The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1902-11-25

to appear in the Religious Herald, the
organ OF the BapLlsts OF the STATE, the
teN. Herbert Al. Hope. editor OF the
Christian Advocate. yesterday issued the
following
In your edition of Saturday. November
ed, you print in advance an editorial.
when you say Will APPEAR the forth
coming issue OF the. Religious Herald. In
the article occurs the following language:
Tie atmosphere was surcnaIged with
electricity during the discussion. We re-
gret tIat in the heat of debate the Adj
vocate was brought into comparison with
the Herald. Our relations with the edi-
tors and publishers of the Advocate have
for years been most cordial and fraternai
aid we are sorry that any critic or the
Methodist paper should lave brought the
Religious Herald into the discussion, al.
though it was done in manner tho.
Lghiy5 complimentary to this paper. But
we regret far more that one OF the AdNo-s
Gates editors Rev. Mr.. Hope, should In
his defense Of tie Advocate. have made
the statements attributed to him In the
rerort published in the Richmond Times
OF the 18th.
..Of course. no well-informed reader OF
the Religious Herald needs to be told #that
these statements are without foundation
in fact and we are at q loss to know why
they were made. The whole bill
vas s13IG5 If we had charged for space
and services the bill would not have been
less than $500.
With regard to this publication you
will please allow me to say
l. Or. r. H Pitt, junior editor OF the
Herald whom you say is the author OF
the article to be printed In that paper.
exargerates the occasion to which he
refers.
4..e last session Of the Virginia Confer
ence may have been. as Dr.. Fit says
it was. the most vivacIous in their MS
tory,.. which 1 do not believe. but the
debate of which he speaks was conducted
ina spirit of fairness and moderation
which is worthy of emulation, even by
gaptist Association. The atmosphere
NAV have been ..surcharged With .elec-
tricity." but the debate was not as hea' :,
ed as he represents, surely not as heateu
as the editorial utterance in winch ne
makes the charge.
In proof of the propriety of that
debate there was mo mention by name
of the paper which is so fortunate ts 20
have the service of DR.. r. II. FIT as Ju-
Nor editor. Complimentary reference
was made to it by one of the spea hels
in such terms that possibly every 2 ~
for Inferred that the Herald was meant.
hut neither the speaker referred to, nor
j. mentioned the paper by name.
3. Inferri1,g that the complimentary rel
e;.ence concerning the aid given by GER
tain UNCONVENTIONAL paper to an educa-
stInnal enterprise vas to the afellslous
Herald / stated in my speech thal @1hat
yaper In It's advocacy OF the great eu lci.
ticnal enterprise Of the denomination OF
,,.l,i,,i, IL VA the exponent was reimbursed
far any outlay made necessary by such.
service. IN seeking to present this lnfor-
\. ton i may have used the exact IAN
x,,iase attributed TO me by the reporter
that .'the college poured money INTO the
treasury of the paper. II Y dlu use tiiis
language ] only meant what the reporter
later on attributed to me, that tine paper
,,oia for the extra expense. This.
i ali that meant to say and after ".
sI,itt published that the paper, OF winch
f,# is The Junior editor, received Slo4-66 re-
reimbursement in the exact amount OF eA-.
penss incurred in advocating the focke- -
s.,,e, movement he confirms the statement
+ made before the conference. he Iisitis
saws that if space and service hau . peeil
charged the bill would nave Deel sei
much larger
i hone win be satisfactory to Dr. Pitt.
now desire to say that l rejoice IN the
..,rd;,lsS and fraternaf relations winch
4,.,,-.5 oxistcd4 for years between the Her
aid and Advocate, and for my part
4asire these kindly relations to con-
time forevermore. But candor com
nels me to say that there was another
s,nd q better way to have secured this
correction and explanation OF dlffer-
ance and misunderstanding between
such Christian friends Growing out -
a newspaper report made in the rush OF
business in a public assembly, than by
giving in advance to the secular press
an editorial complaint and comment.
couched in language that to say the
least. in some places Is not very polite,
Had Dr. Pitt called TO my attention the
words attributed to me, which I never
saw in print until I saw them embodied
in his editorial.5I would have promptly
and gladly corrected and explained them
IN print That DIR. Pitt seams +, be
lieve that knowingly I would make
statement that ..has no foundation ir=
fact or that l would attribute to him
a rnarcanary motive in aiding any move
ment that was for the unfolding of the
work of God. is most painful=to me.
HERBERT NJ HOPE