Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/758

CRESCENT CITY, ETC., CO. V. BUTCHEiiS' UNION, ETC., 00. 743 �obtaining payment, as the other creditors of this corporation did, and ashe might have done. If he bad exhaustcd his remedy he mght have had a different standing with reference to the stockholders. It is true, the contract provides that all those who corne into this schema shall contribute ■ ratably to the expenses necessary to complete this plan of reorganization. ihis does not seem inequitable, but on the contrary just and equitable between the parties. Ail classes of the creditors of this company seem involved in a common misfortune, and it seems to me but right that they ehould share in the expenses of a plan which had for its purpose the beneht of all. The bill is therefore.dismissed for want of equity. ���Cbescent City Live-Stock Landing & Slaughter-Housh Co. �V. BiiTCHBRs' Union Livb-Stock Landinq & �Slaughter-Housb Co.* �[Ci/reuit Courtj E.D. Louisiana. December 30, 1881.) �1. Constitutional Law. �The validity of article 248 of the constitution of Louisiana conceded; the validity of article 258 of same constitution doubled ; the eliect of bolh on the charter of plaintifE considered. �2. Vested Rights — Pouce Power. �When a legislature has granted an exclusive right, and that organ of the government in which is vested the police power with reference to that aubject- matter sanctions the exercise of the right as harmless, there exista ao power, either in the legislature or the people, to abrogate it. �Application for an Injunction pendente lite. �The faets are stated in the opinion of the district judge. �Thos. J. Semmes and Robert Mott, for complainant. �B. B. Forman, for defendant. �Pabdee, C. J. We follow the decision of the supreme court of the state of Louisiana in the case of Slaughter-house Co. v. City of New Orleans, as reported in 33 La. Ann. 934, in these propositions: �(1) The charter of complainant, act IS'o. 118 of 1869, Louisiana Laws, con- stitutes a contract. �(2) That the said charter contains monopoly features. �(3) That 80 far as said act or charter rests upon delegated police power of the state, it raay be repealed or impaired by constitutional or legislative authority, without infringing on the constitution of the United States. �•Reported by Joseph P. Horiior, Esq., of lUe j\'ew Oiieans bar. ��� �