The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1897-07-13
LETTER No 2 TO DIR. KILGO.

Sir: When | read your personal at
tack upon myself more than a week
2 in the June number of Kilgo's
Spitfire, I confess I was something in
dignant, but not surprised. I had
thought you quite capable of this sort
Of criticism, because, as I conceived, of
the ingrained malignity of your nature
and the u~nfOrgiving temper that domi-
mates you. / had told a friend in this
city weeks before that I thought you
capable of engaging in any form of
warfare that you hoped would bring
you gain or any temporary triumph.
You last fusillade of personalities and
defamation and threats and inuendoes
but confirm my impression. If I had
written last Thursday was a week ago
when your malicious, personal diatribe
was fresh to me, I should nave writ
ten in a very different temper from
now and should have gone into a sur
gical operation hat might have re-
suited in such a skinning as you have
not before received however much
your unmannerly and savage conCuct
against me may have invited it.
You parade in your last delicious
5pecimen of personal spite two letters
l wrote to old Mr.. Duke in which I So
licited small contributions to aid in
building Market Street church, and to
provide a lot for the building. The first
letter is dated April 10, 1891, and the
last the 21st of March, 1894. 1 read
again those letters with satisfaction. If
you think that I am afraid of their
publication lest they might, as you
with your accustomed shOrt-sighted-
ness and jump-at-a-conclusion style
evidently believed, put me in a hole"
you are quite mistaken. When I wrote
to Mr.. Duke 1 had met him for a mo-
ment, and had been we'll impressed by
his reputation for ~benevolence. I had
told that he was a Christian and lib
eral. I had nc doubt of his general
character. 1 had not inquired into his
business in any way as it had not been
suggested to me then that in any par
ticular was it improper or illegal or
LII law, L q NV 1lSdlo
the question raised at all. Having a
great many things in hand as editor of
a daily newspaper, as we'll as student,
I had not for a moment considered Mr..
Duke business in any way, and was
only concerned as to his general char
it limited at remotely hen that he was
in any particular depressing the farm
ers or injuring the youth Of North
Carolina and the country at large, and
the whole world in so far as the sales
of cigarettes extended. I state DELHI
ing God never to save my soul if I had
any knowledge of the real meaning
and purpose and results of Dukes bus
mess when I solicited two small con-
tributions. He sent $40 to the first ap-
peal, and was silent as to the second.
In so far as l recall the matter it was
not until the Hon.. John r. Webster,
the able, fearless editor of The Reds
willie Weekly, himself a Methodist lay
man, began his work Of criticism and
exposure of the vile tobacco cigarette
trust that I understood the nature of
the business and the loss Of character
involved in those engaging in it. It is
we think, not more than a year ago,
possibly a few months more-that I
read some of Col. Webster's singing
editorials in which he shoWedup the CT
garette trust in proper colors, and if
my memoir does not fail me, admins
tered a severe and caustic rebuke to
yourself. I have, as it seems to me as
l write, some remembrance that he
roasted you on his editorial gridiron.
and that you remained under the tor
ture as silent as death, and as dumb as
a Stump Sound oyster. If mistaken
here I will apologize for the error.