West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1888-10-11
WHO ARE THE HYPoCRITEs?

Messrs. II. Heermans and y. Ami
Martin, president and secretary Of the
Amendment League, in their reply in
the Journal and New Era, last week, TO
criticisms made in the ARGUS the week
before, tumble into the "hole" they
thought to dig for the editor of this
paper. Let US see "who the hypo-
critics" are. They say: =
1.-The Editor came with it and the pos
tiers to MIR. Martin, who said that as
secretary Of the league he could not
cooperate with any third party meet
ings." Now we deny that Mr.. Mar
tin said anything of the kind, but on
the contrary assert that he said he
''kncY nothing about the matter, and
you Mr.. Kildowl had better see Mr.
Heermans." We told Mr. Martin to
take the letter to Mr. III. and we would
write Mrs. johnson that We had refer
red the matter to the officers of the
League Mr.. Martin made no objec-
tions TO this whatever, and we at once
notified Mrs. johnson of what VIC had
done. After giving The letter and pos
tiers 10 Mr.. Martin we dismissed the
affair from our minds and thought no
moro of it until Mrs. McClurkin came
into our Office on the 25th, when we
asked Mr.. III. if he had made arrange
ments for the meeting, He told us he
had not, and we then wrote Mr. Mar
tin note telling him Mrs. McClurkin
was at our Office and asked him to call
and make arrangements for meeting.
He sent word back telling us that he
was engaged at that time, but for us TO
so ahead, make arrangements for a
meeting, and he would assist us. Does
that sound anything like he would have
nothing to do with the Third party +?
The gentlemen, in their defense, says
further : lit looks like an effort on
the part of the Editor to make some
political capital out of the matter, hence
his efforts to shift the responsibility
onto our shoulders.
Notice this in Mrs. Johnson s letter ::
"To accept your kind offer made some
time since to arrange public meeting +"
Why not comply with his offer to her {?
We wrote Mrs. johnson telling her
that arrangement could have been made
for the meeting.
But how does Messrs. Heermans and
Martin (but we will leave Mr.. NJ. out
of this article in the future as he stands
self-convicted of being two-faced) know
that Mrs. McClurkin advocates the
Third party? Was not Mr.. II. so un-
gentlemanly as to refuse to meet the
lady in our sanctum and find out what
she would advocate? Did he ever
hear her advocate the Third party? Is
she not sent out by the w. G. Il. u.
of this State to advocate the Amend
meat? Of course she is, for she takes
great pains to tell her audiences that
she cares nothing for any political party
and that all she wants is the adoption
of the Amendment. That is in sub
stance what she told us and also what
she said at Tuunelton. Which are we
to believe-Mr. HcermaDs or Mrs.
McClurkin ?
Again NIr. II. says: eff Mrs.
johnson had desired us TO assist her
organizer in arranging for meeting
she would have written u.s. We
think not for she had found you pro-
Tossing temperance but not willing to
aid in ITS prom otion. and she WAS un-
willing to write you again.
We assert that Mr.. II knew Mrs.
mcClurkin was not speaking in the in
terest Of the Third party when she was
in Kingyood
In conclusion, we will say that the
thought of making political capital out
Of this matter never entered our minds
nor would we stOop so low as to do
such thing. Our position upon the
temperance question is too we'll known
by all who have associated with us
since we came into Preston county to
need assertions or professions from us.
Can our critics say aught against us as
to our temperance position IL they
can, turn on the light and let the peo-
| pic know Just what we are
AMeLIs RlYES---Dl0 B0UClCAULT,
~ u ffpIIfarfr flttnor a. .r..t.