The times and democrat. [volume] (Orangeburg, S.C.) 1881-current, 1883-08-16
what Doe. the Record Say :

~
In It's reply TO our article, published
two weeks ago, the Georgetown EaQuir-
er devotcs nearly two columns. There.
is nothing in the article that we care to.
notice except the insinuation that this
Journal is influenced BY Mr.. Dibble m
its ulterances on the.taritf question. We
are not surprised at our cotemporary
making this charge, as we would judge
from thestenor orits long editorial that it
was hard pressed for material out of
which to construct such a Lengthy arti-
Gle. We might reply to this lnsinslation
by asking the Enq'drer il the Ncrs AID
Courier formulated its opinions en- the
tariff question because .'we dc not re-
member having seen any remarks by our
esteemed cotemporary'' on the subject
prior to the attack Of the Ne,rs and Cos-
raer on Mr.. Dibble. But We make no
such charge. We give the Enquirer cred-
it for being sincere in,its utterances on
this as on every other question that may
arise. Besides, we do not believe in that
kind of newspaper warfare. We believe
nj a fair. square, manly fight, andwhen
we are reduced to the extremity OF max
ing such personal charges against a
brother editor, we throw up the sponge
and retire from the field. Having said
this much by way Of introduction, we
will now see how much truth there is in
the baseless insinuation made against US
by the Enquirer. In speaking of our ar
ticle. our contemporary says:
"The TIMES AND DEMOCRAT con-
cludes its article by saying that it IS the
advocate of Democracy and not of MIR.
Dibble. aud that it would be recreant to
its duty ;fitfailed toraiseits feeble voice
against making the tariff the leading is
sue in 1884. Our cotemporary has rais-.
ed Its .fecble' voice and we hope the
Democracy is correspondingly grateful.
Our contemporary is doubtless sincere.
but we cannot but express our regret
that it failed to perceive its duty until
MIR. Dibble had declared his intention to
vote for Randall. At any rate we do
not remember having seen any remarks
by our esteemed cctemporary prior to
that time expressing views similar to-
those, subsequently announced by Mr..
Dibble."
It IS almost q pity sometimes that The
beautiful Eabricatirns Of mans magma
ton should be demolished by plain, up-
relentipg truth. How nicely everything
fits when we call our imagination into
play. We build castles one momentand
pull them down the next. We have no
doubt but that the Enquirer imagined
the above charge to be true, but when
we turn on the light Of truth our readers
will discover that like all imaginary
structures it will fall. In our issue of
May 3, 1883, in an editorial headed Tho
Real Issue to be Met" we said:
The most important thing for us is
the election of a Democratic President in
1884, and to accomplish this we can't
afford to drive from us a single vote,
and a tariff for revenue only plank would
haud over all the pivotal States to the
Republicans. Let US act cautiously in
the matter. and not throw away the
bright prospects that are just ahead ofus
to satisfy the ambition Of any man or
set of men,
Again in the same issue in an editorl-
al headed Food for Thought" in which
we commented on a statement Of the
editor Of the New York Sun that free
trade would cause the Democracy to
lose several States in 1884, we said:
According to this, free trade would
cause the Democracy to lose Louisiana
and Georgia. aud also New Jersey, New
York. Connecticut, and probably Indl-
ana. The loss of these States would
certainly defeat the Democracy. In dis
cussingA this question the 1merican Reg
lister says. and we commend its utter
ances to the mens be- Iartgs who
see,ns deterinip67
F
Ne could fs<ssI ~ from
our columns, but the above is sufficient
TO disprove the charge of the Enquirer,
when it is known that Mr.. Dibble. did
not announce his intention of supporting
Mr.. Randall until sometime in the early