The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1896-08-19
MR.. KEITT'S STATEMENT.
He Believes it to be Acknowledgements
From an Old Newspaper And
Brings I'm an Affidavit.

Mr.. Editor: have through the courtesy o
friend just seen your last issue containing Il
card from MIR. 4. e.. Latimcr commenting up
ON the extract from my speech at AobeVllle
published in your preceding issue. am
| glad to know that Mr.. Latimer is satisfied
| That make my own speeches. | am in the
habit of doing so, and perhaps this is an i'm
! portant difference between us; for the report
is current in the State that he quibbled over
the payment OF a few dollars to the man who
wrote his great silver speech
The following parts OF Mr.. latlmers caro-
must notice. He says:
| LIST. 81 had nothing TO do with the mass
meeting that elected delegates to confer win
the Peoples Party at st. Louis, nor have
ever consented to leave the Democratic party
| At Plckens and Lowndesville Mr.. I.atimer
admitted that he was In the mass meeting nt
st. Louis At Abbeville he denied that he
was in IT, and | had to call on Mr.. Bowden 10
prove 1t. The next day at Greenwooa ne II,
claimed that he did not make the denlai AT
Abbeville and said that he had never lnaue ~ a
denial of it. The people OF Greenwood VIII VIII
remember that asked him to settle me 'uco so
! by stating to us whether or not he was III l,le
mass meeting. He said that he had never 1e,
MED it. At Anderson on the T. he made tue
same statement. | replied that ne mao de-
MED it, and read the following eX'ract ia Isop .so
! the Anderson Intelligencer OF May l'' lo'-.
"IIE BEGs THE QUESTION:
"Mr. 4. G. Latimer writes short card to the
| Advocate this week IN whicn ne says ln iuIl;
dressed TO me in last weeks lntelligencer, and
in reply have only to say that If the card /
pub Iished In the Greenville News with which
tne editor OF that paper expressed himself
satisfied and with which Mr.. Wallace, of the
Sewberry Observer, says he Is satisfied, and II
In addition TO that my twice repeated state
ment in the convention of the "a inst in reply
toqueries addressed TO me, which met with the
most overwhelming endorsement OF my 1el-
low democrats in that convention, are not
sufficiently satisfactory, clear and explicit
then nothing else that could say would be
aud it Is therefore useless for me 10 add any
thing further"
Mr.. Latimer begs the question, or rather
he evades the question, IN as short state
ment as possible. We are sure there are nun
dreds of Democrats in Anderson County, who
would have been glad 10 have seen an un,
qualified answer TO each question propoundeu
itself as satisfied with Mr.. LatImer's Demo
cracy in the past, and accepted ms statement
that he did not participate in me Mlra parry
mass meeting IN 81. Louis as true, ana II our
recollection be not at fault, the News ana
Observer did not discuss nor express them:
selves as satisfied with any more than that"
IsubmIt the following statement from Mr..
]. w, Bowden to show that Mr.. Latimer was
In the ST. Louis mass meeting.'
MR.. BowDEN's AFFIDAVIT.
attended the Industrial Conference which
met on %, February, 1899, at ST. Louis. Mr.. A.
&, Iatimer and l represented the Alliance OF
south Carolina After the Conference
adjourned mass meeting was call led TO adopt
measures to cooperate with the Peoples
Party. General Weaver was called TO the
chair and a committee TO cooperate with the
Peoples Party committee was appointed by
unanimous consent; These committees aiterI
| nominated Weaver and Field as candidates
for President and Vice President OF the
| United States. Mr.. Latimer and were in the
mass meeting throughout the entire proceed
| ings. 1t is my recollection that Livingst one
and Moses left the Industrial Conference in
the morning when the discussion became too
partisan TO suit them. They did not attend
| the mass meeting. Mr.. Latimer favored the
| Peoples Party at this time and made no pro-
test or objection whatever to the action OF the
mass meeting. d. w. Bowden.
Sworn to before me
this August II, 1896.
Jno. c. Watkins e. c. z.
The statement made In regard to MIR. Lati-
mer's expressed sentiment in favor or the
Peoples Party at the District Alliance meet
ing is Of my own personal knoWledge. Inc
fact is we'll known TO everyone VINO ATTENDED
the District Alliance, and bis views were well
known TO many who did not attend. Mr.
John Cary said that he entertained the same
views on his way home from st. Louis.
2nd. 1.-THE statement made by Mr. Keitt that
was in favor of the repeal of the purchase
clause of the Sherman law, without comply
ing with the repeal OIL Tree coinage OF silver, Is
absolutely ialse."
Mr.. Latimer should have used this language
in the meeting, IL at all. l understood him TO
intimate that exaggerated this matter. In
reply, l said there were perhaps hall dozen
men on the floor who knew that had not eX.
aggerated in the least. now repeat that Mr
Latimer asked the Lecture Board TO consent
TO his support of President Cleveland's s policy
to repeal the purchase clause Of the sherman
act. And he said that he believed that II he
failed TO do so that cotton would decline and
the people would blame him. But he had
been told that If President Cleveland's policy
prevailed Englishmen would send money
over here. Senator McCalla was present at
the meeting and am sure he cannot fail to
remember the facts. l remember also thai
Mr. j. r. Blake, Jr., who was at the time
President OF the County Alliance was present.
Mr.. ]. 3. Graves as County lecturer, presided
over the meeting and l remember Mr. j. w.
Lyon Of Troy being present. There were
Others.
The matter created considerable comment,
and I was not the only indignant person
present. Knowing the facts have stated TO
be accurate feel that can with confidence
refer the people to the gentleman named
above or to any others who attended Tue
meeting for full endorsement OF what
have said. Very Respectfully
Jos. l.. Keitt.
Anderson, August II, 1896.