The Opelousas courier. [volume] (Opelousas, La.) 1852-1910, 1896-07-25
Judge Dupre's Letter,
OPELOUsAs, La. July 20, 1896

To the Editor of the Picayune:
There is an old French proverb which says: ::
"Qui nentend qu'une clOche nentend quinn
son." literally translated, "who hears but one
bell hears but one sound" Your article under
the heading. 1.-The law has majesty save
what the courts give it," which appsar5 in
plifies the adage 1t does me great injustice
no doubt unntentOnal on your part, and pro-
ceeds from an imperfect knowledge of facts
and probably from information coming from
source busy at this hour in scattering its ven
ON to prejudice me in the eyes OF the public
and if possible in the opinion Of the Supreme
just as they are, and fear not the judgment
of the unbiased and good people of the State
| will premise by saying that when the peO-
pie of my district called me to the bench was
fully aware how distasteful my election was to
certain parties in st. Landry. Fully identified
with my fellow citizens who were opposed to
ple and engaged in the commission Of acts
which disgraced the parish, | we'll know the
enmity they bore for me, Tor tear the law
might be executed and they might be called to
answer for their Ia W lesSness
l felt they would not fail to take advantage
of anything might do which might be tor
tured into an offense that might injure me in
the eyes OF the public and, if possible. give
rise to a charge that might bring the condemna
tion of the people, il not the highest tribunal
upon me.
ing the appointment OF additional police jurors
by the Governor they thought might avail
them III their purpose, and they were not slow
in taking advantage OF 1t.
Now these are the facts of the case: On rep
resentatiOn made to the Governor by these
men, he made these appointments. The Dis
trict Attorney, i'll the honest discharge OF his
duties as he understands them, brought an ac
ton against these appOintees, coupled with Il
prayer for an injunction to restrain the new
police Jurors from acting and to restrain the
president from recognizing them. The peti-
tiOu was clear and unambiSuOuS and contained
all the necessary ayerments for the issuance OF
the injunction. I felt it my duty to issue the
writ. ThereupOn application was made by the
defendants in lnjnction for writ of certlOrari
coupled as is generally done in such cases,
with a writ OF prohibition. This was granted
by Justice BreauX. Soon as service WAS made
upon me, the opportunity presenting itself. the
new police jurors proceeded to be sworn i'll as
police jurors and was recognized by the pres-
dent. thereupon a rule was taken out by the
District Attorney on all OF them to show cause
why ey should not be punished for contempt
Of court
carefully read the writ of prohibition blythe
light of 9se highest authority could find, and
this is Done less than the decision of the
Supreme e6ourt of the United States, Fourth
Wallace, 15SotU. s. vs. Hoffman). Justice Miller
1.-The writ of prohibition as it's name imports,
is one which commands the person to whom
it is directed not to do something which by the
suggestion OF the relator the court is Informed
lie is about to do. II the thing be already done,
it is manifest that the writ OF prohibition can
not undo it, for that would require an attirma-
itiOn is to suspend the action and to prevent
any further proceedings in the prohibited
direction" A. and E. Encyclopedia of Law
vol 10, page 263; note l. ,or,,o
The injunction had issued and t he ehtt ehttNM " police
Jurors and the president had been enjOined.
This was an accomplished fact. concluded
the writ of prohibition issued by Justice
Breaux did not have the effect of dissOlving the
Injunction. 1t only arrested further proceedings
i'm the determination of the right vel non of
perpetuating it. In other words, everything
had to remain i'll the statu quo until the
supreme Court could pass on the legality of
the proceedings. Be it observed the writ of
certorarl does not include an examination of
the merits OF acase: After close reading, of
every authority within my reach, l concluded
that while it wasyincumbent upon me to deter
mine nothing in the suit, it was my duty to en-
force obedience to the injunction issued by me.
In plain words, while it was my duty to respect
the order OF the Supreme Court, it was equally
my duty to enforce respect to the order of the
District Court.
have been brewing haze placed the matter
before many eminent jurists, who did not hes
itate to declare that my course was legally
correct.
/ could find no adjudcated case in point save
and except that furnished me by the United
States Supreme Court. On the trial Of the
rule for contempt felt it my duty to punish the
defendants Had done otherwise because OF
the threats against me which were made far
and wide to deter Inc froSp performing my
duty, would have felt unT,prthy, of the posi-
pie of ST. Landry. Consider, tbat within the last
few months prior to the election this parish
was turned over to iawlessness, that crimes OF
all sorts were committed for political purposes
and the perpetrators have not yet been called
to answer, and you will at once agree that for
O judge to show weakness under such circum
stances will drag his court into supreme con.
tempt.
am aware, as you remark. that there is some
talk of Impeachment. Let it come. My remOv-
al would be a sweet mOrsel to the lawless; but
I will not for one moment entertain the idea
that the Supreme Court can be made subsur-
Went to the wishes of a set Of men who were
willing to trampe the Constitution under foot
and ride into office over dead bodies.
/ may have erred. No one is infallible.
The Supreme Court, in its last order, from
an ex parte presentation OF the case, seems to
imply ii, 1t has been done without affording
me hearing. 1t may be undone on the final
trial Of the issues.
In conclusion let it be well understood in
! anything have written have no intention of
| criticsing the order of Judge Breaux or the
| last order emanatiug from him, Justices Miller
| and McEnery, buthave entered into this lengthy
explanation with a view OF explaining the
| grounds of my action and of showing that
| acted upon my honest convictions OF right and
sense of official duty, guided by the law as
| then understood it. though in doing SO may
have unintenliOnally erred in my construction
| of the law and Of the order OF the Supreme
Court. GILBERT L. DIPRE.
-eD@%-
UP to Date.