The Donaldsonville chief. [volume] (Donaldsonville, La.) 1871-current, 1878-08-10

of the Potter subcommittee, We
| derived our information relative co
| the details Of the Investigation from
the Democratic press of New Orleans;
| and as it was to the interest of their
party to present the testimony of
Weber in its most favorable light, We
regarded, and still regard, any state
ments from that source tending to
weaken or damage his evidence as
/ incontrovertibly correct. The Piea-
yane, which has been less caustic than
any Of its contemporaries in COM
menting upon. the mass of perjury a4-
duced by the investigation, said in
reference to the production of the
Morris letter
Gov. Cox handed witness [Weberl Q let
l. ter which he looked at with o considerable
show OF nervousness, Its principal
effect is to contradict Weber's testimony
that the Sherman letter was destroyed by
himself about July, 1877,
we submit that Webel's e!eQpsid-
cradle slIow of nervousness " confirms
the proposition that the PRODUCTION
of the Morris letter was surprise to
him and took him completely soft
his feet I" for the moment. The ten
dency of the letter to contradict his
previous testimony was too plain to
require the Pics confirmatory state
ment to that effect. G
Finally, in reference to Weber's as
sertiQn in his letter -.
But that stated to any one in Donald.
sOnviile since July, 1877, that / had The
Sherman letter, or believed it was yet In
existence, is untrue ~ -
we reiterate that the tenor of remarks
made, and opinions expressed by
Weber to friends in Donailsonyille,
since July, 1877, has been such as to
create in their minds the impression
that Weber beliepsd--not kneic--that
such o dacumentas the Sherman letter
had been and still was in existence.
VI course we can not deny that it may
have been part of Weber's plan to
deceive and mislead these friends as
well as Robert Morris and other nag
tess Or, it may be that Weber is not
now cognizant of the impression
which his conversations relative to
the Sherman letter would produce
lupOn the minds of his friends. But
that such impressions were produced
and still exist, we have the best rea
sous for c0ntendiBg. 9t.i3 aoTi I.
- We do not understand why Weber
can be sn teuchy relative to the COM
ments of the CHIEF upon his testi.
mGny, when it lisa fact that our treat
llent Of the subject has been the soul
af,q Madeatian and courtesy when
compared to that at q majority of the
nFess of the country from Maine to
california. We have mainly rec0un-
ted circumstances as they trauspired,
leaving the reader to draw his own |
CONCLUSIONS; we have ai,Anly placed |
WeheF's contradictory statements
side by side, and in no instance has
any offensive epithet been hurled at |
him by the CHIEF, although other
journals, of ali shades 0f political |
status, have freely applied to him and |
other witnesses before the Potter
committee such appellatiOnsi as |
: scOundrel, = s4aperjurer,p and the
like. As IA sample of these may be
quoted the editorial explessiim of the
New Orleans Times, .fAVe accent
Weber. on bis,oowm showing, as a
af the AeeDest dye" No
snph lapgaaga has been eiInlayed by
the CHIEF, yet Weber passes over a
myriad Of these insulting assaults to
take issue with us. 1917 III SIS t.sI f4asl
What makes his conduct still mora
lnaccoaBtable is the fact that he has
been indicated and defended by the
CHIEF upon occasions when no other
paper would give him a hearing
when be was regsI 6ed by his present
biologists as political leper aud out
last; and especially y hen his now
ayorite organ, the DeaboGlgt, treated
lls communications with utter con.i
empt and checked them in the waste
basket, even when an offer of pay
nent for publication was made. %
"A mob entered the town of Monroe
Monday night Of last week, surroun-
LED the court house and Jail, COM
'elled the Jail0r to give lip his keys.I