Keowee courier. [volume] (Pickens Court House, S.C.) 1849-current, 1901-03-27

tor Atlanta Journal Upon my return
from the Northwest into the sphere
of daily newspapers, l find, copied
from the Washington Post, the an
swer Of Henry Watterson to my
criticism of his recent utteyances on
"Uncle Toms Cabin" and of his
anterior sensation with regard to
Mr.. Lincoln and the Confederate
Commissioners at Hampton Roads.
The historical Importance of the
issue raised will justify me in asking
again the courtesy of your columns
for reply.
A brief personal digression is rem
dered necessary. Mr.. Watterson,
writing with much evidence of heat,
proclaims his "independence of
meretricious Advertising" imputes
to me discourtesy and impertinence
and the desire for self-exploitation
in attacking him.
NO DISCOURTESY INTENDED.
AS my personal comments were
purely hypothetical, Mr.. Watterson
seems unduly sensitive. 1 did not
mean to touch him so deeply.
have long been a great admirer of
his talents and popularity. I fully
agree that he does not need emcrc-
trieious Advertising" and should not
seek it.
Nor was moved by any desire or
necessity to exploit myself in attack
ing his opinions. When so trans
continental luminary as Col. Wat
terson attacks the civilization or the
history of whole section of the Re-
public, even the humblest and
obsourest of it's citizens may pre-.
sumo without impertinence to de-
fend it.
But while I disclaim the discour-
tesy, / do not hesitate to confess my
very great impatience at the avidity
with which Mr.. Watterson seizes
upon opportunity to say things that
reflect upon the people who have
loved and honored him.
The South has been much under
fire within the decade. Over it's
financial policies, and, more particu.
larly, over the occasional eruptions
of its social problem, there has been
some fierce criticisms from distn-
guished and potential sources of ex-
preston. If the blade of the Ken
tuckian has flashed once during this
period in public defense of his sec
tion and people, the chivalric act has
not been noted in the newspapers.
IGNORES THE ISSUE.
But twice within these six years
he has gone out of his way to lend
the weight of his name and popu-
larity to documents which reflect
the one upon the ante -bellum charac-
ter and civilization of the Southern
people, and the other upon the wis
dom and fidelity of the Confederate
President and his cabinet.
The fact that both of these posi-
tions command the applause of
Northern newspapers and of North
ern audiences, does not necessarily
imply that Mr.. Wattcrson believes
that eternal concession is the price
of popularity "across the lines"
In the card published in Tho Post
Mr.. Watterson distinctly ignores the
issue raised by his endorsement of
Mrs. Stoves self-confesscd cxaggera-
ton of the conditions of Southern
slavery. He is wise to do 80.
commend his prudence. His position
is indefensible in fact or in loyalty,
and he knows it.
Before, however, l permit him to
escape to scarcely less offensive
proposition must inform him that
he has already done the South grave
injury by his thoughtless speech.
The people of the North arc freely
quoting him in condemnation of the
South's treatment of the slaves. I
hear it on many sides. Here before
me is the Minneapolis Journal, claim
ing the largest circulation west of
Chicago, exultantly exclaiming "Col.
Wattcrson says that Mrs. Stoves
picture of Southern slavery was cor
rect, and that not the book, but the
conditions it described, produced the
war"
RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS WORDS.
Col. Watterson will protest he did
not say that. Even so. But that is
the effect of his words. His en-
dorscment gives color and force to
every baneful impression created by
Mrs. Stoves fiction and the spec
tacular dramas which pcrpctuate it.
MIR. Wattcrson is responsible for the
effect of his words. He ia not a
novice in the use Of English, and the
MINNEAPOLIS journal cannot bc M