The Opelousas courier. [volume] (Opelousas, La.) 1852-1910, 1888-09-15

gentlemen, INC IeHutt WIN oSoi
in mind, are close personal and politi-
cal friends of the Judge, and were un
der our questioning anything but swift
and willing witnesses. Now, we sub
nit to q candid aud fair minded
public that between " ordering" the
Sheriff to release the prisoners
and telling him that "he could not hold
them,r there is just about the same diff
ference as exists betwee1 tweedledum
and tweedledee Certainly, the differ
ference is not sufficient to make our
statement " erroneous or untruthful,
either in letter or in spirit; and we
think the Judge would find some little
difficulty in proving it " libelous."
Besides, we here assert as an undis-
putable fact, corroborative of the sub
stantial correctness of our statement,
that when the Judge manifested a dis
position tsa release the prisoners-let
thep4 go home, or not ''hold" them -
the District Attorney suggested that
with the issuance of new warrant the
parties could be held then and there,
and the Judge declined to adopt or en-
dorse the suggestion.
The fact is the Judge must have been
in famous rage when he wrote his let
ter, and being in that frame of mind he
was not very careful-nOt half as care
fnf as we were when we penned that
terrible article. We cannot believe,
however, that it was this article that
excited his ire, SO much as the fact that
we had opened our columns to one OF
his felIowcitizens i'm order to give him
an opportunity to expose bis grievances.
That exposition was signed by the party
| who made the arrests himself, and was,
besides, inserted as an advertisement.
The Judge ought to know that editors
are not responsible for communications
even from anonymous correspondents,
and surely no sane man would claim
that they are responsible for articles
duly signed, or for advertisements.
That exposition was much more severe
in it's reflections upon his course than
| we were, yet he passes Mr.. Thompson
by and flies at us. Why, oh, why is
| this thus?
But we would like to have the Judge,
even admitting that he gave no '!order"
| for the release of the parties accused,
give some good reason for his monaco
ton in this matter. He is a judicial
officer and as such conserVator of the
peace, and he himself admits that the
parties accused were before him. and
stood accused of thefcrime of murder
by an affidavit entireln regular in form.
There seems to be no nial of this. but ac-
cording to Sheriff Fontenot's statement,
the Judge advised him that he could
not hold the parties in thelabsence of a
proper commitment. Now, what we
would like to ask the Judge to explain
| is this: Why did he advise the Sheriff
that he could not hold the prisoners By
reason of there being no proper COM
mitment, and at the same time fail to
see that proper commitment was is.
sued, although he was aware thct these
parties were accused of rs grave crime
as murder, by an affidavit regular in
/ form
We decline to be draw just now into
a discussion of the other facts and mer-
its of the case, history of which the
/ Judge unloads on us in his letter, and
which Mr.. Thompson gave through oul
advertising columns last week. We were
very careful in our last weeks article
to avoid giving any details or making
any comments which might not have
been strictly correct, and. while desir.
ing to give our readers some little in
formation ON subject which was ex.
citing very general interest, We confined
ourselves to a brief recital of What We
| knew or thought we knew we're facts
/ Now, We don't want to be hard on
the Judge, nor werY don't want to be
rude not half as hard nor half as rude
as he attempts to be on Us and with as
But we desire t88direct the eyes of tlt
people. of the parishes of st. Landry
and Acadia to the spectacle of the high
/ est judicial officer in this district en-
gagged in the attempt to hector ant
browbeat the editors of this paper TO
having made q simple statement whicl
is proved to be substantially correct b.
{ the testimony of two of his closest politi
cal and personal friends, men of homo
/ and integrity, who would gladly,
! they could honorably, shield him from al
blame. If they can gaze upon thi
spectacle unmoVed, if they or any con
siderable portion of them can counter
ance any such proceeding, then is th
boasted liberty of the press delusio
and snare. then are their own right
, and liberties in great danger.
E
In the last issue of the Pointe- Cou
pee Banner appears the valedictory [
! it's founder Mr.. f. L. Claiborne VII
! has retired from the editorial chair an
proprietorship of the paper. In re
: !, view of the eight years labor perform
. ed for the Democratic party and tl
! vital interests of his parish, Mr.. Cla
!, borne leaves we'll earned reputatio
: of o faithful and conscientious journa
ist. He has nothing to regret in dui
: performed, and in severing his conpe,
: ton with the BanEer that he establish
: ed and built up TO its present infiuen'
! as factor in the Democratic party,
: : bids it adieu with kind and pattern