The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1874-06-30

lAtrnllOlli Wllcft ntkToen hllu uhP''"''
Piled white men ruled, the county oihT
GERS were about ~ much drehdeu ~
the police. They were armed-olleh
ignorant aud Vicious men, WINE the
people were dlsarmed, ana Tor nearly
three years some ~ good men Ms THIS
state affords were afraid TO sleep III
their own houses, and passed their
nights In thIckots 10 avoid nocturnal
assassination by these men claiming TO
be pence officers, aud acting under the
abused cry of law and order
The blood of innocent men al over
this state--of Applewhlte, OF 6roes-
beck, Jack Mitchell, Of ELLIS, Thomas
Duncan, of Bell John and Henry kel-
ly, of l.avacca, and hundreds of others
attest the truth Of thls statement
The convicted deputy sheriifof Falls
county was evidently one of the same
liccntious brood, and we rejoiced ana
still rejoice ut his conviction. II was
with such feelings and under such re-
collections TINT our article WIS penned,
as IN manifest on its face.
But, greatly to our surprise, the sher-
III of this county, elected by the people
only few months ago, in the Interest
OF peace aud security, comes forth In
card assuming that our eplthets OF
"understrappers," "subalterns, " elcp
apply to him and his deputies,
ana thereupon Eliminates his decree OF
ostracism against us. He claims that
his deputies are worthy young men of
the best families, rs If we had arralgn-
ed them. The truth Il, that In writing
the article, we never once thought OF
him or them, unless by incidental
comparison with the bad men above
referred to, and the sheriff Of this
county, MS man of reflection aud or
binary kindness of heart, ought to
know IL, and why? Let ny refresh his
forgetfu memory.
Throughout the canvas last fall we
supported him with all our heart and
reioiced ut his election, After the cleo
ton when he was denied possession of
the office, we waited for no mans opu-
ion, but boldly espoused his right to
immediate possession, not only doing
so editorially, but in n card to the peo-
pie of Dallas county, over our own
name, whereby we gained the i'll will
of several personal friends
He was sworn into office and got
final possession about five months ago,
and now we will wager him two things:
First--that not u scintilla of censure
has ever appeared in the HERALD
against him; and, secondly, that he has
been praised, as an officer, in our COLI
umns on an average Of ut least five
times month. We challenge him to
examine our files, and, moreover, ap
peal to the recollection of our readers.
Now, the moment he inagines some
thing aimed ut him or his deputies,
wherein they were not even thought
Of, without even coming to us or ask
ing an explanation, he turns upon well
attested friendship, and through anoth-
er channel, arraigns III. If these are
not facts, we stand ready for correc-
ton.
AS to his deputies, rs we were writ
ing of former abuses under which
the people groaned, and discussing gem
eral principles, it is enough to repeat
that they, young men 80 lately APP
pointed, and of whom we have heard
naught hut praise, never entered our
mind. On the contrary, while know
ing them but slightly, and some Of
them not at all, we knew that five of
them at least were the sons of asgood
friends as we have, and as good citizens
as there are In Dallas county. They M G
truly subaltern officers, but we could
never apply the term 'understrappe"
to such young men and no man who
will read our article, understandingly,
in connection with the FALL county
case can so construe it,
So much rs to the animus of our ar
ticle, These are simply the facts, and,
on that head, we have no more to say.
The principle of law involved is an
other matter. If we are not in error,
policeman was sent to the peniten-
tiary last fall, from Dallas county, for
shooting ut man who was running
to avoid arrest for some minor otlense.
We have now the Falls county
case, presented by grand jury, tried
by "twelve good and lawful men, M
der oath, presided over by one of the
best district judges in the state, then
appealed to the supreme court, argued
and unanimously affirmed. We are
content to stand in such company. The
subject, however, is one of grave inn
port and should be discussed On lmly,
with sole view to the peace, security
and good order of society.
Asa general proposition, an officer
certainly has no right to kill in order
to arrest. lfso, blot out government
and go back into barbarism. The
right has been withheld, we appre-
bend, by the laws of every state in the
union. Lawmakers and our ablest
statesmen have deemed it wise so to
order things. But extraordinary cases,
rs we said in our previous article, do
arise, In which sound discretion, for
the good of society, must be lodged in
the officers breast. For instance our