St. Landry democrat. (Opelousas, La.) 1878-1894, 1885-05-16
The Press and Judiciary.
Farmeryille Gazette.

The Gazette has never failed to criti-
cize the action of any officer or official
in the State of Louisiana, when it was
believed that the official action of an
official was subject to criticism. If the
action deserved commentator it was
justly accorded if on the other hand it
deserved censure, such was given in
plain and uneQuivocal language. There
can be no excuse for an independent
press IN a free government playing a
sycOphantic part, or rendering itself
ObsequlOus to any branch of the gov
ernment. In fact such a course should
be severely reprobated by the people
who are the sovereigns, to whom all
officers are amenable.
Sometime ago the Gazette. took Oc
casiOn to criticize the Supreme Court
upon two different occasions, Some of
the course impolitic. One city ex-
change, in substance said, that such
action on the part of the press was cal
culated to shake public confidence in
this august tribunal and hence unset
tie all contracts a3 we'll as personal
rights of citizens.
Such language wa8 thought to be, on
the part OF the press uttering 1T, an
abandonment of the right to criticize
the judgments of the Supreme Court or
the public acts of the judges composing
the Jench. It is acknowledged, that it
rarely occurs that the press or any pOr-
tion of it, directly or indirectly censures
the court of last resort in the States.
But it has been done, and with salutary
effect.
From the N. O. City Item we take
from the Article, Legislation by the
Judiciary" the following conclusion:
"Thps justice in Louisiana goes
somewhat by chance, and can not at all
times be relied upon. The State Treas
urer las recently announced some pecu-
liar views of his duty which other par
ties think are at variance with far
treatment, and refers the dissatisfied to
the courts for their remedy. We can
not forecast a decision in such q case,
as though the Treasurer is confident he
has the court and that there will be no
| difficulty in finding or making a law to
sustain aim. A tribunal that can find a
legal distinction between lawfully is
sued State warrants may be depended
upon for other surprising discoveries"
The above is as severe as language
can make it. That justice should GO
by chance and can not be relied upon
| and that the Treasurer has the court
renders the tribunal, if such be the fact
stain and stigma upon the Judiciary
OF Louisiana.
The item is not alone in its reflections
upon the Supreme Court. The follow,
ing is from the Shreveport Times OF
last week
"In this day and age it will be impos-
sible to correctly tell what will be the
decision of any court. 1t would seem
| that the courts have wonderful facul,
ty of warping the laws, much to the
surprise of evrybody, SO as to fit almost
any kind of case.h
This language is used when the
Times mentions tue decision of the
Supreme Court in which it holds thai
there is DO such corporation as the New
Orleans Pacific Racific Railroad IN oul
State. The contest was between citi'
zens and corporation. That the Su'
preme Court was on the side of the
corporation is a source of no surprise
and ought not to have been to the
Times.
Put not your trust in princes is the
old adage but the new one is, put no
your trust in the Supreme court when {
corporation is against you.