The weekly messenger. [volume] (St. Martinsville [i.e. St. Martinville] La.) 1886-1948, 1893-06-10
Answer to the Grand Jury.

cts Id, duHt OIL iOiO,
TO the Editor of the Messenger
MIR. Editor, as have never asked the
use Of your valuable columns, hope
You will kindly give me little space in
one of them. 70 answer the suggestions
of the Grand Jury Of this Parish.
After carefully and attentively read
ing the report of the Grand Jury deem
it my duty to answer these suggestions,
i'm justice to the preceding Police Jury
of which / had the honor to be menl-
her. and also to the people Of this Parish.
The Grand Jury says that the Parish
is imposed upon by the cOnstables. This
as far as some OF them are concerned is
no news. as this Police Jury as well as
the preceding ones have been continual
ly fighting these unjust charges of some
of the constables and this Police Jury is
now having two or three suits to protect
the finances of this Parish. The Grand
Jury advises the Police Jury to tear
down (what it considers as an eye sore)
the fence in front of the court house.
1t seems to ignore that the financial
condition of this Parish is such that the
police jury is barely able to maintain
the Parish's credit.
II also advises the painting of the iron
work in the Jail and fails to see the
greater necessity of painting the vault
in the clerks Office. 1t also says that the
file boxes. in the clerks office are full
and that that officer. can only with diff
ficulty keep tho papers in safety.
Blame in this case can not attach to
the police jury as this work has been or
dered twice, and was postponed for want
of material to make these file boxes.
The grand jury says ii would be dcre-
Hct in its duty if it did not call the at
tention of the police jury to these diff
ferent items.
Whether or not the grand jury has TO
be charged with derelictiOn of duty, the
sequel will show.
The grand jury recommends an inves-
tigation of the books of the late Sheriff
Cab. Gardemal by the police jury and
this ii does in its report which Is not
printed in the official journal of the
Parish.
Nevertheless the police jury has taken
its recommendation i'm consideration
and appointed a committee to invesiI-
gate the pretented defalcatiOn by late
Sheriff Gardemal.
This committee will report in due
time to the police jury as charged in its
commission.
Now MIR. Editor is it not passing
strange that the grand jury having two
officers Of the Parish traduced before
them for maffeasance in Office, it recon-
mends an investigation of the sheriff's
books, and makes no allusion whatever
to the case Of the clerk of court.
Is this doing either one of these off,
GERS justice. some mention at least
Ought to have been made az regards the
clerk Of courts case.
No one will deny that these two
cases are of public notoriety therefore
the appropriated public had a right to
know what were its findings in either
case.
Is not the grand jury the almost su-
preme tribunal of the land, has IL not
the power of summoming whoever
they need, can it not also order the
of any kind of written proof
to subtantiate any and every charge
made before them. why therefore has il
made a mock investigation of late
Sheriff CARDINALS case. Why not at
'nce have found him guilty or exonerat-
ri him Of the malicious charge brought
against him. What will the people of
his Parish think of the seeming parti- |
llity of our grand jury.
remain yours respectfully.
EUG. A. DUCHAMP.