The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1907-09-04
MIR. uEcuIEn,s nEConp.

IL.
The ingenious plea of Mr.. III. c. Hech-
Ter that The Times-D ispatch is perse-
cutting him will not divert the atten-
ton of the intelligent voters of Hem
rico from the real issue. The Times
Dispatch has never once considered Mr..
Hechler in this discussion. Il has been
dealing with former treasurer of
Henrico, who was dismissed from Of
fee for malfeasance and who is now
asking the Democrats to nominate him,
over three other candidates. for the
same position. When citizen asks
for the suffrage of the people, is not his
public record n proper subject for re-
view and criticism by a newspaper?
When a citizen who has once held an
Office and been removed by the court
comes before the people and asks them
to reinstate him, is 1t interference and
persecution for a newspaper to criti-
cize his former conduct in office? Do
tire voters of Henrico resent such ac-
ton on the part of newspaper? DO
they regard it as an assumption of
superior knowledge" for The Times
Dispatch TO republish the record in
the Hechler case, which, In the nature
of things they had in part forgot
ten? What Is a newspaper for, If
not to give the people such informa-
ton?
And yet Mr., Hechler cannot imagine
what motive The dispatch has
in interfering with this election"
What motive could it have save the
good OF the public service? What OBJ
iect could it have in prosecuting Mr..
Hechler, a man who as he says, never
did US any harm? The plea is in
senious, but. i is absurd on its face
and will Deceive no intelligent voter.
II The Times-Dispatch has prosecuted
Mr.. Hechler by publishing his record,
then so did Boudar e. Co., the grand
Jury, Judge Scott and the Court of An
peals in uncovering his record and
making it public.
Mr. Hechler is also ingenious In his
buster. He attributes a statement to
The Times-Dispatch which it never
made, and then proceeds TO denouncc
it as false. Says he:
The statement in The Tlmes-Dls-
patch that admitted that ] had used
any county funds, other than the
Todd fund which / was advised al
the time By attorneys l could use, IS
false, and l fear malicious
The statement in The Times-Dispatc
to which he refers was as follows:
THE record shows that Mr.. Hechle,
uEed the county money to save discoun,
on his personal notes. This is admitted
and is stated by Judge Scott in hi!
order removing Mr. Hechler from
office"
There was no mention of Mr.. Hech
ler's name in this connection. and n,
reference to him. Nor did we mean t
say that he admitted that he "ha,
used county money other than IN
Todd fund.-" To the contrary the ar
ticle was introduced with this state
ment.
we learn that Mr. II. c. Hech,h,
WHO Is asking the Democrats of Hen
rico to nominate him for county trea
urer claims that the money which n
used when he formerly held the offic
WINS properly credit TO the Todd es
tate, and that he violated no law
using ii for his own purposes to saw
discount at bank
This effectually disposes of Mr.. Hecr
lcrs buster.
As TO his charge that he has bee
attacked by powerful adversary, TT
Times-Dispatch replies again tn;
Mr. Hechler's only adversary is his CIV
record which The Times-D ispatch h,
republished for the information ar
guidance of the voters of Henri,
county,
Having discharged our duty under
solemn sense of obligation to the pul
lie. and with no personal animus wha
soever towards Mr.. Hechler, it remain
for the voters 10 ponder the record al
DISCHARGE their duty at the polls In II
same spirit.
----=--==s=--=:=---===z
DEMOCRACY NEDIyIyus.
From the Charleston News an
II Courier we learn that the Audarsr