The Caucasian. (Shreveport, La.) 1900-192?, 1907-12-15
CAFFERY'S ANSWER
SANDERS STATEMENTS ANA
LYZED-ORIGINAL CHARGES
WERE NOT DISPROVEN
Regarding the Poll Tax Transaction and
Influence Exercised in Connection
With the Sheriff's Oficc-Attempt to
Evade and BeclOud the Issue.

New Orleans Picaylme Dec. 10: Don
elson Gallery has given out the follow
ing reply to the statement OF DR.. J. W.
Sanders, which was published yesterday
morning in the Picayune:
Mr.. Estopinal, Mr.. Sanders campaign
manager, promised, when my speech at
Washington Artillery Hall was pub
liShed, to refute what | said with ''au-
thentic proofs"
This the statement issued this morn
ing. on behalf of Mr. Sanders, after a
delay Of twenty-five days, signally fails
to do.
The issues which the bulky Sanders
pamphlet attempts to becloud and evade
were:
First-Was Mr.. Sanders joint ad-
mnlstrator of the sheriff's office in St.
Mary in political affairs?
Second-Were poll taxes charged on
the sheriff's books to Mr.. Sanders and
his political friends, while the opposition
was subjecteds to the rule of mo proxy
payments" which was contested in the
suit of State ex rel. Young VS.. John B.
Sanders, Sheriff?
Upon these issues the Sanders pamph-
let contains no denial of any substantial
fact averred by me.
1t is not denied that Mr.. Sanders ap-
peared in courts by formal pleading, in
the suit of Marsh VS. Sanders, and up
held the sheriff for refusing to let cit
izen copy the names on the bound poll
tax book. public record.
1t is not denied that Mr. Sanders
wrote the letter of March 20, 1902, to R.
X. Cooke, showing that he had access to
all the poll tax data he wanted, from
records in the sheriff. office which were
not public.
1t is not denied that Mr.. Sanders ap-
peared in court, by formal pleading, in
the suit of State ex rel. Young vs. San
ders, and upheld the sheriff for refusing
to permit poll tax payments by proxy.
1t is not denied that the sheriff, at the
time when the Young suit was pending,
issued 242 poll tax receipts gratis to his
friends
1t is not denied that on the books
there were poll tax accounts against Mr..
J. Y. Sanders for 34S poll taxes, and
against others politically affiliated with
him-namely. Messrs. w. H. Kramer,
for 81 poll taxes; D. A. Sanders, for
Io2 poll taxes; Henry Jacobs, for SO poll
taxes; and Ed Bourgeois, for 20 poN
! taxes. On the contrary, Mr.. Sanders
specifically admits that he contributed"
to the payment of poll taxes, which is
contrary to his sweeping denial at Jean
nerctte
1t is not denied that Mr. Sanders
made, i'll the Young suit, the argument
which | have quoted from him, in which,
contemporaneously with the free distri-
button of poll tax receipts in the sher-
ifs office, he contended that a poll tax
payment was not valid unless made by
the citizen himself, in person.
1t is not denied that DR.. H. J. San
. ders telegram appealing to Mr.. J. Y.
Sanders for certain relief from the sher-
it, was received by him, nor is it denied
that Mr.. J. Y. Sanders failed to answer
this telegram.
1t is not denied that the statement of
March 81, 1904, showing that ]. Y.
Sanders was charged with .34S poll taxes
was presented to J. Y. Sanders and ap-
proved by him, nor is it denied that the
notations thereon are in his handwrit-
ing. as Mr.. Cooke alleges. On the con-
trary, the two statements produced in
my speech are reproduced identically in
the pamphlet of DR.. Wofford Sanders.
Mr. Kramer admits that the charge
against him for poll taxes is correct, and
not one Of the other parties against
whom poll taxes are charged, including
J. Y. Sanders himself, has made a
signed statement denying these charges
to be correct.
| 1t is not denied that the statements of
| March 81, 1904, and of May I, 1904, are
correct. nor that they were taken from
the sheriff books.
1t is not denied that the sheriff's office
was assessed 1888 a month for buying
the clerks office from J. A. Loret. nor
is it denied that J. Y Sanders insisted
upon the sheriff office paying this
amount because he wanted "to control
the clerks office as stated by Mr.
| Cooke. 1t is merely claimed by the
clerk that he has not been controlled by
Mr.. Sanders in the discharge OF any of
his official duties, but the contrary has
/ never been asserted by anyone, nor could
| it Justly be.
The residuum Of the case. taking Mr..
! Sanders answer for all it is worth, is
that he invoked one set of rules IN the
Young and Marsh cases, against his OPP