The Colfax chronicle. [volume] (Colfax, Grant Parish, La.) 1877-1981, 1893-09-23
Is it Error or Malice?


Is it Error or Malice?
We have upon two or three oc-
casions referred to the glaring in
accuracies of the Mail in dealing
with facts, but, for outrageous vio-
lations of the truth, the last issue
of that paper caps the climax. In
something over four columns, de-
voted almost exclusively to person.
al illusions to this editor, there is
scarcely a sentence that COMFORTS
even partially with the true state
of facts. We have not the time
and space, even if we had the pa
thence and disposition to infict our
readers with explicit answers to all
the silly maledictions that weak
minded editor has seen fit to put
in print, but will only give two or
three samples of his most glaring
mistakes. That they are errors,
any man is bound to admit who
has the least spark of reason, and
the only conclusion to be drawn is
that they are the result of gross and
objectionable ignorance, or are ma
licious misstatements made with a
definite view and purpose.
Take this as q sample:
The last returns OF the Parish Superin-
tendent show an increase OF children in
Grant PARISH OF over one thousand, and
a decrease in polls assessed OF over three
hundred. The natural increase OF school
children for the year should have been
about IT'S or 200. This shows that 800
children living in Grant parish have not
been entered ON the public school list for
years previous to 1893, majority OF whom
are white. Mr.. Goodwin was president
of the Grant parish school board from
1888 until 1892 and can probably explain
this neglect of duty.
: The increase OF children in 1892 over
1891 was 199, and in 1893, 1882, and
an actual decrease Of polls OF over three
hundred, as follows: 1879 in 1892, and
1893 shows 1850. w. L. Richardson was
parish superintendent during the years
mentioned, and says he did his utmost to
get the Goodwin school board to assist
him in making correct estimate OF the
children, but in vain.
Judge Richardson tells us that
he never said a word that could
possibly be construed into any
such thing; that on the contrary
the Goodwin school board was al
ways active and jealous, and took
particular pains in the matter OF
districting the schools and enum-
Grating the childfen-a thing that
never was properly carried out un-
til they did it. The record shows
that on Oct. s, 1889, the school
board instructed Supt. Richardson
to make full and complete enume-
ration of all the children in each
school district, which he did, and
reported in January, 1890. Sub
sequent investigation of the assess
or's work convinced the board that
a large number of children were
omitted, losing money the schools
were entitled to receive. On Oct.
3, 1891, q second instruction was
given to the superintendent, and
he was ordered to make the emu
meration. by districts, giving the
names of families alphabetically,
and number of children in each
family. Judge Richardson com
pleted this enumeration on OF
about Jan. 10, 1892, reporting an
increase over the assessors nume-
Grafton of 1881 children So this
increase, that the Mail 30 glibly
talks about, was made snd COM
pleted by the Goodwin school
board six months before they went
out of Office.
Has any one ever read an article in the
CHRONICLE against app0intive power, es
pecially before 1888?
Yes; see editorials in CHRONICLE