The Opelousas courier. [volume] (Opelousas, La.) 1852-1910, 1891-08-22
oPELoUsAs, PARISH ST. LANDRY LA. AUGUST 22, 1891

i
will have no influence with me, and |
will not change my mind''
| We asked if he meant that he still
refused to give us the advertisement.
He replied that was what he meant.
We then asked him if he had read the
paper carefully He replied that he
had glanced over it, but that he had
seen enough Of it, and it did not alter
his determination to give the sale to
the Clarion, where it had already been
handed in to the printer. We took
the order from our pocket again, un-
folded it, and handed it back for the
second time to Mr.. F. with the assur-
ance that it was worth his while to
read it over carefully. He did so and
returned it with the statement that it
did not have any influence on his
decision, and that lie positively refused
to comply with its demands. We
informed the sheriff that was all we
desired to know, and called on gem
tleman present to witness the occur
renee. The sheriff stated that E'no
witnesses were necessary, as he would
stand to his decision against hundred
witnesses or words to that effect.
This is a case of most glaring defiance
of explicit law. A law which contains
not one syllable of ambiguity. 1t is SO
plain that it is absolutely impossible to
misunderstood it. He who could not
understand it could not be said to have
wit enough to escape interdiction.
The Sheriff's refusal to obey it can
not be excused by even the most ardent
of his supporters. 1t says in plain
Anglo Saxon words that defendants in
execution, shall hare the right to
choose the paper in whose columns the
advertisement of their property under
seizure, shall be made. The Sheriff
was handed written Instructions from
the seized debtors, to publish the sale
of their property in this paper. We pre-
sented their written instructions to him,
aud he refused positively to comply.
The people of st. Landry need not be
reminded of the fact that our paper
never, in the darkest days of the Demo
cratic party, lowered its colors or muf-
fled its defense of recognized democratic
principles. Mr.. Fontenot was elected by
the democracy of ST. Landry. He owes
his honors, and fat Office, TO that party
and also his devotion and support.
But because we decline to trumpet the
prises of a faction, which he has been
pleased TO give his support, thereby
making thrusts at the hitherto solid
and unbroken ranks of the party that
elected him, he boldly despises the
instructions of those having the legal
right to give them, hurls defiance at the
law, and becomes a self-constituted
dictator.
Will the democracy of this parish,
and to whom he is so industriously ap-
pealing for reelection, sustain him in
this law-defying, and dictatorial
course VIII they basely surrender
their plain legal rights, that he may
serve 10 Office another four years Will
they make him the virtual censor of the
Press in ST. Landry, by permitting
him to build up his own paper, with
patronage debtors have the legal right
to deny him ? This topic Is not pleas
ant to us for two reasons. One is, we
dislike to speak Of an officer elected by
the Democratic party, as a democrat,
and be constrained by facts, made such
by his own wilful conduct, to ebarac-
terize his official acts, as those of an
autocrat. We say it hurts us to be
impelled by facts which cannot be
denied, to make such an expose. The
second reason, is because we regret to
see apfoficer intrusted with the enforce
ment Bf the law, the first to trample
upon ii. Mr.. Fontenot sheriff, knows
ha has no right as an executive officer
to try to Influence anyone in the
exercise Of his choice Of newspaper.
1T should be his pleasure as it is his
sworn duty to leave that to the unfor
tunate debtor, whose property is under
seizure. He has denied the Messrs.
prejean that right, although presented
with written instructions signed by
these gentlemen, and duly witnessed
What constitutes an aufoerat