Page images
PDF
EPUB

Act 63, 1896-R. S. 3990

DEPOSITS IN BANKS.

Act 63, 1896, p. 96.

AN ACT to authorize any married woman to deposit money or other funds in any bank of Louisiana, whether National or State bank, and to withdraw same from said bank without the authorization, assistance or intervention of her husband.

SECTION 1. That any married woman shall have the right to open accounts in the different banks of this State, whether National or State banks, and in savings banks, and deposit money, checks, notes and other funds therein, and to withdraw the same by check or otherwise and without the assistance or intervention of her husband in the same manner and under the same conditions as if she was a femme sole or unmarried woman.

Act 45, 1894.
Act 74, 1894.

p. 148.

May be appointed tutrix in certain cases, printed at p. 1814.
May subscribe to stock in building associations, printed at

See Sec. 277. Deposits in banks, p. 77.

[Precedence of Codes, etc.]

3990. That all laws or parts of laws contrary to or in conflict with the provisions of this act, and all laws or parts of laws on the same subject matter, except what may be contained in the Revised Civil Code and Code of Practice of the present session, be and the same are hereby repealed, except the thirty-third section of an act entitled "An Act for the punishment of crimes and misdemeanors," approved May fourth, eighteen hundred and five, and that in so far as there may be any conflict between the provisions of this act and any provision of the said Revised Civil Code and Code of Practice, that said Code shall be held and taken as the law governing, and that this act take effect on the first day of April, A. D. one thousand eight hundred and seventy.

See State ex rel. District Attorney vs. Recorder, 45 An. 313; State va Gaster, ibid, 643; Fuselier vs. Police Jury, 109 La. 551.

THE CONSTITUTION.

THE CONSTITUTION.*

PREAMBLE.

We, the people of the State of Louisiana, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties we enjoy, and desiring to secure the continuance of these blessings, do ordain and establish this Constitution.

Adoption of Constitution. See note at foot of page.

BILL OF RIGHTS.

ARTICLE 1. All government, of right, originates with the people, is founded on their will alone and is instituted solely for the good of the whole. Its only legitimate end is to secure justice to all, preserve peace and promote the interest and happiness of the people.

[Protection of Persons and Property.]

Art. 2. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property, except by due process of law.

Const., 1868, Title I, Art. 3; Const., 1879, Art. 6. See Art. 167 and notes. Confinement of an insane person by a proceeding under R. S. 1768 is not a deprivation of liberty without due process of law; a judgment of interdiction is Lot a necessary precedent thereto. In re Ross, 38 An. 523.

*The people when they voted for the holding of the Convention [Constitution, 1898], voted for it to be held in accordance with Act No. 52 of 1896," thus instructing their delegates, elected at the same time, to observe the limitations placed upon the power of the Convention by the act of the Legislature." State er rel. Fortier et als. vs. Capdevielle et als., 104 La. 564.

The act of the Legislature, No. 52 of 1896, submitting to the people of the State the issue whether a Constitutional Convention should be called, contained the condition that if the convention was called it should not have to submit to the vote of the people the Constitution which it would adopt. The Constitution so adopted was not an amendment of the Constitution of 1879; it was a new Constitution, although the call contained in the act excepted certain matters which the Convention was not competent to change. The Constitution of 1898 was therefore legally adopted, and it is the duty of the court to accept that instrument without any hesitation or resort to any refined distinctions or subtle argument on the question. State vs. Favre, 51 An. 434.

The Constitution of 1898, as it affects the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal, went into effect immediately after the adoption of the Constitution. Therefore, a judgment signed March 25, 1900, and appealed from, and order of appeal signed June 25, 1900, is governed by the Constitution of 1898. Norwood vs. Wimby, 104 La. 645.

A municipal ordinance authorizing the mayor to give notice to occupants of houses of prostitution to remove therefrom within a certain time and imposing fine and imprisonment for failure to comply with the notice, is not unconstitutional or depriving such occupants of liberty or property without due process of law, even though the occupants are also the owners of the houses. State vs. Mack, 41 An. 1079. Nor is an ordinance (N. O. No. 6596) requiring vendors of milk gratuitously to furnish samples of milk to sanitary inspectors, for inspection and analysis. State vs. Dupagnier, 46 An. 577. See State vs. Fourcade, 45 An. 717.

A proceeding in a personal action against absent defendants, by substi tuted service through a curator ad hoc, is not due process of law when the proceeding is not accompanied by a seizure of property. A judgment and sale of property under such a proceeding are absolute nullities. Hobson vs. Peaks, 41 An. 383.

A municipal ordinance (N. O. No. 4197) which prohibits smoking in street cars under penalty, etc., is not unconstitutional, since it does not deprive any one of personal liberty or of any property right. State vs. Haidenhain, 42 An. 483.

A' municipal ordinance (N. O. No. 4145) forbidding the keeping of a private market within six squares of a public market is not unconstitutional. State vs. Natal, 42 An. 612; State vs. Hug. Id; State vs. Rouche Id. Nor is one fixing the limits within which no market shall exist. State vs. Gish, 31 An. 544.

Act 18, 1886 (SUNDAY LAW) does not violate Art. 6, Const., 1879, nor the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution of the United States. State ex rel. Walker et al. vs Judge, Sec. A, Crim. Dist. Court, 39 An. 132. See act and annotation, p. 399, and Art. 4.

Act 82, 1884, making tax deeds exclusive evidence that the property was assessed, the taxes levied, and the property advertised and adjudicated according to law, and that all the requisites of the law were complied with, is constitutional and valid. In re Lake, 40 An. 142; In re Douglas, 41 An. 765; Breaux vs. Negrotto, 43 An. 426. See act and annotation, p. 1600.

A municipal ordinance prohibiting the existence of wells on certain premises is a proper exercise of the police power; and does not violate the constitutional protection of property, etc. State vs. Schlemmer, 42 An. 1166. So is one restricting the slaughtering of animals for food to certain districts. Villavaso vs. Barthet, 39 An. 247; Crescent City, etc., Co. vs. City, 33 An. 934. So is an ordinance prohibiting the keeping of inflammable materials or explosives in stores except in certain quantities. This is not taking the private property of a person storing petroleum without due process of law. Waters-Pierce Oil Co. vs. New

Iberia, 47. An. 863.

The provisions of the Constitution of the United States and of the State relative to taking property without due process of law or without adequate compensation first made do not apply to local assessments, but only to exactions under the right of eminent domain. Excelsior Planting, etc., Co. vs. Green, 39 An. 555.

[Right of Free Speech-Free Press.]

Art. 3. No law shall ever be passed to curtail or restrain the liberty of speech or of the press; any person may speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsi ble for the abuse of that liberty.

Const., 1868, Title I, Art. 4; Const., 1879, Art. 4.

Const., 1812, Art. VI, Sec. 21; Const., 1845, Title VI, Art. 110; Const., 1852, Title VI, Art. 106; Const., 1864, Title VII, Art. 111.

Art. 106, Const., 1852, "The press shall be free," does not exempt capital invested in a newspaper from taxation. City vs. Crescent, 14 An. 804.

« PreviousContinue »