The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1910-11-14
have Lost confidence. and 20 tell the
truth IL you can

way my veracity or sincerity.
Concerning this statement made in The Times
Dispatch | have to say that am not greatlA
surprised a. any statement thar appears con
corning me in the columns OF some OF the Rieh-
mond papers, The people OF Virginia have By
this time learned to appreciate the value OF
the statements made by these papers concern
ing me- any work in which may he engaged
So long as these papers give expression 10 theif
own views | have generally LEFT II TO their read
ers TO estimate their utterances at their proper
value. But whenever II is stated in the columns
OF any of these papers that any gentlemen
OF good standing and character has made state
ments concerning me affecting my character as
Il Christian man and minister and especially
that those statements have been made 10 me face
10 face In The presence OF hundreds OF Methodist
ministers and aymen and not denied by me-
then ! am compelled by every consideration Of
seifrespeet and of justice 10 my influence for
usefulness To deny the accuracy OF such state
lnent and to demand that the paper which has
made such statement concerning me shall pub
lish this statement of niue with the endorse
statement
In this statement Or, Cannon did not denonnee
the Times Dispatch. bur he denied the accuracy
OF the statement made in the paper, and de-
manded that the Times,Dispatch publish his
statement with the endorsement of the Confer.
ence as to its accuracy. The Conference endorsed
his statement without dissenting voice and re-
quested its publication.
A motion made that the reporter De fe-
Quested to retire. but Or Cannon opposed that
motion. saying that he had no revengetul feeling
about the matter but he did insist that his state
nent with the endorsement of the Conference be
published in the Times Dispatch.
Or Cannon clearly acted in the matter as
any other would have done, who was jeal
GUS OF any reflection upon his character, or that
was calculated TO impair his influence and
. fulness It had been published in Of the
morning newspapers Of the State that he had
been challenged by one of the most prominent
Meihodists in the State TO speak the truth II
YOU can, which most serious reflection
upon his character for sincerity. and he had
proven the incorrectness of the report. and asked
for the publication of his statement in the col.
] umns OF the offending newspaper.
In reporting the proceedings the next day. the
Times Dispatch did not publish DR.. Gannons
statement in full. requested by him and the
Conference. but special objection made
to that. There WIS. however not only no word
of regret or apology for the incorrect statement
OF the day before. but retraetion with
drawal Of ii. Moreover, the report was 50 word
ed AS To produce the impression upon the reader
that Dr. Cannon had been guilty of double deal
ing in his conduct, 1t was stated thar DR.. Can
non mad made his statement in the absence OF
MIR. Branch and that Mr. Branch, having heard
of it. had hurried back to the church and had
"A long whispered conversation with DR.. Can
non. and that DR.. Cannon had then repeated in
MIR. Branch's hearing modified statement OF
what he had said before. Thus the incorrect re.
port of the day before, which might have been
= declared to be unintentional. was followed the
: second day by a report that not only contained
no word of regret or apology Tor the first report
but deliberately attempted to prove that DIR. Can
! non had been guilty Of double-dealing in his
!, statement OF the day before
i There great amazement and considerable
I iustihabe Indignation at this conduct ON the
part of the Times Dispatch. without any soliei
;ation the part OF DR.. Cannon, paper WAS
drawn up which appeared in Saturdays Wv
, oa.an. and also appears along with the reso
, lutions of 1900 in another column of this issue
This paper declares that the statements made in
the Times Dispatch are incorrect and mislead
ing and the paper is requested to publish the
preamble and resolutions. The Conference
further more declared that unless the Times Dis
patch feels prepared to give correct and un
biased and candid report of the actions Of this
body its staff of reporters is requested to desisi
entirely from the of the reporters privileges
on the floor of our Conference. There was con
aiderable debate concerning the second resolu
ton but the paper was adopted in its entirety By
an overwhelming vote. During the discussion
OF the paper DIR. Cannan made a personal state
mcnt of Friday but indignant at the state
ment OF Saturday. and that while he had re.
.engeful feelings concerning the matter yet he
was determined TO do everything in his power
TO defend himself from attacks that were made
upon him, for the purpose OF damaging his char
acter with the people of Virginia, and thus ini-
pairing his opportunities for usefulness.
] The above are the facts ia the case. On the
basis OF these facts it is difficult to see how Dr.
Cannon could have acted otherwise than he did
and the action taken by the Conference does not
seem to have been radical. The Conference took
no action against the Times Dispatch until the
first offence had been repeated in aggravated