton and it was commonl believed that It '.d been Selected to convict. This looked very ke persecution. Again, the information had been allowed to be amedd to oure a fatal de fect-a most unheardf thins., This looked very like ersecution. And how had the var diet been o-btained? It was asserted by one of the jrymen t btt he had been tricked Into agreen t. by false rep resenttions as tto the eet the recommention to mercy. This locke vry lite persecution. Mr. Leonard t.aught the majorat in t is Bouseo wed it to temselves to nass the resole. n er grave charga had been made and ty shruld not rst under such imputations, Letihe $8udilary Committee examine into the matter and report. Mr. Wine thought the construction placed upo the lguga of the re olutlens of last yea b Warno aur. There was not a worde ntem to justify the Ide that immunity or actual orime was meant The gentleman from Plaquemiles could not have been familiar wit! crimlnal practice or he would not have stated that the amendment of an Information was un heard qe . It was a very eolpmn procedure. As to the information being filed by the istrict Attorney, it was the dutyof that offieer to file It if he conceived that the rand Jury had failed intis duty. Mr. MeiCrioe, of West Felloiana, then took the fi0dr ndesad: r..peaker, I r t, with te honorable gon gto eman fromm add (Judg Ws. that this res ojution qhoul4 have been introduced into this ouse; bu,. since it has been introduced I will not suffer the statements made upon this nloo ý ( e t~ntratdte , .but before I proeed uherI will notice the remarks from n tleiman from CddoI ( r. Leonard), He says he passage of this resolution wilt "rolilve the emoorafin party of the State ou isiana rom the imputation of a violsaloa of their lth," of their pledgee, et~. ,he Democrat Conservative party o-f Loul.siaa does not esireto be relieved' of sash an imputation. r. they repudiate such an imputti, and url iti baiefroln whence it cane with the scorn it merits. I speak for myself and the Demo. atle-onservative party of Louisiana when I. say voted for the resolutions ,passed April 20, P7 with a full knowledge of their purport and inteat. Sir, we were told by those who spoke, as it were, for the President, that charesof brutal outrage, druelty and violence had been made against the people of Louisiana, and the fear of the North was that these oppresslon' and out rages would be praticed upon the Republicans of the State of Louisiana in revenge, and under the influence of the violent exeltement caused by the late struggle; and that those stories, though not true, had been spread in a thousand ways before the people of the whole United States. The pledge was sought and obtained from the government of the Stat of Louisiana. as represented by the General Assembly with the Governor to place upon record the deter mination of the people of the State to discoun tnnance everything that resembled persecution for political principles-not prosecution for criminal violation of the statutes of the State, which was expressly precluded from the scope and tenor of the resolutions, Sir, the Demo orati'-Conservative party gave these pledges willingly, headtily. for the reason that there never wa' the romotest idea or determination in their minds to persecute Republicans for their political principles. Never did the mem ber of the General Assembly vote or pledge themselves to refrain frm prosecuting criml nals violating the statutes of the State. Such a pledge they would have scorned to make, even as the price of their idbertios. M-r. Jonas arose to reply to a question asked by the gentleman from Piaqusmines. He had asked what the resolutions of last year meant, if they did not pledge the immunity of the r - turning Board from prosecution-for what of fensas was absolution given and to what of fenders? He answered him, that a political offense was beingeommitted by Mr. Packard and each and every individual that supported him, so long as they maintained their contumacious opposition to the lawful government of the Stale.Ul'ackard was guilty of such offending, as were the poli.emen who guarded him, the legis lators who remained by him, and these resolu tions merely said that for this they should go free. It did not say to the official who had' robbed the people that he should go free, to the defaulting tax collector that he should go free: to the thief and perjurer that he should go free to the forgerer the mur derer or the assassin that he should go free. To none of these was immunity pledged, nor could any bargain protect such criminals had it been made-which he denied. The gentle man spoke of political bargains that were as binding as those between individuals. Had polities got so low, so corrupt as to admit of bargains that were sacred to protect such rimi nals? No the suggestion was disgraceful. Polities, he had been taught to believe, dealt with great qnestions of State polity, internal mnprovements, commerce, political economy, statecraft and constitutional law. If it had come to onhe disgraceful uses seue bargain Co i implied, t tbemh A li graed, $o muen Vge not hatbed wit a which b rny onstftMOtl Of, could be tefzed bolitlol Th wre charged with mutilating Xublio records, with making fake return s, with for ger rbo not an Indly duanut the people of whole tate. It wa never meant thatthe res utl oisreferedf to should condone such of r. ~tush-on the floor-desired to remind $he Houlse that the debate had taken a wider range than was justifiable. He would not follow In the ilne of assertion of wentle en of his.noW tfarty who hai preceederitm. b ut, when t¢i time came for him to speakle ehoitld give the o a orld feaessly, the construo ion p|tae b1y hitmself on trhloPsolutlins of lanst session He did not wish his opinions to be in ferred from aught that had been said to-day by others, He had said all thea was necessary upon this ccaesion, and yiel led the floor to the gentleman from Plaqgemines (Warmoth) to take what course jOwc c. .. Gov. Warmoth asked that the resolutions go over. THm CONSTITUTIONAL AMENNDtMNT5 were called up by Judge Lyons, who moved the passage of the se3ond of the amendments pro posed in tie Henate resolution. Mr. Voorhies reminded the House that the amendment offered by him was ti be recon sidered. upon which he asked a vot,, The amendmtent was rej ted--aes 75, noes 93. Mr. Leonard moved the adoption of the amendment offered by him yesterday abolish ing I exiseting monopolies and inhibiting the sib iihment of others, r, Keetin wanted to know some of the in .titutlone included amonu the monopolies. It the lettery company was among them, he was opposed to the mmndment, lit was proposed to allow the sale of lottery tickets at all he was In favor of the perpetuation of the Howard Mr. Singleton said it was not proposed to abolish the lottery, but to refer that question to the people. they would decide it, and the gen tleman would be absolved from all responsi bility. Gov. Warmoth aidl that there were other monopolies in this tath besides the lottery company, ralnst which this amendment was directed. The State could not get along without monopoli s. They may be evils but they were ekxeedingly necessary evlk. The city could hot hayve gas or water without the granting of exclu sve privileges. Every railroad that was getablighed was a mhnlopoly to the extent of its franchises, Was the State to be prevented here after from fostering such institutions and granting them each franchises as were neces ary to the atbllo Welfare, in order to shorten et of the Ittery comr pany? In spite f the hillbppio oh fisrlend from (.iddo, .ng and had yet many monopollee,and he attributed or commercial greatness to her great mon odoly-the East India Qompany. The amendment was lost. Yeas ON, noes 4(. Mr, Lyons then called up amendment No. 2. as asse dby the Senate, to stand as amendment Mr. Blidger moved to amend soeas to reduce the salary of members of the General Assembly from i to S4. Lost. Mr, Leonard moved to amend so as to limit the biennial session of the Legislature to thirty days instead of ninety, and to strike out the clanse llrWiin. l the session to be prolonged by a two-thirds vote. -r. Bridge as ked what w.S the object in lir Itlbg thele eOSi nl to ttioitt days when members were .hid a salary He thought the amend ment had bette. as presented. IOn motiontof Mr. Bridger the amendment of Mr. Leoard was laid on the table Mr. Wise moved to amend by allowing a per dieti of St and aotual tavtelina exreuses, and li sting the session to Si ty tayd. JIost. The amendment as then adobted as It came from the Senate. Ypas 101. nays 5. The third a endment was taken up. Mr Leonard moved to amend by addting a provision that the Qeneral Assembly shell not create any new ofme except by a two-thirds vote, and mlaking all offices with a salary -bov toto elective by the people, except notaries ble isand j udges of the Supreme Court. The ai-endmett was lost. Mr. Lyons moved the amendment as it came from the Bena'e, and called the previous ques tion. Tile ameadment was adopted, Yeas so, nays 15. i., Leonard offered as amendment a the fol lowing: The monopoly known as the Louisiana Lot. tory Company, created by oact No. 23 of less, is -- olished. The House adjourned, A- CUAfD . o CITY CONSOLIDATED BOND MATTER Abstract from the decision rendered by Judge Woods, in the cause of Rosalie Mannhaut and others vs. the city of New Orleans and others: "I am of opinion that the act of 1852, above mentioned, contains a contract vald and binding on the city, and that the bondholders are entitled to exact the substantial perform ance of the contract, I have so hold upon the former hearing, of the case, Maenhaut et al. vs, the city of New Orleans 2 Woods 108. The thirty-seventh section of the act of 1852, constituting, as it does, a contract between the city and the bondholders, stands unffected by any subsequent legtslation that seeks to impair or repeal its prmoisions, But the rem edy of the complainants to enforce their con tract is clearly not in equity, but at law, by the recovery of a judgment on their coupons and bonds, and by the writ of mandamus commanding the 1hvy and collection of the tax reqhired by law. The relief at lat is plain, adequlte and complete, and equity can not be resorted to." oo AnSTArrrit from the dtecleon rendered by Judge Billtngs In the case of Morris Ranger vs. the Mayor and Common Council of New Orleans. dated "But among the statutes of the State with reference to the city of New Orlians, and among the general statutes of the State, are found acts that give the absence of any par ticular means of payment ti a city ordi nance creatin -a d. -spe-ta-sci.gnift.ance "The act of 1852, 1)To. 51. entitled 'An act to consolidate t.e city of Netw Orleans, and pro vide for the gove ent,' etc., section 87, page 54, contains the fd winf provision: ' 'And no ordnance (of the city of New Or leans) roeating a debt or loan shall be valid unless for some single object or work dis tinctly specified therein, and unless such or. dinance shall provide ways and means fot the unctual payment of running interest duri the whole time for which said debt or loan shall be eontract(d, and for the full and punctual discharge at maturity of the capital borrowed or the debt incurred. " o ADSt'BAtfff from the report of Judge T. Wharton Collens, "special master in chancery," approved by Judge Wocl. o o "XI. On all points of inquiry generally, I report: '1, That the act of 1852 was asslgned as an irrevocable ch'1ok and safeguard for the bene fit and advantage of the holders of the con solidated bonds. No debt could be contracted except according to its provisions. The hold ers of the bonds are entitled to precedence in the collection of taxes on lands and slaves, and to the suppression of any demand for payment of any subsequent debts that would interfere with or pirevent the payment of the consolidated debt, unless such subsequent debt was contracted upon compliance with the terms and conditions of the act of 1855." IN THE CASE OF MAENTIAUT VS. NEW ORILEANS, before the United States Circuit Court for Louisiana, Judge Woods, in the written roA sons assigned by him for judgment, uses the following language: "In the argument upon the motion for in Junction it was claimed by counsel for the city that the act of 1852 was in violation of the constitution of 1845 which was in force when that act was pased, and which declared (artt cldoe 127) 'that axation shall be equal and uni form throughout the State.' The provision of this act of 1852, which is deemed to contra vene this constitutional requirement is this: 'The rate per cent of said tax in each munici pality shall be In proportion to the indebted ness of each.' I cannot see any conrlict'be tuween the law and the constitution. As at pres ent advised, I do not think the objection to the law well founded." French'china decorated tea and dessert ser vices. of the latest styles, at E. Offner & Oo.'s, 174 OCanal street. The ladies of New Orleans can count much sureroon getting the latest fashions by a visit to Eyrich's bookstore, 10o Canal street. than in the most fashionable millinerr establishment in the city. Eyrich has all the literature of fashion, Hsarer's Bazar. Frank Leslle's Ladies' Magazine, Godey's. Peterson's Ladies' lMaga sine, etc., any one of which will save our ladies all the expenses of a dressmaker. Ladies' magazines. howevir, are but a small portion of his stock, as he has all the latest pictorials and newspapers as well, and is up to the daivin news as wedl as in fashionse. o. TIE DELLOCq-l4OBLOM CJASE. Eleventh Daly' Proceedlsng -Argumentrt of Mr, llaitlF for the Prhsee.lion, antd Maljor Austin for the Defense. Onl yestorday the arguments commenced in the .United States Circuit Court, the opening speech for the prosecution being made by ARHISTrAN'P ATTORINEY (lINEnIrAhl lhAIRll. To the iourt- Mr. Blair read the act of March 3, 1863, sect;ion 3, under which law the ctlaimant nmit he the owner of thile cotton n.t the thne of capture andi entitled to the pro e'tvls. h'ire law pernits two kinds of owner ship- general And bnspelal. If the defendant made , lis claim as general owner when he was only the special owner, it was a fraud; if the deflendant claimed to be the general owner when he was only the assignlo of a sle al owner, it was a fraud' and if lie made claim for the proceeds when 1ie was only enti tled to recover for advances made, It was a fraud. To the Jury 1 stated whon I commenced two weeks ago that we would prove, to you affllirmatively the fraudulent nature of the claim presented to the Court of (Cflline in 18R, for which judgment was rendered In May 1874. Out of the 18Rl bales there were 1013 bales, or 8-9 of the whole as to which we have shown that Belioeq, N4oblomn & Co. had no right to enter the claim, or make the statements which Roy originally made in support of the chlini that Henry Peychaud had no right to repeal those statements in the amended petition filed by him as syndlle in March, 1874, and that he had. no right to recover against the govern ment on account of the cotton set forth in the petition, Mr. Blair then took the tabular statement (flied with the several petltilon) of the cotton for which the cluin was made, anel went through the same in detail, showing by the undlsputed testimon y (ft nineteen unimpeach ed witnesses that 1l813 bales olf the cotton sptcilfled did inot belong to Belloei.q Noblom & Cuo, at the time of capture, andt that they had no right or title in the same. Hie showed that of the 1851 bales claimed, certain 82 bales formed no part of the judgment of the Court of Claims, and that for this reason the prose cutlon had offered no evidence of the fraud iu volvedl in them. Ho that out of the 1851 bales claimed only 158 bales, forming three lots had, through the non-attendance and death of wit nesses, been omitted in the proof of the fraud ulence of the Bellocq-Nobiom claim. He argued that while the court would charge thalit "a man must he presumed into cent until proven guilty," there are stages in the progress of a cause when the burden of proof shifts, and that when the prosecution has shown-- as lihe thought it had. -that the deo flndant in this case was the plaintiff in the one alleged to be fraudulent, and that nothing could he done In the matter tof the prosecution of that cause without his knowledge and ap proval, then the burden of proof shifts upon him and he must show his innocence by transt ferrhig the responsibility to some one else, and sithowing that he was misled in the acts by which he participated in the fraud, Mr. Blair further argued that if a paper in connection with the case be signed by Henry P'eyohaud, which paper affected the judgmantn of the court in his favor he is plresuunli to know the contents of snuch paptor, is responsi ble for the truth of its statmnents, and is liable both civilly and crhinmnally. Thedefense haus Introduced no testimony at all to show any right, title or Interest vested in Bollokx, Noblom & Co., and no attempt has been made to impeach the testimony of the govertnment witnesses establishlng the fraud ulent nature of the claim for 16111 of the 1851 bales, for which the original claim was made, though they have producned many witnesses to show the bad character of Bouchard and the good character of P'oychaud. In 1808, aftier Peychaud had been syndlic of the estate of Bellocq, Noblom & Co. two years, one MoGuire filed the original petition in the Court of Claims, and Mr.. Pierre Roy, a menorn her of the firm, aceoopted, without question- and without examination of the books of the firm to see whether the allegations of the pe tition were correct- the statements of the pe tition filed by Mctuire and swore thereto; and on May 19i, 1871, five yearS after the iti tutlot of the suit, and four years after he lihad entered into his .ontract with IBouchard, Pey chaud for the first time appeared as the plain tiff before the Court of Claims. In March, 1874, eight years after his ap pointment as syndic, Peychaud swears to the amended and third petion, aoepting Me uhire's and Roy's table so far as it beneilted his case, but rejecting the allegations of Roy, who had been a member of the firm, when they conflilcted with the new aspect which he was ablout to give to the claim for Mc(Guire and Roy only asserted a lien for advances, and claimed their amount, while Peychaud alleged that BellOeq, Noblom (& Co. had re duced the 1851 bales to possession, prior to the fall of New Orleans, and increased the claim from $121.763 97, the amount of advances, to $400,O0, tihe net prooleds. Mr. Blair argued that the omission of Val lade's name from the receipt in settlenielnt which Poychaud took from Bouchard aad Mrs. Bernard in 1874, while the name of every other recipient of the fund was carefully set out, demonstrated that Poychaud did know of Vallade's contract for one-third of the amount realized for 206 bales of cotton claimed by Billocq, Noblott & Co. and omitted Val lade's name fIrni the settl'ement because Val lade had been a witness, and to prveont the eon elusion resultlng from this appropriation to Vallade that Peychaud had bich aware of the Vallade contract. Mr. Blair then insisted tb the jury that th amount of this allowiance Toi Vailade was circumstantial evidence of Poychaud's knowl edge of thi contract of September, 1872. That agreeooent set out that certaidn specified 261 bales enumerated in the tabule,, and clahimted by Peychand, belonged to Vallado, and it pro vidhd that of the proeedsl of those 268 bales Vallade should receive one-third. The Court of Olaims rojected, in its judgment, 31. of these bales, and fixed the avorage valuo of the cot ton at$192 per bale, and Mr. Blahir arguod that by only one procenss of calcoulation could the $14,848 set out in the settlement be reached, as follows: 268 bales, less a1 rejoeted, leaves 232, which, at $192 per bale, makes $44,44, one-thirdt of which is $14,848. He also reviewed the testimdiny of Mr. Con rad here, and hisa deposition taken on the ninth Meptember, 1874, hearing upon the samne point, urging tiat, this evldencm established that Val ade's interest was known to Pey chalud prior to February, 1874, at which date Vallade swore that he had no interest, and prlr to March, 1874, when Peychaud swore that the cotton eclonged to Bellocq, Nobiom & (Jo., and had been sol od by them before the fall of New Orleans. As to who it was that ulupeol or rilislnd l'eychaud into mnking the petitiin end swearing that Vallad,'a Ilnterst, was known to PL'ychaid prior to February, 1874,. at whih dlalte Valladeo swore he had no interest, and prior to March, 1874. when l'oy chaud swore that the cttton belongedl to Bol !eg, Noblom & (J,.. and had been A~izedj,y them before the fall of New Orleans, Mr. BIlair said that the tcase was bare of any u'lideneo 1.,' show that any one had so dlupedl him, anid t h I it followed that he was the a.tive , mo,,vr, ., the matter himself, and the rlairn ii meg frou. I ulent, and Peychaud aware thereof. IbI imli'l mont stands and the accused it shown I, I,,L gillity. The orialnai petition, settlnrg foimll h .i~nk,13 the right to reduce the cotton to pf-)(.olo, was only for advances nmade. On March 3, 1574 GeorgeTaylor tiled a motion in the court of claims for leave to amend the petition so as to claim the proceeds, and on March 19, 1574, Henry Poychaud swore to the petition as amended, to make claim for proceeds. Mr. Blair assertkwi that the motive for this act of perjury was the difference between his (Pey chaul s) commission as syndie on $121,000 and the commission on the judgments for pro ceeds, amounting to $296,064. As to the employment of Dent, to prevent the taking of an appeal by the Attorney Gen eral, and the allowing of Taylor and S'leward to carry off between them $66,000, when it is shown that Peychaud considered their com pensation too great, Mr. Blair urged that it was done to cover up the track of the con spirators as quickly as possible, and thereby to prevent any further investigatation by the government of the fraudulent nature of the claim, and the guilty knowledge thereof on the part of the defendantsonow on trial. In support of this he called attention to the tes timony of C. M. Conrad, deceased, to the effect that Peychaud resisted Taylor and Sward's claim for fees until he heard a rumor that an o alleg ot of frautrd was to be filed with the Attorney fenl, and theu) PurOyCtharud hastel tetle with Taylr, IHe thba added that it ad been his endeavor to make a plain --perhape a dry-statement of bare fats,. Peychaud drew from the treasury a large surn of money to which he had no right, after he had had eight long years in which to inform himself as to whetler the claim was a just and corrrect one. There is an assertion of a missing book, lbut that book went into the hands of Mr. i'ey chaud, as syndic, and it is for him to show what hsas betome of it. This he has not dlone, and when tho defense placed Mr. Jules No bior on the stand, heo belng th first to say anything about a missing book, they were careful not to so question him as to bring out where the book was what it showed and whether or not that ~ook was examined by Peycehau.d in orler to verify the statement lpon which thme claim was fom.led l bfore swearing to the petition which contained that statemrnent. IReferring to the case as directed against - H. H. SHANNON, Mr. i]lair explained Mhannon's position as united tHtates (Co1rismmlsrisier the rmanner of trving cauises in the Court of Claims, and of taking testimony before a omrnmissioner. lie nrgued that tihe charge of conspiracy was estbllishedl by the intihonf, as to hIis fie of $50 I0, contingent p,,on the suIceessful Issue of the prosecution, by dloingl which he bar' tored away his judlichil dignity, by becoming a co-plaintiffl in a lcause in which tstintioriy was to lbe taken before himself in his official caaclit.y. T'hus being one of the conspirators, he be came responsible for the acts of ealch and all of his colleagues, anldi, as so responsible, the indictment must stand and a verdict of guiilty must be rndlerod. }le spoke of the fact of tlhc sllghtness of qartuain evidence, and showe'l its character a.s circmsn tantial, amii how evi donce of that nature is eventually the strong est of all evid.enoe, alil closed by renliniling the jury that in weighing the cvitldenlo auwl formrrl a conclusion as to the gusilt or Irnno cence of the a(cn(sol, they mlust remember the sacred(ness of their own oaths, rut aside all blas or rejudclle for or aganinst the defendant, disregard all pers fonal fling, and reltder their Verdict simply according to the law as laid down Iby the court and the facts as adduced on the frial. o o Mr. Bllair was followed by MAJOR J. M. KUSTIN. (rounseil for Mr. Shannon, wio, spoke asi ol lows: Mryl if prlear Four lonor arnd (,rnllrrmen of thef Jryl-r Tihe gelntlman who openerd this case for ihn governmlnent in iris etotnlliunt gave you a glowing descrription of the benign ptoliey of thire government of the United IStatI' tow rld thie people of this sectrion since the late war. lie plctured to you the mercy that had boen extended to those who had been led astray in the heat of confllot, and described to you the juhi lee anndt millennlurn that followed the humane policy by which all of these suf fering people wore restol'od to theilr rights of property tacd pnr'ion guaranteed by the c.on stitutlion. lnde.'(, lhs eloquent enthusiasttn led him so far beyond the pale of fact and his tory that he pro.lalrned lo you tirhe startling proposition that the mrefiful course of tho govt'rnmrent had been unparalleled hi the his torv of nations. You, gentlemen, are too well aware of the history of this section to require me to enter into particullar refutation of this astounding and reckless fictlon. But, gentlemen, the facts of this case amlon are replete and the re cord tee.rns with ghastly evidl(tenes of thant hu mane, generous anrd merclfull policy the gon tleman who preceded ime so loudly declaimed aiou t. The peor old men who were brought here from the counntry to tustify for the prosecu tion in this case are living witnesses of the mercy and overwhelming kindness of the gov ernment. They told you how tire ldashing squadrons of Pope and the stalwart infantry rt Banks scourred the parishes of Mt. Landry and Avoyelles, and despoiled them, against their solemn protests. of the last remnant of property upon which they were to subsist. They told you how the army of quarter mastor wagons, guarded by the soldiery of this merciful go nverrnurl, swooped down upon their gin- touses and barns and emptied them of their contents without warning or compen sation. Gentlemen, the law officer of the gov ernment is unfortunate in his assetions; there has been nond of that mercy which the glowing zeal of his Imagination has pictured to you. On the contrary, the dol(ors of the courts of the government have been closed for twelve long years against thousands and tens of thousands of just and righteous claims of these people, and remain closed to-day. For the sake of the gentleman, for the sake of the government, for the sake of history, I wish it had been as the gentlerman asserted. Major'Austln then went over the charges of the indictment, and argued that the testi nony adducedl did trot corminOt either Shabnon or Peychaud with the offensds charged therein. He argued thrt, while the connmis stoner of the Court of Claims was an officer of the court, nevortheless the law made it in cumbent upon the claimant to pay for the testimony taken in his behalf, He cited see titmr 1085 of the Revised Statutes of the United States which proYtde:; "When testimony is taken for the olaimant, the fees of the Com missioner before whom the testimony Is taken and the cost of the commission and notito shall be paid by such claimant." Under this sewtion it was compethet for the commiseloner to make any arranghnent with the claimant he chose; that tire Assistant At torney General was wrong in saying a com missloner was like a jlrdge. Much was not the case. A judge received asalary from the gov ernment. A commissioner was like the clerk of court; while the law provided for fees, he oevrhtieless HcOuld make tny -rrroguemetta with litigants he chose to, Su pos alitlgant were to come to Mr, Woolfiey, tle clerk of. thin co)urt, with a case, and tell him it was a good claim, but he was poor and did not have the money required by law for a deposit, and that he would give him a hundred dollars if he won the tase; would that re wrong; would not Mr. Woolfley have a right to make such an arrangement? Certainly he would. Shannon is in the saime positidn. He made an arrangement contingent on the success of the claim--there was nothing in it contrary to law; he had a right to nake it. Major Austin then reviewed tire evidece of various witnesses to show that there was noth ing to implicate either Shannon or PoychaRri in the charges of the lndicntment, and said that the documentary evidence proved nothing if rot linked together by the testimony of Adolphe Bouchard. He described Bouchard's enrnoction with the case; his assot. ation with the notorious John F. Barr'ett, Cunningham and others; his interest in the claims now einding; his attelmpt to blackmal Peychaud, Taylor and others; the promise of the Dis trict Attorney, Bleckwith, to relieve him from prosecution If he would testify, his unwilling ness to become a prosecuting witness, etc. Major Austin then clo:serd as follows: The charges against these honorable gentlimcen rcst upon the testimony of this infamous rrlan Bouchard--the man who sat for throee in ye upon that witness stand and proclaimed his own dlishonor. In all my life, gentltmen, I never listened to such a tale of turpiturde; in all my life I have never seen a man pro claim his own infamy and degradatibn with joy and unction as this witness did. A smile of sn.atisfanrtion stolo over his face as he narra ted hisr jr)lrt in mrost repellant and revolting tra-nnsractrons. And, as that holy father Siulilearu told you, he gloried in the concep tion of the stratagem to prevent an appeal by the employment of Jfudge Dent to influence tihe Attorney General. Gentlemen, the most despicable wretch that crawls on God's green foot-stool Is the "informer." In all times, since the history of human treachery first begun he has boenrreprobated and despisni. Aristcilo speaks of him as loathsome, and Tacitus characterizes him as the pest and vcr min of society. Far back in the history of the former Vene tia IRepublic aI brass lion, hollow anir with open mouth, stoodxl in front of the Doge's pal ace to receivo communications from sples and informers, upon which the government based prosecutlons against its beost citizens; and to the shamne of history be it said, convictions were procured upon such evidence by the hired udges of the governrment. Sucn pyactlces, elemtnen, belong to the barbaric past and nd no sanction in this advanced and enlight ened age. (Can you, gentlemen, upon the evidence of this consort and companion of thieves and blackmailers-this man who has bh~en shiown to be utterWy unworthy of belief, who sits there by the prosecution reeking with perjury-can ycu, uplon such testimony, strike down and d r.stry the character of mni whoe. Ilvs .havo jriwln, ray.withohut a stain, without a re iroaohlt SUPRLIME COURT. The following eases are fixed for PRIIOAY. FEBRUARY 15, 1558. No. 6471. SuIoccssioR of Franrco l'arke hltler. No. 6.:1. J. W. Montgomery vs. Louisiana Levae Company. No. 0919. t)aet of Louisiana vs. David Siess. No woo, ( inio n Hi.es vs. lDvid Bless. No. ;t692, Geo. M. Klein vs. Mrs. Lucy Buckner et, at's. No r;925. Uriah French vs,. Toblas Rlgby and sheriff No. .9;3a. Margaret Duoro vs. E. Waggaman at al. No 9613, Mrs, . C. Oliver. Widow iletveotlo. vs (. lDecUir. shiriff, ht al. No. a09,9. Huece(sslon of re. M. lIlams, Sr. No. ,51. Wmin. H. Boult vs. Jerome Harpy A Metornr, No-, 139. Alfred L. Bass vs. W. R. Messick, shrrlff, at al. No. osat. J. W. Montgomery vs. Ed. H. Wilson at al. No. mn194. Citizens' Bank tof al. vs. FI. T. Austin. No. 0950. tRate of Loulsana vs. Ben. Weasel andl t. Will ams. No. 6950, Late of Louisiana vs, Washington Taswell, Wilson Kodley and Zeko Hall. Nro, il;Re. Stonession of lJames W. Pipes. No. 61r6. Rose L. (louxl and husband vs. Jas. Monela. No. 6097. Matilda J. Bowie at al. vs. John R. Weatherly. No. ;i698. James Luok vs. succession of W. I. Benton. No. N,ine. State of Louisiana vs. Wi. Wells. No. 6970. John A. Klein vs. E. M. Kramer, No.1 971. Sumcoasion of D. 1'. Jackson. No. 8972. Lltteberry B. Clarkson vs. Mrs. Min erva Hparrow and hubanld, No. 6977. Acculila Moliilvil vs. EIlsabeth M. Taylor and husband. No. 0974. Aha P. Nugent and wife vs. Dora L. frll~enith and husband. No. (,rc. C. O. . tewart vs. F. P. Mix. sheriff, at al. No. r976. State of Louisiana vs. John J 'hnson. No. 0977. State of Louisiana vs. Rlhard Smith, alias Jick Smith. No. 1i978. State of Louisiana vs Bedford Burns. No. r9n0. State of Louislana vs. Richard Ilall. No. ;c4i. State of Louisiana vs. I. . J. NIlol, .Jasper Bowman and EtIert ('utrer. No. 5916. James M. Alexander vs. Wm. Ten nant and wife. 1o. 6!98. Schmidt & Ziegler vs. Calebh~Yndnil at alt. No. (;985, 1. and A. Soule vs. Norwood's ad* ministrator and sureties. No. 695€. Joshua U. Thorns vs. B. W. Hewell et al. No. Oe95. Lehman, Abraham & Co. vs,gMrs. Yeto Levyr and hushand. No. oeyu. D. W. Howell, tutor, vs. Chas. McVea. exeuontor, No. 13957. Clinton and Prltt Hudson Railroad Company vs. J. J Oscar Howe, tax collector. No. n09R. Succeaslon of E. H. Loppelman: No. (;99. Warrick Tunstall vs. parish of Madi son. No, 6ol9. Pollee Jury QConcordia parish vs. 9rg6o M. Davis. )ettr Young at Al, No. 6n92 Heirs of Jacob Hoover vs. Z. York and E, J. Hoover. eeoutors. No. .993. Howard MoKnight vs. parish of Grant. So. 994. Sunocession of Robert C. Ilynson. No. 69. Suoession of Mary Hynson. No. 699t. E. 8. Eskridge and husband vs. E. D. 0 Farrar. agent, and Mary E. Ogden St al, vs. heirs and nitlversal leogatees of .John Perkins. No, 8997. 81las H. Cooper ant wife vs. John T. Rhodes. No. 6oa$. Walter C. Compton vs. Wmin. L. Sand ford ani sheriff, No. )999. Succession of Stephen Duncan Lin ton. No. i700. tateo of Loutsiana vs. Abraham Bass. 0.7001. Edward J. Gay A Co.. vs. G. A. Daigre et al. No. 7002. Isaac D. Brown vs. Joseph Beason, admini.trator. No. 7093. Mrs. E. Blake at al. vs. the minors Frank Kearney and Anna E. ljake. No. 7004, Bon, Corson vs. G. W. Hamilton at al. 0:o. 7006. E,. Maihiot vs. Robert A. Pugh. ;o. 700(. Barah F. Bradford vs. A. iD. Lafargue, tax collector, at al. No. lo17. Virginia Bash vs. Britton & Moore. 7o0. 7oo. J. Matt. Wells, Jr.. executor, vs. Fan n e . arid Ida Wells. No. 7009. Mrs. Caroline Forrester at al. vs. Moseos Mann. No.o1018. Mrs. A. A . iBlhardson vs. Moses Mann. No. 7014. School Board vs. Emile L. Weber Nto.. 7091. J. P. Smith vs. parish of Madison. No. 7010. Enos N. Cramer vs. succession of Albert F. Crane. No. 7017. Scott & Williams vs. the sheriff at al. No. 7015, H. R. Wade vs. II. J. London and sheriff. No, Q719. Mrs. Ellen G. Patrick vs. Lawrence L. Butnr, testatiehtary executor. No. 4598. Mrs. Lucy L. Mann vs. Benjamin L. Mann. No. 7020. C. D. Favrot ot al. vs. the parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 7021. Mareellte Martine.. Widow Louis Borlinr. et al. vs. succession of Adolp h Vives. No. 70122. Julia A. Ventress, Individually and as testamentary executrix, vs. Isaac D. Brown 1o. 7l02. State of Louisiana vs. James V. White. No. 7024. William Blackie vs. J. & O. Arbour. No. 7026. Chism & Boyd vs. A. L. D. Conrad at als. No. 7026. Nalle & Cammack vs. A. L. D. Conrad at als. No. 7027. State of Loulstan.ess. George Brown. George Tennant at als. No. 7129. State of Louisiana vs. Israel Mor tison. No. 7090. James L. Cole at al. vs. Thomas La (bambre &, uO. at als. No. 7(1l1. Joseph V. Ledout vs, John C. Bur" ton. No. 7982. State vs. Elbert Faulk. No. 7033. Leopold Do Poret vs. A. L. Gusman t ais. No. 7034. Edward Well vs. Charles Hillbrn. No. 7.01. Marie Periine Evans and husband s.,Paynoe & arrison. No. 7osn. D. Rt. Carroll A Co. vs. Mrs. Lizmdl Hamilton at al. Post & Co. Intervenors. No. 7037. Huccession of Henry D. Shepperl. No. 7038. Mrs. 8. C. F. Logan vs. Hatlrriet Her bort at al. No, 7e Ann n, pear- t, WL., Jaikcon, administrator. J. Ktg intervenot. No. 7040. Mrs . J. Mitchell, .tutrix, vs. T. Hf. D'Armond. No. 7091. Mrs. Frances East and husband vs. McVes & Kernan. No. 7042. Town of I'laquemnes vs. Charles Reff. 0 No. 7051. Adam Dobel vs. J. M. Delavallade. ----*** -- sECONWD DISTRICT COURT. Nos. 40,136 and 40,137. Arthur and Simou Cahill were emancipated. No. 40,138. Succession of Edw. Kelly. No. 401,39. John chnoleder vs. August and Mary Schneider. -Suit for a partition. THIRD hISTRIT COURT. No. 25,168. Julia Rabi, widow of J. Pinta., at ale. vs. T. H. Handy, sheriff, et als.---Peti tioners pray for an injunction prohibiting de fendant from selling a certain piece of prop erty, part of which belongs to a minor. FIRST MUNICIPAL COURT. Gus Davidson, for assaulting and wounding Ham Stanley, was sent before the First I)s trict Court ndelr bonds of $500. John S. Cook, for stabbing and wounding Patrick Hdllivan, was sent before the Superior Criminal Court under bonds of $26()0. O- ----e-..- ....... OUR aILVER SUPPLY. How Much Sliver Can be Coined by the Mlnts. [.t. Louis Ilepublican.1 Prof. Linderman, director of the mint, gives it as his opinion that the mints are now able to coin $3 000,000 a month, and If the New Orleans mint were put in order it ;ould turn out $1,000,000 a month more, making $4,000 000 a month, or $48,000,000 a year, 'he first year after the passage of the Bland bill, he thinks the yield of our own mines would be $35,000,000 silver, and there would be $15,000, 00( received from Mexico, $5,000,000 from South America and $35,000,000 from Europe- making our total receipts of silver for the year $S.000 000. All this would be in the shape of bullion; but thire is an act, passed In 188r, which authorizes 'e treasury to receive bullion, gold and silver bars, stamped by the mint or assay office, and issue certificates In exehangc-these certnlc te.e to be receivable for duties. This would authorize the whole $90,000,000 silver product and import to be brought into use as coin or bullion and give the country the full effect of the bill at once. FouR HUNDRED AND FirrF BAL.s COTToN AT AuCrxox TuHs DAY-By Nash & Hodgaon, U:e tioneers, at 12 in., on the levee, head of Custom house street, from the wreok.of the steamer La Belle. Bee adjertisement. If you want any and all kinds o decorated French chlna, go to E. Offaf & Co.'s. 174 Canal street. 0 0 0