The Donaldsonville chief. [volume] (Donaldsonville, La.) 1871-current, 1907-12-21
Ranlr to fhe Cafrerf Charges.

The New Orleans daily papers
printed on Monday, Dec. 9, the reply
to The charges made by Don Caffery
against Lieut.. Gov Jared Y. SaE-
ders, which were in effect that MIR. San
ders was jointly implicated with his
cousin, Sheriff John B. Sanders OF ST.
Mary parish, in SO administering tie
aft airs of that Office as to give undue
political preferences to their frlenos 10
the 10 after OF poll tax payments and
access TO the records OF such pay
ments. Documentary proof was cited
by MIR. Cafery in support OF his accu
Stations, and the character OF the evil
deuce was such as to leave little doubt
in the minds of impartial hearers or
readers that gross partisanship and
unfairness, to say the least, had been
manifested in the conduct of the
sheriff's Office and that the sheriff S
cousin was fully cognizant OF and
privy to these practices.
The Sanders reply is made by
DR.. ]. Wofford Sanders, brother
OF the lieutenant governor, and
it is accompanied by mass o.:
documentary evidence which requires
more time to read and digest than
We have as yet found available. The
New Orleans Times Democrat seems to
have given the controversy careful and
unbiased consider alton, however, an6
there can be no partisan injustice in
quoting and adopting the editorial
view expressed by that leading Dem
ocratic newspaper on a matter apper
tanning to Democratic candidate for
governor OF the state. The.concluding
paragraphs OF the Times Democrats
lengthy editorial are as follows:
The evidence shows that the sherifYs Office
in st. Mary was not, in the matter of poll taxes,
conducted fairly and equally as to all the voters
Many of the sheriff's political friends received
their poll tax receipts through him without pay
ing cent for them the expense being charged
against his account: while his political oppo-
nents, even when they rendered mony were put
to great inconvenience and hardship to get their
recelpts, ana were nnalIy compelled to carry
their cases MP to the supreme court to get the
rights the constitution gives them.
With all these matters Mr.. Caffery attempts to
connect Lieut.. Gov. Sanders. Whether he does
SO directly may be doubted for the evidence is
not sufficient. On the other hand the position
OF Lieut.. Gov Sanders in regard to the sheriffs
once and Its management the fact that he was
the cousin, adviser and legal counsel of the
sheriff, his intimate knowledge OF the interior
workings OF the Office, his advocacy and defense
OF its methods and the many times he was called
IN to settle questions connected with it leave an
Impression that he should share some of the re-
sponsiblllty with the sheriff for the methods
which prevailed and this impression is not re-
elsewhere. Had Mr.. Jared Sanders answered
the questions categorically he might have made
stronger case for himself. His denial that he
advised the sheriff to refuse the poll tax money
sent In by voters would have set completely at
rest one OF Mr.. Caffery's charges. He could have
disposed OF others by showing that he did not
know that poll tax receipts were being issued
where no money was paid in for them; or that,
knowing this practice he advised against it
That ne was wholly ignorant that he was carried
on the sher1hs book a debtor for S348 for poll
that when he found the charges entered against
him ne insisted upon the books being immedi-
ately corrected and his name being erased from
the list OF debtors to the sheriff's Office. All
these statements and proofs would have been ac-
cepted as meeting directly and unequivocally the
charges of Don Gallery, and would have laid
them 1T rest. It is unfortunate that Lieut.. Gov
Sanders did not appear as q witness in his own
case ana did not give his version of these Incl
dents, which no one else can give properly for
him.