St. Landry democrat. (Opelousas, La.) 1878-1894, 1890-06-21

cation TO De retained, Ill ch6eFfuly ada my re
have signed, but among recommendation to tina
repablicansat this placeIof Others who may hav
one Is 10 be Gpl0iHtedIre requested bis appoint
cheerfully add my re Ement l see no rcasOl
commentator to that why he would not Civ
of others who may haye;as mucn satisfaction, i
requested his appoint-inOt more than any othe
ment see no reason republican here, for Ia
why he would not giye.iS popular in his owl
AS much satisfaction, ifparty, and stands wei
not more, than any 9TH among democrat
ar republican here, foriwhose personal esteem
ne is popular in his Ow aid friendship he en-
party and stands wellIjoys to a large extent
among democr He Is polite ana atten
whose personal esteemEtive to his business %
and friendship he en-lan employee in a larg,
joys to a large xtenttmercantie firm here
de is polite and atten-I and has, think, giveI
tive to his business asientire satisfaction t,
an employee in IafgeIhis EN- l0yers will
mercantile firm here lwhom lie has been en
and has, think, givcntgaged for the past TIVE
entire satisfaction toIyears. I have know
his employers withhim all his life and he
whom he has been for.lieye him to be trust
the last two years. IwOrthy not only as
have known him all Metropolitan but as cti
iife and believe him toI gen and as a persona
be trustworthy, notfriend
only as a republican Respectfully submit
but, as a citizen and a6ted. +. r. LEWIS,
personal friend. Judge l3th judicial Dis
Respectfully submit i trict, Ia.
ted, f. 7. LEWIS,
Judge 18th Dist La.
OPELoUsAs, June 10th, 1890.
Hon. Z. T. Lewis:
Dear Sir-Being requested by yen to
examine the two letters given above,
and to state which take to be correct.
| would state that read your original
letter before it was forwarded TO Wash
ington, and that, according to my best
recollection, tho letter on the left | be-
lieve to be a correct and complete copy
of the same.
Very truly yours,
E. j. CLEMENTS.
OPELoUsAs, June 10Th, 1890.
10 Hon. L. L. Lewis:
In obedience to your request to make
a statement of my recollection in this
matter have to state that read your
original letter before it was forwarded
to Washington carefully several times,
and am positive that il contained this
declaration:
"Being democrat |, of course, desire
none but democrats in Office, and | do
not wish to be understood as desiring
the removal of the present incumbent,
whose application to be retained have
signed" and | may add that tho letter
on the left is correct copy of the whole
letter to the best of my recollection.
c. M. THOMPSON.
nave Othtf Witnesses, out IHeSh are
sufficient in addition to myself.
As said in my first communication
have neither apology nor explanation
to make for this letter 10 any one. 1t is
plain, unambiguous and speaks for it.
self.
Permit me now to call your attention
to something else in connection with
this matter.
Some time during the month of Au-
gust last, because of certain rumors
being in circulation as to This letter,
wrote to the Postmaster General at
Washington, requesting that copy Of
my letter be sent to me, stating that /
had inadvertently omitted to retain a
copy. This letter was mailed in the
post Office at Opelousas by myself. ]
never heard of it afterwards. On the
2Sth of September following | wrote
again to the same effect, mailing my
letter on the train, and within a very
few days received the following reply:
WASHINGTON, d. c., Oct. Cd, 1885,
Sir-Your communication Of the 2Sth
uitimo relative to sending You copy of
4 certain letter fled in this Department
has bees, placed on file. It would be con-
trary to The rules OF the Department to
furnish copies of papers on file.
Very respectfully,
TSignedl j. S. CLARKsoN,
First Asst Postmaster General.
TO Judge u. L. Lewis.
The italics are mine. Within few
days after your return from Washing
ton City | heard that you were circa-
lating copy Of my letter, and could |
not understand how yen, n personal and
political enemy of mine, could get a
copy of my letter which had been re-
fused to me as appears above. 1t was
not many days, however, before i had a
copy of what you were circulating as
ny letter. On the 9th OF March, 1890,
wrote 10 Senator Gibson, inciosing
.opy OF your copy, calling his attention
o tho fraud you were praeticing, and |
demanded through him that be eitlers
furnished witha certified copy, or that
lie original be surrendered to me. |
authorized him TO show my letter TO the
postmaster General. Iii his reply Sem
tor Gibson says:
III went over all the papers ON file
the post Office at 0pei0nsas, Z
.a.. with Mr.. Wannamaxer, the Post i
raster General, and / could find no let
en- OF yours among the papers respect
ng tie matter one way or the other
one about Mrs Bailey or Harry Bloch.
there is d reference in the briefs to let
ers OF yours, but | could find none
rom you. The Postmaster General
ooked at the papers when | handed |
hem to him, bus did not examine them .
! carefully as ] did. He merely re-
1arked, the letters have probably been !
AIKEN away. OF course, no one can say.
robody is allowed to look at papers on
lie except members of Congress. Sena- I
prs and Representatives Nobody
Anat0rs or Representatives allowed
D withdraw papers or take copies of |
benz. They belong to tile Executiye.n
Can yon explain how. in the face OF II
lese rules. you obtained either access I
, tile original or q copy. Il seems to
d ali explanation would be Iii order as
iii assert in your card that the original I
ID read by you and copied Ia The city