The Opelousas courier. [volume] (Opelousas, La.) 1852-1910, 1888-09-15
The Judge Quibbles.
The following communications were
'eceived by us on Tuesday night:

received by us on Tuesday night:
CROWLEY, Sept. II 1888.
EDITORS CoURIER-I inciose cOmmunica-
tion for publication this week
Please let me know by return mail whether
it will appear in this weeks issue, as desire,
or not. If yon decline let me know immedi-
ately. Yrs. &c. E. I. LEWIS.
EDITORS CoURIER--In your issue of Septen-
ber Sthr find the following editorial:
On Friday of last week, four parties from
the neighbOrhood of Arnaudville, charged
with the killing of Ozeme Pickens, which Oc-
Cured there some three weeks ago, were ar
rested and brought to town by ex-deputy
sheriff jeff. Thompson and turned over to the
sheriff. The same evening, without any in-
yestigation whatever, Judge Lewis ordered
their release. This summary proceeding
ELECTED considerable unfavOrable comment.
With the lights before us, we cannot say
whether these criticisms were we'll founded or
not. 1t was certainly an unusual proceeding.
But some of the circumstances i'll the case
were also of an unusual character. Mr..
Thompson has addressed an open letter to the
Governor on the subject, which we publish
elsewhere, also card to the public, which is
appended thereto A perusal of these docu-
ments will afford some insight into the mat
ter.
Having been in your office on Thursday
evening the 9th paying you one of the Jour
btSL6S usually GAb6HQGu TO newspaper eulbOEs
L was hence much surprised to Gnd, two days
later not only that yon had opened the col
umns of your paper to groundless abuse of
myself by another, but that you had without
inquiry, editorially joined therein, as appears
by the above extract
Presuming that you have some desire, to
know the truth and to correct erroneous
statements made by you and published to the
world, suppose you will accord me space
for that purpose.
First let me say, that there is no truth
whatever in the charge that "ordered the
release" of the parties arrested nor is it true
that lever gave any order whatever il, ,rela-
tion to either their arrest, detention or dis
charge.
My connection with the matter is briefly as
follows-The Sheriff short time after the
homicide asked me what was best to be done
to secure the arrest of the guilty parties,
stating that he could get no clue aud calling
my attention to article lI67 r. S. asked whe-
ther something could not be done under its
provisions. / replied that it might be we'll to
try it, This is simply provision authorizing
the Attorney Genl. or Dist. Atty, in the abb
sence OF any complaint or charge against any
one. to summon witnesses before the District
Judge or Magistrate to be examined under
oath for the purpose of finding out the guilty
parties The same day the Dist. Atty. con-
suited me about this same provision OF law
| and advised himsto proceed under it. He
replied that ne would do SO and thereupon
fixed the examination for Wednesday the 9th
oH-ept. then suggested that he write to
the Governor of the State and ask him to Of
fer IA reward for the arrest of the guilty par
ties. He adllsted thfsuggestion and the re-
ward was offered.
The Dist. Atty. was proceeding to summon
witnesses when on Friday Aug. 3lst on riding
into town l was informed that certain par
ties had been arrested by MIR. JEFF. Thompson,
a private citizen, upon warrant, issued by
MIR. T. b. Brooks Justice of the Peace, and
| addressed to any citizen-and that the Sheriff
had refused to take them into his custody
without a commitment. Upon meeting the
Dist. Attorney and the Sheriff, who were CT n
versing upon the subject / asked the former
whether there was any law authorizing ar
rests TO be made in that way saying that
| knew of none and doubted whether there was
but that, if there was any such law the arrest
would hold good.
No application either oral or written was
| ever made tom by either the District Att0r-
/ Bey or any one else to either commit the ar
/ rested parties to jail-Or to examine into the
| charge against them; nor have | ever been
applied to by any one to order their arrest,
aud may add, that have never uttered a
/ word TO any one to prevent their arrest or the
1 arrest of any one else charged either directly
or Indirectly with this crime.
The only order ever gave in the matter
/ was the one for the examination OF witnesses
on the 5th Of Sept. as above stated
On that day many witnesses were IN at
tendance. Ali of the parties arrested by Mr..
| Thompson aud he himself with nm audience of
/ some fifty persons were present in eonrt Up
i ON taking the bench the District Attorney
4 moved that he be allowed to carry the inYes-
tigatinn before the grand jury and requested
me not to make the examination as proposed
by him originally for which he assigned va
rieus reasons.
4 stated TO him in the hearing of all parties
present that | WAS ready and willing to pro
4 cced with the examination but as the District
Attorney was specially charged with the duty
X of making such investigations and solely res
ponsible felt il my duty to accede to his re-
/ quest The whole matter was thus transferred
to the Grand Jury at the special request oi
! the District Attorney.
i Such is, in brief. the history OF my connec
Il tion with this matter all of which ! would
4 have cheerfuily given had you taken he troH
i BILE to inquire of me on the 9th inst. when
was in your office, and at which time 1 nusi
think you had yonr editorial in type.
Il The slightest inquiry might have prevented
Il the use OF your paper as vehicle Of slander
0ns charges against me and probably saved
you from writing apa publishing libeloul
statement.
ke Respectfully yrs. E. Z. LEWIS.
Il Ou usurprise on reading this certain
y III exceeded that which the Judge say
Il he felt on reading our article. His let
ter was the first intimation that we hat
Z that he had not ordered the release o
these prisoners, and his emphatic dis
clainaer. somewhat staggered us. W.
made Tie statement in perfect goot
4 faith, never dreaming that there wa
the shadow Of a donbt of it's correctness
hearing it iterated and reiterate, ol
every side, and considering it pal er
ceHence and literally d matter of publ
! notoriety. And, acting upon the axior
: that. while one should be prompt t
! commend, he should be slow to con
| denim d public servant, we CAREFUL
b prefrained from making any unfay y0rabl
comment, preferring to await fuEthe
! developments before passing judgmer
snpon the matter. But here comes tll
Judge, who not only declares that ou
] statement is .'erroneous," nntrntfifu
/ and t.libeIons,' but accuses ns of joiT
! ing 10 ssgroundless abuse of himsel
9 This took our breath away. II til
! Judge can distort any statement in thi
article into abuse of any sort. we VI
give him chrome Read it agail
z Judge.
p Now, In reference to the release
q tile prisoners, which the Judge empha
J. ically denies having ordered, il vi
y necessary for MS To seek informatlt
from those in Il position to know. W
therefore interviewed Sheriff FOnteno
: who informed us that while the JUDI
i aid not & order z him TO relea
q tl,a nrisoDers. lie did tell him that ~