The Donaldsonville chief. [volume] (Donaldsonville, La.) 1871-current, 1873-09-20

tA0iASo VI VIC pun EoAo VI ohOAA dOutOh'
The Jury was well calculated to carry
out the purposes of Mr.. LIQUIDS perse-
cutors, not that it desired to further
their iniquitous ends, but the mem
bers were too ignorant of law to dis
tinguish the sharp practice of the
schemers.
| We reiterate that the Parish Attor-
ney is personal enemy of Mr.. LIQUIDS,
and no representations of the Pioneer
can induce us to believe he was not
actuated by malice in the course OF
conduct he has pursued in the matter.
To be sure, he was in great degree
influenced by the desires of certain
official whose displeasure he feared to
incur, but we opine he did no violence
to his personal feelings in assisting to
.humiliate Mr.. Loud.
The Pioneer is guilty of falsehood
in stating that but two sureties were
offered upon Mr.. LIQUIDS bond. Four
indictments were first brought, and
good and solvent surety furnished by
accused and accepted. The following
day the Parish Attorney entered molle
pros's upon these four counts and had
them brought in again with the Sec
ond batch of twenty-five indictments,
and directed the Sheriff to reject the
former sureties if they again offered.
{ What palmer proof of the malicious
intent of the conspirators can be de-
sired than this? About ten more
persons were offered as sureties in va
rious amounts, but all rejected by the
Sheriff before the trial of the rule
taken upon him to show cause for
such rejection. Only two names were
presented upon the trial of the rule,
however, and under the rigid and ar
bitrary ruling of the court it was
deemed useless to offer others, unless
a millionaire could be found. The
special care taken by the Parish At
torney and others to hunt up old
mortgages upon property that had
been accepted as surety upon other
bonds, and the strict enforcement of
the almost universally ignored home
stead exemption, clause shows evil
dence of the determination to imprison
Mr.. Loud at all hazards.
The effort to show that the bond
required by the court was not exor-
bltant is lame attempt of Judge Cole
to justify his action in this regard.
Entirely ignoring that fundamental
principle of law-the presumption that
every accused person is innocent until
proven guilty--he demonstrates his
own malice against the prisoner by
using the argument that the punish
ment for Mr.. LIQUIDS alleged offense
is penitentialy and a fine double
the amount embezzled." Couple this
with the very indicate proceeding
OF the righteous judge in announcing
from the bench that he had heard
that Mr.. Loud owned several fine
houses in Massachusetts and would
be governed by this to some extent
in fixing the bond, and his partisan
spirit is clearly demonstrated. We
are informed by a person cognizant
OF the case that no fine is required by
the section of the statutes under which
the indictments against Mr.. Loud are
brought but Imprisonment is the sole
punishment. Judge Cole cites one
portion of the statutes to justify his
indecent action under another.
The CHIEF made no such statement,
as charged by the Pioneer, that "a
large number of the most reliable peo-
pie OF IberYille are bold in denounc-
ing the movement as a wicked CON
spiracy,' but we are perfectly willing
to assume responsibility for the asser-
ton, and in response to the demand
for the names of some of these persons
we append the following; Messrs.
Allen Jumel, Thos. E. Grace, Chas. |
Lozano, Samuel Hirsch, P. H. Murphy,
Arthur Randall, James Crowell, v. I.
Dupuy, John Jefferson, Geo. Schwing.
T. Verrett, e. L. Duhart, Andrew
Caneza, VIM. Bowman and Chas. A.
Brusle, all respectable citizens and
tax payers. Now let the Pioneer re-
peat its statement that "no man of
position in society as gentleman and