St. Landry clarion. (Opelousas, La.) 1890-1921, 1911-08-05

nounceQ Lne 81. Landry delega'
ton changed it's vote
for Michel 7 votes
McClendon7
Montegut 2
16 votes cast"
I had Mr.. Landry certify to
these facts. See his certificate
herewith which please preserve.
This certificate, if it is worth any
thing, proves up my case. If in
the several figures in the Michel
column his eyes could discern a
figure | and 2, then these indi-
cate Michel received first one
vote, then two votes as con-
tended for by me and his OPP
ponent received the remainder.
The most marvellous feature of
this record is that it does not
accredit Mr.. McClendon with a
single vote. Such vote or votes
as he may have received are
obliterated. Not a figure to be
seen. Why is this so? Why is it
that Michel's votes are beyond
recognition? Why is it McClen-
don's votes undecipherable? Why
is it that Mr.. Montegut's vote, a
figure 2, is so plain? Why is it
that the votes for the other par
ishes are clearly observable other
than in St. Landry? Was this
done to dovetail with Mr.. Swords
version of his recollection, APP
pearing in your paper Of the 29th
of July wherein he says: Du-
son cast the votes of the first
ward for Montegut; T. S. Fonte-
not cast the seven votes for Nc
Clendon. | went on the stage
and cast the seven votes for
Michel. C. NJ. Thompson, who
held the proxy of Alcin Vidrine,
DR.. Ben Guilbeau who held the
proxy of Treville Leger, and
Capt. Sam Haas went for
Michel" or was it merely acct
dental. Strangeisn'tit? Stranger
than fiction.
Mr.. Swords recollection, Iplace
little value on. His memory was
in several essential parti-
culars. / have already shown
there were only sixteen dele
instead of nineteen as as
serted by him; that these were
not instructed to vote as a unit
as also declared by him, and I
have proved by the record"
that his certificate is valueless,
for the reason it emanates from
a record Of no basic value. How
can any one say how the votes
were cast therefrom, unless he
can decipher the figures that are
supposed to represent these
With the figures in the
column unintelligible to
even Mr.. Landry, with those in
The McClendon column complete
v obliterated, / challenge any
one to indicate therefrom how
st. Landry's vote was cast. My
money was to be forthcoming if
he record proved / was in
error. It fails to do this. It
proves nothing at all. My money
'emains in my pocket.
Whenever I assert a fact, II
Usually am correct. In this in {
I was correct in every re-
;pect save one. I stated Mr..
was Mr.. Michel's OPP
oonent. Therein I erred. But I ]
lid not err when I stated we had
,nly sixteen votes, that these /,
we're uninstructed, and that
only received one or two
yotes, his opponent the re- {
nainder. | stand by this state {
My memory is as good as {
my witness MI. Swords can /,
ind. lam going to adhere to it, :
without record evidence to the ;.
contrary. !
The first time you go to the l
gity examine this record and
will find it is made up as
written herein. My son and my
elf say it and it is not going to !
Undergo any further change. In
conclusion, | desire to thank Mr..
Iandry for the courtesy ex- /
me. i
Yours truly,
GILBERT L. DUPRE.
New Orleans, July 81, 1911. ]
hereby certify that the vote {
Gil. n.a4e