Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1889-08-29
THAT MIAMI OUTRAGE.
A Card from Mr.. B. II. Baker Giving
the Other Side.
Not a Question of Settlement, bnt Question
OF Law and Legally Elected Officials
About the Rangers.
CANADIAN, Tex, Aug. 26, 1889.

CANADIAN, TEX, Aug 26, 1889.
To the Gazette.
You have deemed it proper to pupiish
an omen letter to Governor Ross written
bv J. X. Little, county judge $50 calIed)
of Roberts county. I trust you will con-
slider it your duty to publish this short
reply. Mr.. Little, whose open letter Is
tissue of fanoies and misrepresentation
is the leading spirit in the efforts of hail
a dozen persons i'll the village OF MANN
to rule Roberts county and grow fat on
the taxes paid by Der tax-paying citizens:
This Miami squad, under the guidance OF
Mr.. Little. organized Roberts county by
a Detition containing the names or per-
sons not voters, persons whose names
were forged to it, and'the names OF per
sons existing only in the imagination OF
the forgers. At the election, the ballot
boxes in the two precincts controlled py
the Miami squad were stuffed ana persons
snot citizens were persuaded to vote, anu
nv these frauds the Miami faction were
counted into the county offices and Miami
declared the county seat. There were
about seventy voters in Roberts county
The law reo1iires 80 voters to organize
q county. but this little crowd, by the
use of a fraudulent petition pretending
to represent the names of over one nun
dred and fifty voters, secured the ordeF
for the organization of the county over
the heads of two-thirds of the genuine
settlers. Among other things 1t mas Deeh
Droyed that there were only three voters
arrTN
in precinct No. 2, yet there were loFCy
eight votes returned as having Oeeh
DOlled .Gafid all for the Miami raZzooperS-
OuoSyyarranto proceedings were al once
Instituted for the county Otnces Oy Ihe
f5ersons elected, and the venue hav-
ing been changed to LipscomD county
the contest for the offices of district ana
county clerk was tried at the last term OF
the district court of that county, result
inc in 2 verdict and judgment for Relator
Robert Acorn.
The respondent, Burns, gave notice OF
aDneal to the supreme court, but he got
no statement of facts in the time pre-
scribed by law, nor did he file approved
aDnaal bonds, He pretended 10 ME
bonds but the clerk denies that he prom
Used to approve them, and did not III tacC
annroye them. 1t would seem that
careful appellant would have seen TO IL
that his bonds were approved II ne oe-
cod IN anneal his case. On failure of
the aDDeal respondent attempted to sue
ont q writ Of error. Our courts nave
more than once held that writ OF error
does not lie to revise the action OF the
district court founded on proceedings by
ono Varranto, and especially when no
sufficient reason is given for not having
nerfected appeal. In this petition LOT
writ of error no reason is given by plain
| tiff in error for not having perfected ap-
neal. except the gross negligence OF he
/ spondent Burns or his counsel, among
tsghom Mr. Little seemed to be Inc
/ Iaader. Every. Ia#yer knows that the
/ sIipgsme colEE ~fll not permit eltneF Tue
! nIaiiIffjs e Sfefendent in error TO file the
racord in this case. for the whole pro-
ceeding is void. When the time Tor
! narfectlng appeal had expired Relator
! Acorn procured his writ of custer and
reDeate6Iy. requested Mr.. Little to call q
! term of the commissioners court to
consider his official bonds. This MT.
,{F.ir+Ie refused to do. The law requires
E5A regular term of the commissioners
'Ecourt to be held on the second Monday III
AuOIst. and this the Relator Alcorn
| waited for. but when the day came ana
| the air was blue with the determination
on MIR. Little's part not to hold session
of the court Cand he did not permit one
! 70 he held. but on his own lpse dlAlt,
| without the commissioners, ADJOURNED
~ ReIator Alcorn demanded eNecu-
| tion of the writ of custer, (nOt copy
INIT the writ and it was executed by
the constable Of precinct No. i. Ii wa:
! executed in the regular way by the con
IS+abIe's taking possession of the ofIce'
faud their property, and IT'S execution Mi'S
7 not resisted by respondent Burns. me
constable did not display weapon; tha'
is the product of the prolific Inauguration
of the excited sO-called county Judge
This writ was not given to the so-callei
sheriff for execution, because ne also h0l'
his Office by fraud and would not haF'
executed writ against one OF ms leho"
j., fraud After the execution of thu
writ Respondent Burns ana TINS sheIIi
whose loudly proclaims that he wonl'
1,e,lSa avacu+ed the mandate of the law
in the office and insisted upol
lyeening q guard over the propert
bthrnugh this most excellent so-caile'
T sheriff and they were permitted TO 90 S
+hrouphOut the day. | was sent Tor ah'
on nv arrival late in the afternoon 1oun
+beaboye state of affairs. Soon afterWard
I fouud an armed man in the room wh
Dreteuded to be deputy sheriff unde
This law-abidiug so-called sheriff.
also found Capt McMurTay and thre
rangers IN town and ascertained that the
had been all day trying to get qme
. settlement of matters, but had taken n
mart otherwise, Capt. McMurTaY at one
conferred with me and suggested that
nostDone action until he could confe
with the opposition, and gladly con
sented After repeated conference
, | cant. McMurray informed me could d
nothing with the sheriff, who said h
. would maintain his guard over the rec
: ords. etc. l at once went to the ottic
and inquired OF the person found theI
with arms on, by what authority L
4 acted. He admitted that he was not
deputy sheriff, that he had no appoint
7 ment of any sort except a verbal ordt
? from the sheriff to guard the recordss
and that he had not given bond, "A
that he was not in possession of a writs
anv kind from any court. 1 informs
him that he was acting without authoTl'