The Opelousas courier., 1886-10-16
opelousas, Oct. l2, 1886.

opSAoukesVt WV A'~t A~NEs1'
Mr.. Editor-In the last Issue of your
paper You sar, Of act l03 of the late
session of the Legislature, that:
Had it been adopted within the next ten
years the corporation intended to be estab-
iished by it would have owned the greater
part ofShe land inclosed in the proposed ''spe-
cial leyee district" and the levees would have
been in no better condition than they are to-
day, We have taken the trouble to trace this
Act through the Legislature The bill the
Journal of the House shows, was introduced
into that body by Mr.. Harmansou of Avoyeiles
On reaching the Senate, tsee Jonrnai p. 4ibl III
was reported fav orably, with amendments by
the appropriate committee, was read the Sd
time in full and the committees amendments
adopted. Senator Lewis of st. Landry then
moved Up. i34l the final passage of the bill. The
roll was called, and the result was, it received
the Vote of every Senator present intending
both Messrs. Kayanagh and Lewis
Yon, presume, will not deny me the
space to be heard in answer to the in
jufious differences you would have your
readers draw from this extract.
1t seems to me that simple respect for
the commissioners named in the act
should have had some influence in guild
ing you as a prophet. What there is in
the character of Capt. w. Burton, E. w :.
Sylvester and Leroy S. Havard the COM
missioners Of St Landry, and of their
associates, to justify your bold predie-
tions, am unable to see.
They are all gentlemen of high stand
ing and would not for moment coun-
nance the system of robbery you sug-
gest, and doubt whether voter in
the district was actuated by any such
unworthy consideration. leave you to
settle with them your prophetic warn
ings, but III passing, | trust you will
allow me to inform you that this act lO3
is the offspring Of similar corporation
established in the Fordoche and Crosse
Tete section of country, since 1882,
which has given great satisfaction to
the tax payers. 1t has worked well there
and the author of act l03. Hon. T. P.
Harmanson, doubtless believed it would
work we'll in his section and for that
reason introduced the bill and submit
ted his handiwork to the people affected,
for their decision
My connection with the bill is briefly
told When Mr. HarmansOD consulted
,ne / said to him that | did not know
what we've the wishes of my constitu
ents in that part of the parish upon the
subject, but that saw no objection to
their deciding the matter for themselves
by their votes.
The bill, as it came from the House,
provided for Il submission of the act te
the vote of the property tax payers OF
the district rs a whole, so that if there
Slnr.t1 hat r.,Et, f,.p As,nrD1Anc
than there We're votes against it in ST
Landry the latter would have been
bound against their will. 0
Right here permit me to ask you why,
III tracing ssthis Act through the Legis-
lalure'' you omitted to mention that
yonr friends Mr.. Gniary and Mr.. Robin
voted for the bill in that shape and also
Mr. Arnaud on its final passage in the
House. Mr.. Lyons being absent. (See
House Journal p. 526.l
When it came to the Senate it was
referred to the committee on corpora,
tions of which | was member and
when it came mp for consideration in
Committee | moved to amend Section
90 as follows:
"Prouided, that this act shall have no eff
feet in either parish unless ., majority of the
votes therein shall he cast in favor oil the
same. But If one parish vote for and the
other against, the district shall be composed
Of the parish voting for and in that event
the commissioners named for either of said
parishes shall constitute the board ms herein
provided"
This amendment was adopted in com
nlittee and forms the concluding portion
of Section 20 of the act as it passed.
With this safeguard to the people oi
st. Landry I saw then, and see now, nc
lInpropsiety wliateFer in the passage
of the act.
1t Amounted to nothing more than q
proposition to organize a corporation
for ievee purposes within cet tain defin.
ed limits to be created, or not created
by the people concerned as they saw
proper.
1t was not My proposition, moi the
proposition of any Of the members from
ST. Landry, but it came from AvOyelles
and inasmucll rs the levees to be bull
were il, part for the protection of lands
subject to inundatiun in ST. Landry il
was right to leave the question to tlls
decision Of the owners Of these lands.
Such, ut least, is my judgment what
ever yours may he.
have but to add, that admit cheer.
fully your right to Investigate fully, ant
TO critieise all of my official acts Indeed
invite you to do SO.
Possibly yon might discover some
thing more to condemn and prophesJ
about, but be sure the next time to scrn
tinize the record more closely than yot
seem to have done iii this instance, ant
above all things don't use stick tina
cracks ynur friends heads while yol
are Draining me.
Respectfully yrs, E. Z. LEWIS.