Joseph Rucker Lamar

“ The case having been brought here by writ of error, the plaintiffs cited Louisiana cases in support of the contention that, in their suit for the recovery of the purchase price of agricultural products, they were entitled to an attachment, not only to secure a fund out of which to satisfy a general judgment, but also as a means by which to bring the cotton into court so as to have the vendor's lien foreclosed. In the light of those cases the plaintiffs further insisted that the garnishment operated as a seizure of the cotton ”

“ By reason of these facts, and to avoid conflicts of jurisdiction between the courts, Gumbel & Company claimed to be entitled to the benefit of the writ of prohibition forbidding the judge of the parish court from proceeding further in the case as against them, garnishees, and claimants of the cotton under bills of lading issued by the railway company. ”