LOUISIANA. 



395 



pay the interest on its obligations, and is at 

 double if not treble the necessary expense, 

 owing to its inability to meet its curient ob- 

 ligations. The charter should contain definite 

 powers, less offices, and attach more responsi- 

 bility to the officials." The subject was taken 

 up by the members at an early day, and a joint 

 committee on the city charter was appointed 

 to receive propositions on the subject and to 

 prepare a bill to effect the necessary reforms in 

 the municipal government. A plan was intro- 

 duced into the Senate by Mr. Bacon, embra- 

 cing the leading features of a scheme submitted 

 by the " Property Holders' Association " of the 

 city. This provides that the powers of govern- 

 ment be vested in a mayor and six administra- 

 tors, two of the latter to be taken from the 

 first district of the city, two from the second, 

 and one each from the third and fourth dis- 

 tricts, while the mayor is to be chosen from 

 the city at large. The six administrators are 

 to form a council, presided over by the mayor, 

 and also to constitute the heads of the six ex- 

 ecutive departments of Finance, Commerce, 

 Improvement, Assessments, Police, and Public 

 Accounts. They are not chosen to preside over 

 designated departments, but are assigned by 

 the mayor after their election. The adminis- 

 trators must have been five years resident in 

 the State, and three years in the city, must be 

 thirty years of age, and qualified electors, 

 and must have taken the oath of office pre- 

 scribed in section 100 of the constitution. 

 (See ANNUAL CYCLOPEDIA for 1868.) Each 

 is to receive a salary of $6,000 a year, and is 

 required to give bonds in the sum of $100,000 

 for the faithful performance of the duties of 

 his office. The mayor is to have a general 

 superintendence and control over all the de- 

 partments, and receive a salary of $5,000. 

 The scope of the various departments is in- 

 dicated in general by the title, but the charge 

 of public education is placed under the depart- 

 ment of assessments. The administrators are 

 prohibited from having any interest, direct or 

 indirect, in the works or contracts of the city, 

 and from receiving any bribe for their official 

 action. The principal objection brought against 

 this measure was that it placed the government 

 of the city in the hands of too small a number 

 of persons. Among the amendments proposed 

 was one brought forward by Mr. Eay, a country 

 member of the Senate, for giving the Governor 

 of the State the power to appoint the first 

 mayor and council for the city, their term of 

 office to expire in 1872, after which the govern- 

 ment should be elective and the officials hold 

 their places for two years. The discussion on 

 this and other proposed alterations continued 

 at intervals until near the close of the session, 

 when the whole subject was postponed, and 

 will come before the Legislature of 1870. 



An act was passed, over the veto of the Gov- 

 ernor, incorporating the Ship Island Canal 

 Company and giving into its possession all the 

 funds and assets of the old Drainage Commis- 



sion of the Metropolitan District, which in- 

 cludes the parishes of Orleans and Jefferson, 

 to the amount of nearly $2,000,000. The ob- 

 ject of this company was the construction of a 

 canal from the Mississippi Eiver at Carrollton 

 to the bayous some five or ten miles distant, 

 and it received the drainage funds on the 

 ground that the drainage of the entire district 

 would be effected through this channel. This 

 fund had been raised by assessment on the 

 property to be benefited, for the special pur- 

 poses of drainage, and it was claimed that it 

 could not be diverted for the construction of a 

 canal, which might or might not prove practi- 

 cable for those purposes. The Drainage Com- 

 missioners under the old law refused at first to 

 give way to the new system, but an injunction 

 was obtained against them by the Canal Com- 

 pany, and, when the whole subject came before 

 the courts, the constitutionality of the new 

 law was sustained. The work of constructing 

 the new canal went on slowly through the 

 year, and in the mean time, by an amicable 

 agreement, the drainage of the city went on in 

 charge of the commissioners under the old law. 

 The act of the Legislature incorporating the 

 Ship Island Canal Company, and placing at its 

 disposal the drainage funds, was characterized, 

 by the political opponents of the majority in 

 that body, as a corrupt, scheme, detrimental to 

 the real interests of the cities concerned. 

 Another measure, against which similar com- 

 plaints were brought, was the act "to protect 

 the health of the city of New Orleans, to locate 

 the stock-landings and slaughter-houses, and 

 to incorporate the Crescent City Live Stock 

 Landing and Slaughter-house Company." This 

 law gives to the company which it incorporates 

 the sole right "to land, keep, or slaughter any 

 cattle, beeves, sheep, swine, or other animals," 

 at any place " within the city of New Orleans, 

 or at any point or place on the east bank of the 

 Mississippi Eiver, within the corporate limits 

 of the city of New Orleans, or at any point on 

 the west bank of the Mississippi Eiver, above 

 the present depot of the New Orleans, Ope- 

 lousas, and Great "Western Eailroad Company." 

 The privilege here mentioned is granted to the 

 proposed company, and forbidden to all other 

 persons, tinder severe penalties. This was 

 characterized as a gigantic monopoly, and it 

 was claimed, with great emphasis, that it was 

 carried through the Legislature by bribery and 

 corruption. After the 1st of June, when this 

 act went into effect, loud cries were made 

 against its provisions by the butchers of the 

 city and a large proportion of the citizens. 

 Finally an action was brought against the 

 company, and an injunction obtained on the 

 ground that the law was unconstitutional. 

 This view of the case was sustained by the 

 court, and the injunction made perpetual. The 

 ground on which the act of the Legislature 

 was pronounced unconstitutional was, that it 

 was inconsistent with the fourteenth amend- 

 ment of the Federal Constitution, and the first 



