Lexington gazette. [volume] (Lexington, Va.) 1871-1962, 1909-07-28
TUCKER AND MANN
Anti.Saloon League on Replies
of Candidates

Va
The Anti-Saloon League of Vir-
ginia last week issued statement
in regard to the replies OF Hon. H.
St. George Tucker and Judge Will
liam H. Mann, candidates for the
Democratic nomination for Cover
nor, in which the correspondence
with both candidates is given and
discussed. Omitting the replies Of
the candidates the address OF the
League is, in part, as follows.
To the voters of Virginia:
The aim OF the Anti-Saloon League
Of Virginia is the abolition of the
saloon. While the League nomi.
mates no candidate and supports no
political party, yet the League does
urge the voters of Virginia TO select
men for public Office who will favor
that end. It is the openly declared
policy OF the League as set forth in
print and on the platform, to give
to the voters Of the State the facts
as to the past record and the pres
emit position OF candidates for public
Office, and to leave to the voters to
decide for which person they will
vote, Such method OF procedure
is fair both to the candidates and
the voters. No candidate can
reasonably object to a statement
concerning his past record and his
present position, especially when
he 10 requested to make that state.
ment in his own words.
1t has been the custom OF the
Leagus to publish the reply Of the
candidates without any accompany.
ing comments. This custom is fol
lowed in this instance in so far as
the replies OF the candidates are
confined to statement of their pre-
sent position and record. But Mr..
Tucker by his delay and by state
ments in his letter concerning the
League and its representatives,
which statements are not declara-
ton OF position or OF record. but an
attack upon the committee, has com
| PEELED the committee to give the rea.
son for the delay and the facts as
! they exist.
Mr.. fuckers DELAY
The policy OF the League being
well known, many inquiries have
been made asking why this policy
had not been followed in the present
gubernatorial campaign, and com
plant has been made that the pub
LEGATION of these statements had been
unduly delayed. AS a matter OF
fact, the State League has followed
its well known policy, and it is in
no wise responsible for the greal
delay in the publication OF its state
ment. On June 9th, acting under
the instructions of the Executive
Committee, the Headquarters Com
mittee OF the League addressed let
tiers to the Honorable VIM. Hodges
Mann and the Honorable Harry ST.
George Tucker asking certain ques-
tions Of these gentlemen and giving
to each of them the opportunity to
state his position and record in his
own words. AS these letters wers
sent two months before the primary,
the committee thought there was
ample time for the reply to be made
and full publicity to be given.
The reply OF Judge Mann was re-
ceived on June 18th, but the reply
OF Mr.. Tucker could not be secured
until July 10Th, although the com.
mittee did everything possible to
secure that reply at an earlier date,
as the appended correspondence
will show. In view OF the fact that
Mr.. Tucker in his reply OF July
10th, attacks the impartiality OF the
committee, especial attention is call
ed to this correspondence, extend
ing as it does over period OF three
weeks from June 10Th to July 10th,
necessitating five separate meetings
OF the committee, some members OF
which were obliged to leave import
ant work and travel many miles on
account OF Mr.. fuckers persistent
and unaccountable delay.
In his reply Of July 10th, copy
of which Mr.. Tucker gave out to
the press before the committee re-
ceived it, Mr.. Tucker complains
that the committee did not send
identical letters to both candidates,
but wrote a separate letter to each
of them. The absurdity OF this COM
plant will be shown by an inspec-
ton OF the two letters. The object
of the committee in making its in.
quiries is to secure an accurate
statement OF the past record OF both
candidates as citizens and as public
officials. 1t would manifestly be
absurd to ask Judge Mann how he
voted in the local option election in
Staunton or in Lexington when he
was never resident of either place,
or to ask him concerning his record