The Newberry herald. [volume] (Newberry, S.C.) 1865-1884, 1884-07-10
~. Pope EE9LIES 10 NR. JOSEPH !
kEITf.

10 THE i El-lI VI tut seSOIISt
time in my life, | feel impelled to
answer q communication in one Of
our County newspapers TO say
that regret the necessity, would
he stating my feelings mildly.
Nevertheless, it is a duty Owe the
good people of this Comfy. for |
was born and have been reared in
their midst. and for nearly qnartcr
Of century have been OH terms OF
the kindeSt and closest Intimacy
with them. Mr.. Keil.'s card cen
tains statements That demand at-
! tcntion.
1t happened in the recent Conn
ty Convention that Joseph l.. keitt,
E>q, an attorney Of the New berry
! Bar, assaulted politically Mr.. George
Johnstonr, also an attorney ofthe
Newberry Bar Both of these gen
tlelntn ARE also large planterr. The
basis of the attack referred to WAS
the following language of Mr..
Keitt. He charged, that while Mr..
.Iohnstone was n member OF the
Legislature from this County he
uttered the following words The
agricultural interest of the State is
growing too powerful and unless
checked viii control legislation and
it ought to be throttled " Mr..
Keitt's ,harge was deliberately
made. He acknowledged that he
had no proofs, but suited that he
made it from representations made
to him by others who had heard it
from Col. A. ?. Butler, Com
missioner Of Agriculture for this
State. lie also stated that the words
complained of were uttered by MIR.
Johnstone before Committee
while a Bill, having reference to
the agricultural interests, was be-
fore it. Mr.. keitt assured the Con
vention that if. upon investigation
the charge was nnfuunded he would
correct it. This charge l denied,
not mincing words in my denial /;
on the contrary, being indignant
at such an attack, l characterized
it as damnahlo and pronounced
the charge II lie ont of the whole
cloth, but tinasmuch as Mr. keilt had
carefully announced that he did not
make. the allegation against Mr..
Johnstone upon his own knowledge
but simply npon the here say testl-
mony of Others, | took pleasure in
disclaiming any intention toimpute
ialsehood to him.
There are two questions rerti-
nent 10 this controversy:
|. Did Mr.. .ohnstonc use the
language in question?
=. If be did not, was my conduct
in the Convention such as the
people of Newbcrry shonld con-
demn ?
It must be apparent to every fair
minded man that if Mr.. Johnstone
used the language in question, his
right or claim to the support OF
this pc pie WAS gone. No man
who used such language can repre-,
sent the people Of NeSbelry in
any position. In Mr.. JonstOne's
case, the use Of such language IN
volved the basest ingratitude. Our
agricultural people had made him
their representative four successive
terms in the Legislature. Very
peculiarly in his case, it could be
truthfnlly said, that our agricul-
tural people had made him polti-
cally all that he Was, and for him
to smile the hand that helped him,
was too mach for this pcopl. to
bear qnietIy.
If then, the consequences of guilt
were so fur reaching and SO destruc-
tive, WAS there not involved, in com
mon fairness 10 him, q demand lha.
the charge should only be made
when the same was true? Mr.. klett in
his cald, contents himself with what
is known as ''heresay testimony. De
is a lawyer and knows that snch tes-
timony is treated as absolutely worth
less in tho Ccu,ts OF law in this
State, and lie onght TO know that
liz use is not to be tolel ated in as
certaining the truth or falsity oil
any serious charge. Now | pro
pose t, treat the public to a diffe
rent kind of testimony. shall nse
nothing bnt direct and positive tes,
timrny. ! wish before doing SO 10
.alI Mr.. Keitts attention TO Il diff
erence in the phraaeology of his
card as published in the Newbelry
ObSerrer and that published in the
Columbia Register. In one Qhe
Ob$errer,) near the en,' of his card
referring TO Col. 4. P Bntler, Mr..
keitt says: He confirmed my
statement; :" in the-Rcyi$ter he sa. s,
He confirmed the statement in
substance. How much better it
wonla have been for Mr. keitt to
have obtained Col Bntler's state
mcnt in writing, Sor, otherwise, to
have stated all that Col. Bntlrr told
him, so that we conld have drawn
our OWN differences
Now to my proofs--I propose to
put npon the stan.l as witnesses
the five gentlemen who composed
the Special Committee before whom
the language was alleged to have
been used by Mr. Johnstone. They
are Mr.. George Johnstone, w. II
Mr.. Parker. of Ahbeville, Mr.
Jno +. Ficken. of Charleston, Mr.
f. B. Mnrray, of Anderson, and
Al. T. VI