The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1901-09-04
1 QUESTION OF ETHICS.
Can a Political Conversation be
Confidential.

ness III publishing Wy A0S"0A ~ ~
insSant, making inquiries OF Col Il.
d. Lee, of Sumter, with regard to
certain national questions. sent q
copy OF the same letter to the Colum-
bia State, and that paper did not pub
lish it, presume, because my ques-
lions indicated views that it is antago-
nizine. Therefore your disposition to
be fair and permit an honest discus
sion of these questions is commenda-
ble and deserving Of my profound
thanks.
In his reply to my questions in your
issue of the 26th instant Of Col. R. D.
Lee complains Of my making & "pri-
vate Conversation the basis of a
ssoublic discussion. He evidently
recognizes the right of 3 citizen to
have private and public political
views, the one, the opinion OF the
man, the other, those Of the crafty poll
tician. Ny standard Of citizenship
teaches me that what is expressed on
pubiic questions in private should also
be the views to be publicly expressed.
Consistency demands this, and honesty
to the people demands it. Hence,
knowing Col. Lee as do, and enter
tanning high regard for him, l as
sumo that what he stated in private
conversation on a political question
was his public views, or else I should
not have alluded to what took place
on the same night, and shortly after
the adjournment Of the executive
committee, which had adopted resolu-
lions that regard infamous, and for
which my friend voted.
In Justice to myself shall briefly
relate what took place between Us On
the night alluded to, | was waising for
q car to go to the Governors mansion,
where I was q guest, and Col Lee
came up on his way to his hotel, l
SwiSted him pleasantly about voting
for the resolutions, by asking him II
ha, 600, was afraid Of Tillman's whip.
He said: Z think Senator McLaurin
has gone too far" he said: Now, l
approye Of McLaurin's vote on the
Paris treaty; you know Mr. Bryan
advised it and I think he was right.
I also approve Of McLauEin's position
on expansion; this country has made
wonderful strides, and McLanEin's
vote on the army bill was, under the
circumstances, eminently proper, but
when McLaurin voted for that ship
subsidy bill he went too far" This
rs almost word for word what. Col.
Lee said. 7 expressed my amazement
that, entertaining the views he ex-
pressed to me, he voted for the resolu-
lions denouncing Senator McLaurin,
and said to him: Colonel, you en-
dorse McLaurin on three Of the four
ouestions which the committee take
Issue with, and the fourth question
the ship subsidy bills not party
principle, nor did Senator McLaurin
Tote for ship subsidy bill" I ex-
plained that Senator McLaurin in
speaking to the resolutions he intro
duced at the instance OF the Southern
Cotton Spinners' Association, inciden-
tally expressed his approval of the bus
iness policy of giving aid to the Amer
lean merchant marine, that our peo-
ple might get the benefit Of competi-
tive shipping to foreign ports, but
that there had never been vote on
the bill, and what is known as the
Frye-Ranna bill did not meet with
McLaurin's approval, but modified
bill would get his support; anyway
1t never reached a vote and now lies
among the carried-over or continued
bills in Congress. Col. Lee seemed
to be under, the impression that the
vote had been taken and that Senator
McLaurin voted for it. presume my
friend was too busy in his law Office to
watch closely the proceedings OF Con-
gress. but if he will examine the Con-
gressional Record, with one half the
care he devotes to the Supreme Courts
reports when be has doubtful case,
he will know more Of what has been
done in Congress.
Having had an interview with Col
Lee, and finding that where he differ
ed from Senator McLaurin was only
on a piont upon which he was labor
ing under a misapprehension, I was
amazed at the language he used in his
reply to the Magill circular, l rather
expected that he would have ackonwl-
edged his mistake and express regrets
for being party to an injustice, but
when he said Senator McLaurin by
his course in Congress has not been
faithful to the trust reposed in him
by the Democratic party Of South Car
DINA, lSSl III GOty OOuItO w 1I1Sy
friend to PROFOUND questions to him
which indicated his views expressed
TO me.
Col Lee says his "views on public
questions are, I believe, well known. /"
No, they are not, for they do not seem
TO be well known to himself, then how
can they possibly be we'll known to
others.
What does close reading OF his let
ter show: 1t shows an attempt to con-
fuse the issue by answering questions
I did not ask. I never asked one
thing about tariff, yet he makes
punching bag of the tariff question,
and proceeds to exercise himself with
it until he reaches the conclusion that
a man who favors protective tariff is
not a Democrat: but to crafty my
friend in his side-stepping tactics,
with the hope that he will come to
the scratch later, I will take peep
at the soundness Of that position. Col.
Lee claims to be a sound Jefersonian
Democrat. because he favors a tariff
r. -o.-o,,,o o,,Iv Doac bo pC+ 1yoou,