The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1898-01-28
THE ono PRIMARY, QUESTION.

ocrat of yesterday contains a card,
signed w. X. Stephens, another
one of the committee, replying to
same.
Mr.. Stephens fires double barrel
shot, at the HERALD and it's cor
respondent. Our correspondent is
eminently able to take care of him.
self, and we presume will do so.
Mr.. Stephens asks some questions
of the HERALD, which we will pro-
coed to answer seriatim.
He insinuates that Committed
maH's'' article was suggested by the
editor of the HERALD. That is not
true. The editor of the HERALD
did not know anything of the article
or the intention of the writer, until
we received the communication
through the mail. We did not di-
rectly nor indirectly have anything,
to do with it. Il
We are explicit on this point for
this reason. The tenor of Mr.,
Stephens article shows that be and,
those who assisted him in the
preparation of his article, are labor
ing under the. impression that the
opposition to their tactics comes
from and is being worked up by the
HERALD. 1t is perhaps natural for
them to think so. We are all prone
to judge others by ourselves. But
in all caDdOr and kindness we must
tell the gentlemen that they are
mistaken. The opposition is wide
spread" and the HERALD is simply
voiclng that opposition. 1t neither
comes from any individual, nor is it
directed at any individual. 1t is a
general, widespread" opposition
to the committees decision, because
the rank and file of the party believe
that the decision was wrong; detri-
mental to party organization and
conducive to bribery and corrup-
ton. Those are not only the facts
of the case, but we believe that Mr..
Stephens and his assistants know
them to be the facts of the case !;
and their effort to make it appear
that all communication and all OPP
position is inspired by the HERALD,
is simply another one of their
political tricks.
The writer says that ever since
the committees action there has
been studied effort upon our part
to ''foment trouble, to create dis
cord.'' Now the truth is, the gem
tleman is trying to shift his own sins
to our shoulders. When, two years
ago he moved to table a resolution
to prohibit the buying of votes in
the primary, he "fomented" a
trouble that very nearly cost the
nominees their election. And here
recently, when he introduced the
''no primary" resolution, he so
mented" a trouble that not only
makes possible but very probable
the election of one or more Repub-
lica MS at the next August election.
No, the editor of the HERALD is
not "using the columns of his paper
to crafty his personal spleen
against some one of the candidates. .
The HERALD is never run on so low
a plane as that. The editor has his
preferences, of course; and Mr..
Stephens may be incapable of un-
derstanding how man may
subordinate his personal preferences
to a public duty; but it is true,
nevertheless, that the HERALD,
when it discusses public measure
or party policy, does so without
personal favor or prejudice, expect
ing our friends to submit to what.
ever may be for the greatest good
to the greatest number. We are
sorry. if Mr. Stephens prefers to
ascribe any less worthy motive to
the HERALD's utterances, but we
have been in the business long
enough to know that in politics
especially, partisan men will ascribe
partisan motives to their opponents.
We are asked to name those who
influenced" the committee to de-
eide against primary. We simply
decline to do so. Not even to APP
pear "manly" in the eyes of Mr.
Stephens, or to win any of his dol
lars, with which his pockets are 81
plethoric. We have the testimony
of more than one of the committee
that influences were brought to bear
upon the committee, to vote against
having any nominating convention
We have the testimony of more
than one of the committee that thi:
was done, in their judgment, for the
interest of certain candidates anG
against the supposed interest Of a
| ,A1 80 l.