Virginia citizen. (Irvington, Va.) 1891-1921, 1905-03-31
Friday, March 81, 1905.

In A long and leading editorial
last week the Northern Neck News,
published at Warsaw, the home of
Congressman Jones, took occasion
to dispsrage the efficiency of Hon.
K. ). Martin as one of Virginia's
representatives in the U. S. Senate
and to bring him into bad odor with
the other members of the Virginia
delegation, particularly Senator Dan
lei. The excuse for this unwar-
ranted attack was a short editorial
OF the week previous in the columns
OF the VIRGINIA CITIZEN. wherein
In commenting on Senator Martins
energy and usefulness as public
servant we used the word secured
in connection with certain church
claims which through him have been
introduced in behalf of churches in
the First District and through his
Efforts alone are now before the Court
OF Claims in course of the proper
proceeding and not lying dead after
being introduced. The acrimony
and captiousness of the News editor
ial is manifested in such a fiimsy
foundation that we feel it due us
to reproduce our editorial which it
Haunted at its editorials head. 1t
follows
A Richmond newspaper correspondent
In Washington, In sending us list of
the claims awarded Virginia churches
Urom which list we extracted the ones
for the First Congressional district, and
published last week., accompanied the
list with these remarks: "The statements
contained In the within enclosed sheet
may easily be verified, as they have been
by me. They afford such striking COM
mentsry on the usefulness OF Senator
Martin as q member OF the United States
Senate that am persuaded to the opinion
that they deserve publishing, in view of
their great interest to the people of Vir-
ginis." What strikes us most potently Is
the fact that not a single one OF such
claims allowed Virginians was intro
duced by any other member OF the Vir-
Sinia delegation. Even the claims for
the First District. to which the Senator
owes little, were introduced aud secured
by Senator Martin. This is but small
Indication Of Mr.. Martins usefulness to
the State and his power as a worker.
And yet right here In this District some
are found who ask-"Whst has he doney"
The very question indicates ignorance
or Intentional perversion.
Mark the reference to the First
District. In previous Issue our
washington correspondent (who,. by
the way, is newspaper man of that
city, IN no way connected with Seua-
tor Martin, and who for years has
been furnishing us with Congress
slonal items) sent us the following,
among other items, which was pub
lished under our standing heading
"Doings in Congress"
Following are the church and educa-
tional claims just secured by Senator
Martini Trinity Episcopal church, Ports.
mouth, $1,000; Centenary Reformed
church, Winchester, S1,7s6; Enon Baptist
church, Chesterfield, 5000; Evangelical
Lutheran church, Strssburg, 81 ,ol9; Brad
dock Methodist church, Winchester,
, $1,000 Catholic church, Winchester,
SOLO, Presbyterian church, Townsville.
$i,7o0' Norfolk Seamen's Friend Society.
$s,O61; st. Paurs Episcopal church. Nor.
folk $s,eooi Norfolk Academy. 81. 600.
And in the same letter this item.
which we subsequently, published un-
der the same heading;
In addition to the claims Just awarded
by Congress Senator Martin has sue.
ceeded In having thirty eight more Vir-
gina church claims referred to the Court
or Claims for adjudication. The amount
or these claims aggregates more than
$4,000. This insures their ultimate nav.
ment by Congress. The church claims
just referred for the First Congressional
district are as follows: Fredericksburg
Baptist church, $4,000; Zion Methodist
Episcopal church, South, Spotsylvania
county, $500: Saint Georges Episcopal
church, Fredericksburg. $4,000; Metho-
dist Episcopal church, South, Fredericks.
I. burg. IS. 900; Methodist Episcopal church.
Newtown, $4,000; Catholic church
Fredericksburg $4,000; Shiloh (old site)
Baptist church, Fredericksburg, $4,000;
Wilderness Baptist church, Spotsylvania
county, 5000; Presbyterian church, Fred.
ericksburg, $500.
The foregoing is the item referred
to in our editorial as of interest to
the First District and which set the
News "by the ears" because, writing
week later, We inadvertently used
the word awarded" or secured" in
saying introduced and secured. !"
On this is based the unbridled charge
OF the News that "everv statement
made by the CITIZEN. so far as the
same applies to the First District, is
without foundation in fact" The
very fact that we had published
boldly that SO far these First Dis
trlct claims had only been gotten
before the Court of Claims by Sena.
tor Martin (Which, it is acknowl.
edged by all in position to know, |
counts for much in the battle).
and the fact that this publica-
ton was before the eyes of the
News writer, to all fair minds
Is evidence that there was no set
purpose to claim that payment had