Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1904-08-18

Mr.. Roosevelt an0 the hepuDHcan party,
and for the evident purpose of inhamiDg
the white voters of Virginia, of the Ninth
District particularly, against the Republic
can candidate for President.
The Hon. Thoe. l.. Moore, United
States District Attorney for the Western
District of Virginia, resented what the
Roanoke Times had said about Mr.. Roose'
welt, and also ts publication of the Henry
S. Baker letter as bona fide commuDica-
ton. Mr.. Moore wrote to the editor of the
Roanoke Times, presuming that the said
editor would promptly and cheerfully"
correct any errors that had appeared in
the columns Of that paper when pointed
out. The result IF that correspondence
shows that the editor of the Roanoke
Times not only refused to make any cor
rection; but tried persistently to justify
the publication of a fraudulent communi'
cation and to sustain his error by insinua-
ting that the honorable gentleman who
asked that the correction be made was
trying to practice deception. This is
the way it cheerfully corrects its ISLANDERS
when they are pointed out by a gentle
man whom 1t presumed to speak of as
"our Christiansburg friend"
Before writing 10 the Roanoke Times
MIR. Moore had written to the Washington
Post and also to the Ports mouth Star, and
his letter to the Times was based upon the
fact that both the "PosS" and "Star" had
declined to respond to his letters. The
entire correspondence is published in
another column, and we ask that it be
read in connection with This article.
Thus it is shown that the Roanoke
Times not only rudely declined to invtsil-
gate and correct slanderOus error when
its attention MAS called thereto by PROM
inent and honorable gentleman; but 1t
displayed purblind partisan spirit in try
ing to maintain the truth Of a Islander 1t
had circulated by publication in lis COL
umns, and to which its editorial sanction
had been given as a verify. Instead OF
cheerfully correcting errors when called to
its attention, by an artfully contrived ed
itorial in its issue of the 3lst ult, it strived
to sustain the truth of thing that bore
the impress of falsehood upon its face and
had been declared untrue by a dis
tinguished citizen, by the United States
District Attorney for the Western District
of Virginia.
We present in support of our charge
that the Roanoke Times has been guilty Of
"vicIous INTERPRETATIONS the following
specifications:
1st-It tried to iDjure Colonel Slemp and
the Republican party by an unfair use OF
the Arthur Sullivan incident, and it sup
pressed, Intentionally or ignorantly, i'm
portant facts connected with that transac-
ton.
2nd-It published the Henry S. Baker
letter as a verify aid when its attention
was called to the fact that the letter was
fraud and the scene it described had not
occurred, 1t declined to search for the
truth and sought to uphold falsehood.
3rd-It does not deny that the motive
of its editorials Was to inhame the white
voters of the Ninth District against the
Republican party and its candidates, by
charging and arguing that the policy OF
that party and the acts of those candidates
we're intended to conduce to miscegenation
and social equality.
If motive so sinister, suppression of
the truth so apparent, and refusal to
correct slanderous errors go palpable do
not constitute vicious misrepresenta-
tions," what will?
Among the other vices of the editorial
policy of the Roanoke Times, as indicated
by the editorials in question, ID a DISPOSE
ton to drag the womanhood Of the Ninth
District into the impure political cess
pool it and other Democratic journals
have been digging. What else can it
mean when it speaks of the womanhood
of the Ninth District as ian element that
is not without interest in the weighty
bearings of this campaign Is this not
intended to awaken the interest and
arouse the support of the white women of
this district upon the theory that they
are the threatened victims of social equal
ity and miscegenation? If such was the
design of our Roanoke contemporary it
has not only slandered the Republican
party and candidates but it has given an
insult to the splendid womanhood it essay
ed to be defending.
We know of no more appropriate way
to close this article than by quoting as its
closing paragraph the last paragraph of
our editorial of the 18th of July, which