The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1898-01-14
MR.. MoM1LL1N,s RECORD.

tanned an article embodying the
statement that Mr.. McMillin, in the
year 1892. (when McDowellism was
rampant in this state and the servi-
ces of every true Democrat was
needed to repel the advance of his
sub-treasury heresy) was conspicu-
ously absent from the stump in
Tennessee.
The American of the 18th takes
the HERALD to task for this edito-
rial expression, and makes profert
of Mr.. McMillin's record for 1896;
note the difference in date.
In replyto the Americans article.
the editor of this paper wrote the
following to the American, which
appeared in that paper of the 18th:
Not Accurate.
To the American:
Under the above heading, in your is
sue of this date, you are, indeed, very
inaccurate. You quote from the Column
bia HERALD of last week when it is
said that "if Mr.. McMillin made a sim
gle speech in this State outside of his
own Congressional District, we cannot
now recall it; and if he made more than
three in his own district, it is that
many more than we think"
Then you proceed to narrate how
many speeches Mr.. Millin made for the
Democratic party in 1896, citing Column
bia as one of the places at which he
spoke. You then conclude your re-
marks with the hope that "the Column
bia HERALD, having fallen by some
strange misinformation into such an
egregious misstatement, will have the
requisite courage and candor to &C
knowledge its error and accord to Mr..
McMillin the credit he deserves"
Now, if shall convince you that the
HERALD was correct in what it said,
and that it is you who have made tan
egregious misstatement," l hope that
"you will have the requisite courage
and candor" to acknowledge your err
ror and correct the gross injustice you
have done the HERALD.
The HERALD Goes not deny what you
say about Mr.. McMillin's record for
1885, And as that is the best years
record he has ever made, we are not
surprised that his friends should point
with pride to it. But the HERALD was
not referring to that year, and in the
same article from which you copy dis
tinctly said so.
The HERALD's editorial referred to
says: "About the year 1892 .(not 1866,
when the Democracy of Tennessee was
fighting McDowellism, and when John
Henry was a dangerous political power
in the land, where was McMillin?
When the danger flag was hoisted
at every Democratic cross-road;
when ever other Democratic Congress-
man was on the hastings and hustling
with all his might to reconcile the
farmers who had unwittingly followed a
wolf away from the fold, and lead them
back; when the fight was fierce and tn e
issue doubtful, where was Mae?' 10,
Then follows the paragraph you quote
referring directly and explicitly to 1892,
not 1896.
Now what have you to say as to
accuracy? Don't you think it is The
American rather than the HERALD
who "has been grossly deceived with
out taking pains to ascertain the
truthp And have you the "courage
and candor to acknowledge your err
ror?"
OF course you have, for we accord to
you the same good "inten tions" you
vouchsafed the HERALD. 1t would be
interesting also for you to state how
the mistake occurred. Perhaps some
one garbled the article in question
and sent you only part of it. 1t is no!
the first fake news you have had from
Columbia.
And now that the matter is up for dis
cussion, we shall be glad if you will be
as explicit concerning Mr.. McMillin's
whereabouts and political record fol
1892 as you have seen fit to be about
1896. Was he in Tennessee lighting the
-sub-treasury and other political here
sizes of that day, or was he East discuss
ing the tariff?
In order to correct at once the false
impression your comments of to-day
have made, beg that you give this g
place in your paper of tomorrow.
f. d. LANDER, Editor Herald.
Columbia, Jan. u.
The above was published by the
American without comment. The
American is a McMillin paper; and
we take it that if the HERALD had
misrepresented Mr.. McMillin's re-
cord for 1892, the misrepresentation
would have been commented upon
We certainly did not intend to mis-
represent him, and do not think
we have; and we repeat the charge
and repeat the question, where
was Mr.. McMillin in 1892, and wha
was he doing?n
IT is hard to believe, of course
but the report is that in the recon
Memphis municipal election, there
was some bribery aud corruption