The Lake Charles echo. [volume] (Lake Charles, Parish of Calcasieu, La.) 1876-1898, 1876-06-01
nToncure VI. EDubueIef

The recent decision of The Bu
preme Court 81 L0uisiaua ID She
case of the State ex rel. Jno. g.
Moncura, appellant US. Antoine
DubuclGt, If not in accordanoe
with The law, Is in keeping with I
tie reputation Of the court, The
fact is, aud the pleadings admit,
that Moncnre was elected Treas
urer 81 The State by a majority Of
38T6 votes. The Returning Board
however, frauaulensly threw ont
portions Of the election returns
and declared Dubuclet elected.
Moncure brought suit III the Su-
peri0r District Court to obtain the
Office; that partisan tribunal ele-
cided against him. and De ap
pealed to the Supreme Court
which has sustained the partisan
decision 0f the lower court The
merits of the case were never
touched by either court. both de-
oiding that the action Of the Re
! turning Board was final, and its
/ determinations not subject te re-
view. This extraordinary decision
was rendered BY Justice Ialia-
ferro, and concurred in bY Chief
Justice Ludeling and Justice
Howell. Justice Taliaferro is a
very malignant, and mind
ed old man, who seems ~ shink
that he Is d public inquisitor, and
\ that it is bis duty To perseeute all
| the people OF the State outside oi
the radical party. Justice Howell
went into the radical party as q
| sort of speculation. He is 4 man
of mean abilities, and, We believe,
before he went np0n tile bench.
! was regarded as hardly an average
pettifogger. Chief Justice Lude-
| ling's character Is welI known to
/ the country d man Of cOnsidera-
ble capacity, he il at the same
/ time one Of tile most audaci0usly
corrupt men Id the State. He has
no respect for his high Office and
uses it simply as q means tO pro
mote the corrupt schemes Of hun
self aud bis party
That such d trio should have
rendered il decision, i'll an itnpOr-
taut case Involving tile public in-
terest, contrary Ia the constitution
aud tile principles Of law aid
down by themselves in former
decision, Is not singular. ID was
necessary to their party that Du-
buolat should hold the Office 81
Treasurer, though he was defeat.
I'd at the election, and they did
not hesitate u prostitute their au-
thoritv to maintain him there. III
does seem wonderful, however
that such a set of men should con
stitute the highest tribunal of lav
III q free and enlightened State
The scandalous character of thii
decision is very clearly shown IL
che able and exhaustive dissenting
opinion of Justice WHY, which ".
printed III full yesterday evening
Justice AVyly shows very clearly
that the decision of the court, the
Tie action. of the Returning BoaTC
II not subject to review, Is un
sound, for the act creating sh'
board itself declares that its pro
mulgations, etc, shall be gg'inat
face evidence in all courts of jus
lice and before an civil officer
lmta at aside after d contest 10
cording to law of tho right OF an,
person named therein to hold ans
exercise the office to which III
shall by such return be- declares
elected The opinion 0f Instiol
WHY, however. IL so clear, brie
ana eoneisa, that IL is needless fO
us to recapitulate its points. on
readers can pernse the paper ~
self. and every citizen 81 Isoaisiani
should do s0.
The legal propositions ot thh
dissenting opinion ara in them
selves sufficient to utterly over
whelm the decision of the court
But TIE opinion derives additiona
forea from tbe faet thatiE il th'
opinion Of that tnamaer nj thi