The Pickens sentinel. [volume] (Pickens, S.C.) 1871-1903, 1894-08-23
A BRISK FIGHT
BETWEEN TWO POLITICIANS IN A
HOTEL LOBBY.

Editor Rooster and w. Gibbes Whaley
Como tn Blows-Tho Origin of tho rou-
ble-Cowsrdly Attack on Mr. Rooster
from tho Rear.
COLUMBIA, S. g., August 16.-A per,
sonal difficulty in the lobby of the
Jerome Hotel yesterday afternoon be-
tween George II. Koester, editor of
the Register, and w. Gibbes Whaley
convention, caused some excitement on
Maiu street. 1t is unnecessary to 20
into details. The following is an ac.
count Of the trouble as given to the
reporters of other papers by the princi-
pals:
FROM MIR. WHALEY.
Mr.. Whaley being asked for state.
ment Of the causes leading to the trou-
BILE between himself and Editor KOes-
ter, said: IL sent Mr.. Rooster q note
this afternoon at about s o'clock, stat
Ing that in an editorial OH the 18th
Instant he had willfully perverted a
conversation with me and that he had
told deliberate falsehood. Mr.. Koes.
ter called at the hotel this afternoon
and had a conversation with me con-
corning this note. He stated that he
had In measure implied in conver.
sation whilst in Charleston that was
a coward: l told him I would ask him
simple question: Did he mean to say
that was a cowardP' He begged the
question and I had to repeat the ques-
tion several times, stating that he must
give positive answer, yes or no. He
| finally answered yes l at once slap.
ped his face. He struck at me, slightly
grazing me. The crowd in the lobby
at once rushed in and separated us. I
regret to say that one Of my friends In
separating us struck Mr.. Koester. |
would have preferred attending to the
matter myself. I stated that I was
out the matter with Mr.. Rooster. by
that time the crowd had collected In
the lobby Of the hotel, and l got upon
one Of the benches and stated to the
crowd that MI Koester had made q
statement in one of his editorials
| which l had denounced as absolutely
false; that had desired to slap his face
and l had done So"
| FROM MIR. KOESTER.
Tuesday morning published In the
Register an editorial severely CRITICS,
Ing Mr. Whaley for the part he had
taken In the ring tactics adopted at
/ III
Club, In Charleston, Saturday night
Among other things I stated that an
outsider (myself) had told Mr.. Whaley
that he was too big coward to repeat
to any one of the men excluded from
the meeting an insinuation he had
just made to me that they were not
there in good faith. Today I received
letter which will be found elsewhere
in the paper In which Mr.. Whaley ob
jects only to that part Of my editorial
containing a statement above narrated
The statement that he had been called
a coward he denounced as falsehood
AS soon as I received this letter !
walked over to the Jerome Hotel and
saw Mr.. Whaley engaged In conversa.
| tion. When he was through walked
up to him and told him that l had re-
ceived letter from him, which would
| like to discuss for few moments In
public or private, with or without
friends being present He said that
either public or private discussion
suited him but finally decided on hav.
Ing the matter ventilated in the hotel
lobby. He commenced calling up va
rious members Of the Charleston dele.
cation, while asked Mr.. w. w. Price
no necessity for going into all that was
said. 1t amounted to this: That l
stated to MIR. Whaley that possibly l
had not used the word coward but
| that l had used words to the same
effect and that l had certainly called
| up one Of the gentlemen whom he had
instnuated was not at the Charleston
meeting in good faith and had told
him that he did not dare repeat to him
the insinuation he had just made tc
me. Mr.. Whaley kept asking did
90 fN co fN0 vi &~lI
him that did. He then struck at me
He struck at me again and I gave him
a lick. Friends then interfered anC
pulled us apart. While 1 was being
showed away was struck three or -four
times from behind, one Of which was
exceedingly severely, landing upon the
neck, just below my right ear. do no
know what outsiders interfered in such
a coWardly manner
MR. WuALEY'S GARD.
The following Is the card of Mr.
Whaley which brought on the trouble:
COLUMBIA, August Is.
&. Il. Rooster. Esq, Editor the Colum
bia Register.
Dear Sir: l have only today seen al
editorial in your issue Of the 14th inst.
The editorial Is an attack upon my
self, and amongst other things you say
"Mr. Whaley said to an outsider that
the men whom he had excluded wer,
not there In good faith. He wa
promptly told that he was too big s
coward to repeat that SANDER to any
one OF those men face to face" The
outsider you refer to Is yourself nc
you Will recollect that the conversa
tien was as follows: told you tha
you knew that q combination had beer
formed by yourself, Terrell and +. w
Wagener by which number of me1
were to be rushed up to the meeting a
tho last moment with the intention o
capturing the meeting and that th'
men were not there In good faith. Iol
said in high flown style: "You will
not undertake (or you will not dare) t.
say 80 to these men," 1 laughingl.
and satirically replied: "Oh, no, hav
no intention of saying anything Of tn
kind to them" You know we'll tina
the word coward was not used. YO1
have wilfully perverted the converse
tion and In my opinion told deliber
ate falsehood. must request you t.
give this note equal publicity wit
| UOnr nditnrinl h,1t 7 rpuoh aoph