The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1888-02-29
"A DlGNIFIED REJoINDER.
Mr.. Galloway's Reply to the Able.
willie Medium.

on his "interview."
OF course it is manly, high toned ard in cv'
cry way worthy of the occupant whG ,G ls nSnn Im1
County of Abbcvillc. And need not say
that it meets argument with argument anu
stands proudly on the issue rs presented III
the Senator's interview. But the truth is ii
fails in every one of these particulars
We will not characterize the communica
ton of the Senator, but will simply say that
it does not meet our expectation. It's tone
and temper is surely unworthy of Sen
My position is simply this: In discharge ol
my duty as n correspondent have taken
occasion to criticisc some of Senator Hemp,
hills official acts, which is the prerogativc OF
the humblest citizen. In this instance was
asked to do so by quite number OF our clti-
ZenS. or course Senator Hemphlll mas inc
right to defend himself legitimatcly, but he
cvades the issue and makesa personal assault
upon my character.
I want the Senator to distinctly under.
stand that no measure OF abuse on MS part
will make me SO far forgetful Of my duty to
the public and TO myself as to make kim
dred reply.
and to measure what we have said by the
.'inch." BY reference 10 the past columns OF
his paper he will find that his unkind re-
marks about me could very properly be meas
ured by the span: ana tney were @ narsn, issro o,
stake the Senator has dropped the main Ques'
ton, viz: or Judge Sitton's high endorse
ment by this community at large, by all the
House delegation, BY the Governor, ana fNrS ESpc'
which he himself heartily endorsed, and that
the petition went regularly up from the peo
pie, signed by the House delegation, was put
in the Senator's hands and by him sent 10 Tie
Governor.
The Senator seizes upon one or two unim-
portant facts which we vii! briefly review.
The circumstances are these: 4 case OF pet
-, hnfN Hnn
which was sent by him to the higher Court,
and remanded back to him for trial ana was
satisfactorily adjudicatcd. This case was the
State against John Cater for stealing saddle
J. C. Caldwell against Barbara Brock had
been tried by Judge Sittop, but an appeal
taken TO the Circuit Court. Exception being
taken to Judge Sitton's ruling. on motion OF
Messrs. Perrin & Cothran the Judge ordered
the case tried by Judge Q. I. Calhoun. lmme-
diately after this the following notice OF this
case appeared in the Medium:
IAN Important appeal case Ss came 1I up rom bn,
fore Judge Fraser. The Judge granted new
trial, but would not refer it back to MIR. Sit
ton, because as he tersely remarked, In view
of the facts, he was not capable OF trying 'he
case"
Upon seeing this paragraph In the Medium,
Judge Sitton very naturally supposed that II
had reference to the case of the State against
John Cater, at that time having no knowl.
edge OF the disposition that had been made OF
the other case. Judge Sitton thereupon came
to me and asked that I make the following
correction:
from the Medium with reference to q case OF
petit larceny sent up to the Superior Court py
Judge Sitton The editor says that the Judge
would not send 1t back to Squire Sitton on
account Of his manifest incompetency. This
is all mistake. The case was referred back
TO Judge Sitton and most satisfactorily tried
by him."
This appeared In the issue of the Messenger
for March 22nd. Every one will observe that
both Judge Sitton's exception to the para
graph and my statement Of what he consld-
cred to be the facts Of the case were respect.
full and we'll tempered Senator Hemphill
replied in O lengthy editorial which we never
saw. Our first sight Of 1t was In the last copy
of the Medium, handed us. We heard OF u,
however, and referred the editor to Judge Sit
ton MS our author, which appears by the fol-
lowing in the Messenger of April 5. 1887:
"Saw the first paragraph alluded TO IN TINS
way: Judge Sitton handed us copy OF the
Medium, calling our attention to 1t ana 1e-
marking that It was very unkind and all
mistake, and asked us to correct It, For lur-
ther particulars, we refer Senator Hemphlll
to Judge Sitton, who is an honorable man maj
with the entire confidence OF his fellow clti'
zens."
We insert Judge Stton's certificate as proof
OF the facts above stated.
CECTIFICATE.
thereby certify that the above statement
Is SSe SSs'SSs @est, S. c., Feb. q, 7AaE' isss L.
MENRY III HESf: :. MCGEE.
Judge Sitton referred to the one case, the
editor to the other. Both were equally cor
rect as to the particulars to which they re-
spectively referred. In this matter l am not
at fault as appears from the above statement.
His allegation against me about the "sonc
500 votes,' we next explain. 1t will be no
ticed in the first place, that the number does
not mean exactly 800, but in that neishhor-
hood. We spoke from memory. Senator
Hemphill ran 72S votes behind the party vote,
as polled at the primary. Mr.. Young did not
Senator at the general election about 100, and
these were the ideas in our mind without IN
tention Of deception. The point was inmate.
rial as the Senator admits and not the main
proposition in that paragraph.
We append the official figures Of the pri-
mary election, August lst, 1856:
Iotal vote cas-. a'g.l
Judge OF 100
senator vote 80
The difference between the Senatorial anc
the party vote 72S. This is the vote to which
we had reference.
We have now presented fairly and impair
TALLY, as we believe, the two points on which
the Senator seizes. The public will see there
is nothing in either.
Senator Hemphill has public and pri-
VaG0 CIlUTuClcT. we nave IOL SOuBnI W
wade the sacred precincts Of the latter.
The true issue as presented In my last COM
munication remains unanswered, according
to our Judgment.
Strengthening this position, l cite the case
of DR.. Wideman, of Due West, to whom all
hearts 60 out In sympathy as he lies upon his
long bed Of atfliction. He was one of the
men who rode in the front rank Of "Red
Shirted Democracy" when the fate Of our be-
loved State trembled in the balances. He has
just been removed from the office Of Super
visor Of Registration. The first he knew OF 1t
was by the daily paper. Was he incompe-
tent?
Judge Sitton at least has the comforting sat
isfaction OF knowing that his petition, so well
endorsed, rests quietly In the archives of an
honest Democratic officials office. Let it re-
main sacred there.
We compress the argument In nutshell :
Has not Judge Stton been endorsed by the re-
port OF the Grand Jury, which report the SEN
ator endorsed and on which he staked his Win
dication. There were IS men on the Grand
Jury-all asserting. Thus our argument
stands intact.
Let disinterested public give the verdict.
We Will abide their decision.
r. S. GALLOWAY.
Due West, S. G., Feb. 81, 1883.
Pellets From Stony Point.
STONY POINT, Feb. p, 1SSS.
n1o,Hc cnncbinn ''--'rhn Snbba 4 IN