West Virginia freeman. (Parkersburg, W. Va.) 1881-1886, 1885-11-25
VIRGINIA. FREEMAN |
THAT VOTED DOWN REPORT
ONCE MORE.

as ever I was in my life. 1 wrote
briefly, simply because 1 did not
wish to intrude upon your columns
unnecessarily. But here comes
more than two columns of editor
lal foundering in reply to my brief
notes.
You say [ "cite no instance
of injustice done, nor make
single correction"
| did make two, and there is room
for many more in your criticism.
1st. You said "the report met
the hearty approval of the Confer
ence, except that Bro. Harper, &c"
For want of space did not quote
the entire sentence.
Now you deny what | quoted
from you, word for word see FREE
NAN of Oct. 9TH.
The "injustice" you did me in
the above is representing me as
being alone in my opposition to
the adoption of the "third party"
organ of the State, and that I was
doing it by way of "rebuke."
| was not alone in my views, nor
was the Conference a set of ignor-
amuses, but voted their honest
views, and the majority would have
been much greater had all been in
and voted.
I'd. You do the church an in
justice, when you say we have CIV
en- "hope and encouragement to the
saloonists and liquor men, with
their political henchmen and stri-
kers."
How does this sound when said
about church always true as steel
on the temperance question.
The two above objections to your
criticisms L did raise. Why do
you say 1 cite no instance of in
justice.
Is it possible that you "never
heard of two sides" to the method
of dealing with the temperance
question:
Did you not know that there are
leading nsiaads, as pious and as true
as either of US, who are opposed to
the third party movement?
Of course "there wasn't a clause,
word or intimation, &C., about
First, Second, or Third party" in
the voted down report, but there was
an endorsement of third party Or
gan, to the exclusion of other party
journals.
Ii the different temperance jour
nails Of which you speak had been
included, not word would l have
uttered against the report, the tenn
perance elements of each political
party being alike recognized.
All will be needed When the final
contest comes on.
| stated that when the amend.
ments were passed on the "voted
down report" members became
careless, and but few voted yes. on
adoption. This you say "was a
most remarkable and unheard-of
thing for an intelligent, delibera.
tive body to do"
Whether you regard US intelli-
gent or fools, the above are the
facts in the case.
You say further "it is notorious
that nearly every U. B. and M.
4. pulpit in the land was a rostrum
for Republican speeches."
L will let our M. E. brethren
speak for themselves, but will say
for the U. B. that 1 was
in the church during the most ex.
citing days on the slavery question,
and never knew one of our pull
pits 80 perverted.
Where were your Baptist rostrums
at that critical time?
Now all the facts concerning this
matter can be summed up in one
thought, viz: the Conference
was unwilling to become an ap-
pendage to the third party, by
adopting its organ, and the intima-
tlon is unjust that we we're trying
TO force anybody against their will.
The attempt was to force us to a
recognition Of the third party organ
the exclusion OF others, when to