The Lake Charles echo. [volume] (Lake Charles, Parish of Calcasieu, La.) 1876-1898, 1878-04-11

tion, in order to open the door TO
the admission of absolutely neces-
sary evidence to sustain 1T. Did
the Supreme Court draw up that
information?
Secondly: That even after the
information was so amended, the
evidence of the State, absolutely
essential to legal conviction oil
the prisoner, viz: the fo ged instru-
msnt which the information, as
amended, charged him with having
felouiously uttered and published
as true, was fatally detective and
Insufficient, and therefore legally
! iuadtuissible as evidence against
the prisoner. because it lacked the GER
tificate Of the clerk of the district corrt
of Vernon parish, which, Ivy express
law, was necessary to give that lnstru-
ment any legal value or authority what
ever. Did the Supreme Court ever see
that document? Did it ever see copy
Of it, until after Anderson's conviction,
when it came before it, embodied III the
transcript of appeal? Did the Supreme
Court prepare the evidence on behalf
of the State. to be used or Anderson s
trial by jury. and did it compare that
evidence with the law Of the ease, and
see if it was sufficient to maintain the
offence charged?
Thirdly: That the information, even
litter being amended, charged Amber
son and his co-defendnnts with having
feloniously uttered and published us
true, the forged and counterfeited III
strument declared ON in the informu
ton, not in their capacity HIS officers OF
the law, las members OF the Returning
Board nor in auy other official capacity
whatever; but SO charged them simply
as Thomas G Anderson, james Madison
| Wells, eli dlios; whereas it WINS apparent
that to sustain conviction under the
offence charged in the information, it
was essential that the offence mot for
gerry, nor counterfeiting-they were not
charged with that-,but feiomously ut
seriug and publishing us true a forged
and couuterfeited public record should
have been charged rs having been com
mitted by them in their official capacity
as members Of the Returning Board
because us private individuals, not act
ing, nor protesting TO act, in any official
capacity, their uttering and publishing
as true forged and counterieited cleo.
ftion return could not have injured Oh
deceived, and could not have been ca
culated to injure or deceive anybody
it being of the essence of the offence
charged that the act of ''uttering and
publishing as true, certain altered.
forged and counterfeit public record
to-~it: the consolidated return of the
parish of Vernon, made by the super.
visor of registration should have beer
committed with the intent to injure OF
deceive somebody. Aspreviously asked
We inquire. again, did the Supreme
Court draw up that information
The simple truth is, the reason an6
the only reason, why Thomas G. Ander
son and his associates in the most in
famous and gigantic crime ever perpe
trated against q State and nation are
allowed to go unwhipped Of justice, il
because they were not properly charged
with the crime, and because ON Amber
sons trial there was fatal varianc,
between an essential allegation in thu
information against him, and the evi
dence offered to support it,
The Supreme Court considered til,
case on appea just as it would hav'
considered case of the State agains
John Jones on an iIformation for felop
iously uttering and publishing as tru'
+, analtered, forged and counterfeit checl
on the First National Bank of New Or
J leans The honorable and honoret
Judges of that Court shut their ears t,
. popular clamor, and their eyes to til
rejoieings of the public press over wha
was popularity believed to he the lleg,l
: conviction and justsentence of Ander
G son, an consulted only the transcripts