The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1902-03-25
EDITOR GONZALES VS. JIM TILLMAN.

EDITOR GONZALES VS. JIM TILLMAN.
The State newspaper is starting its
campaign against JAS H. Tillman early
in the game. In yesterdays paper
is published about three columns of tes-
timony to prove that Mr.. Tillman as pre-
siding officer of the senate made a ruling
which was not only against parliament
tary law but in the face of all precedent,
and in addition to tnis he made false
statement and had said falsehood spread
upon the journal of the senate. The
ruling was that motion to indefinitely
postpone was not debatable. The SEN
ate sat upon this position and decided
against Mr.. Tillman by formal resolu-
tions Of that body. In reply to this ac-
ton Mr.. Tillman heartily commended
Jeferson's Manual to the committee on
rules for diligent study and said that
since making the ruling he had consulted
two of the highest parliamentarians IN
this country and was grati6ed to learn
that they had sustained him. These
two gentlemen were Speaker D. B. Hen
derson of the national house of represen-
tatives and Mr.. Frye the presiding officer
of the United States senate.
The editor of the State newspaper has
taken the matter up and wrote to these
two gentlemen to find out if they had
sustained Gov Tillman in the ruling
above mentioned. President Frye in
his reply says: 81 had a telegram from
Lieutenant Governor Tillman in relation
to the indefinite postponement of meas
ure and my reply was: "Jeferson's Man
ual silent. Motion necessarily debata'
BILE. Debatable under rules of senate.
Speaker Henderson replied that he re-
ceived the following telegram from
Lieut.. Gov. Tillman under date Feb. ~:
kindly wire me if in your opinion a
motion to indefinitely postpone is de-
batable under Jefferson's MANUAL To
this Speaker Henderson replied: Eyes
The house of representatives de-
bates the motion to postpone
indefinitely and has done so
for many years. Had the Manual for
bidden it, this would hardly have been
done without a special rule giving posi-
tive permission
These are the main facts in the case
briefly stated. The senate itself passed
upon the rule and unanimously rebuked
the presiding officer. So the main charge
and the new one is that Mr.. Tillman
stated what was untrue when he
asserted that his position was sus-
tanned by two of the leading par
liamentarians in this country, presum-
ing, Of course, that he referred to Speaker
Henderson and President Frye. He does
not say he meant them, though it IS evil
dent he telegraphed them, and received
their replies. AS the record now stands,
the testimony produced shows that he
has had falsehood spread upon the jour
nal Of the senate.
What about it? What will the people
say about il? Mr.. Tillman, long before
he was elected lieutenant governor, had a
reputation for very strong and vivid
imagination and sometimes even repre-
senting things not just as they were, yet
he defeated by very large majority
some very good men.
The people should select men of char
acter and truthfulress to public position
and positions of honor and trust, but they
don't always do it. The pity is they
do not, but how are you going to help it?
By bounding down and prosecuting Jim
Tillman. That is what many people will
say when they read this testimony,
though of course it is only the records.
If the State keeps up this from now until
the campaign closes, right or wrong, Jim
Tillman will be the next governor Of
South Carolina. We may deplore the
fact and theorize as much as we please,
but the fact remains that we have to deal
with 10000 voters who won't believe
half they see and nothing they hear, that
don't suit them.
We await now Mr.. Til1man's side of
the question. Let US have his explana-
ton and statement.