Mississippi leader. (Jackson, Miss.) 1892-1895, 1893-08-08

course, all they need to do to con
stitutc crime in the eye of Dr.
Smith is to vote other than with
the Prohibition party.
He simply assumes it to he a
crime for a minister who votes
for temperance resolution on
the conference floor to vote any
other ticket. He makes no cf-
fort at the proof save to give it
as his opinion that all such ulti-
mately land in certain warm
climate. Doctor, is it really Il
crime to vote the Democratic or
Republican ticket. He refers to
his criticism of Chancellor Gar
land, as his "gcntlc criticism. y
Let us examine it. After refer
ring to his criticism of DR.. Kel-
ley and quoting "All this was
to the injury of the church and
the deep modification of its mem
bers,' he proceeds to charge that
venerable Chancellor and Chris
tian minister Of casting his
bread upon polluted waters, the
filth of which is to he gathered
after many days, by his postcri-
ty. Along this line he charges
all of his like, and consigns them
and him to hell, As we showed in
our previous paper, and the doc
tor does not deny the charge.
Now is not this a gentle q criti-
cism! 1t is not my business to
defend Chancellor Garland, he il,
fully able to care for himself.
simply refer To these statements
as to others Of like character to
make good my statement that
Your arguments are eXtrcme-fa-
natical. And if have not fully
made out my ease, 1t is not for
lack of material, for this has been
furnished in abundance.
No, brother, your argument
has not disclosed to me my near
ness to pcrdition, | am not "try-
inc to shake off conviction by say
ing hard things of you, for
there is no convicting power in
the words referred to, to make Us
uneasy. The only one who seems
to be quaking is the individual
who presented such argument
without thinking of the results tc
which his false reasoning led.
The doctor tries to hide the force
of my argument againt his unfair
dissection of the characters of
some of the best men in the
church, by accusing me of saying
''hard things of him. But, like
the ghost of old, it "will not
down. " No Use to founder, doc
tor, for the Indictment sticks, and
there is no escaping the consc-
quences.
"To put every one on the side
of the saloon, which is the devil :
most powerful agency, simply
because of voting the Democrat
ic or Republican ticket, can be
nothing more nor less than blind
fanaticism. The doctor asks,
"Who has done that - DR..
Smith, of course. He enjoys the
sole distinction, so far rs my
knowledge extends. | refer him
and others to his utteranccs for
proof. No rcstatement need be
made.
He depicts me with "lines Of
despair upon my cOuntenance,
and makes me eXclaim, "1ou are
trying to break up the Democrat
ic or Republican party This
last sentence he encloses III quota
ton marks and claims that |
wrote the sentence. My wonder
increases as | proceed. He knows
that | wrote no such sentence.
He knows it to be II gross misrop-
rcsentation. He knows il has
no foundation in fact. He is
aware of the fact that it has never
existed anywhere, save in the airy
intellectual atmosphere of Dir. j.
ID. Smith.
He says he does not "care if
there are a thousand anti-liquor
parties. Exactly, doctor, but
you propose to unite them finally,
If | am not to belong to the Pro
hibition party, | must belong to "A
Prohibition party, in order to es-
cape censure from you.
He accuses me of ''bringin9
out arguments against Prohibition
by force of habit. Il mean the
habit" he says, "of answering
everything that cmanatcs from Il
Prohibitionist, with few stereo-
typed words and phrases that
have been culled out or manufac-
tured by liquor newspaper edi-