The Oskaloosa herald. (Oskaloosa, Mahaska County, Iowa) 1885-1919, 1910-12-01
CHICANERY USED
VS. JOHN ?. WHITE
He IS Denied the Use ofthe Columns
Of United Mine Workers Journal.
UNFAIR AND CANNING METHODS
Editor Blue Pencils all Favorable
Comment for White. Correspond
ent from Springfield Says In
dications are White Wins

y b
-
John p. White, President OF Dis
trict Thirteen of the United Mine
Workers of America, is making a
clean and uncompromising campaign
in his candidacy for the office Of In
ternational president, and all manner
of unfair and cunning methods OF
chicanery known to political trick.
sters are being made use of by the
opposition and those who are for the
"other fellow.
1t will be recalled that a few weeks
ago Mr., White was denied the use OF
the Journal to reply to an attack
made upon him through its columns,
and 1t now appears that the editor OF
that paper is censoring articles ap'
pearing in other publications con.
tanning complimentary mention OF
Mr.. Whites work in the interest OF
the mine workers, and is placing
such articles before it's readers as
verbatim copies.
The Birmingham Advocate, a trade
unionist journal published at Birming.
ham, Ala, in it's issue of October 21st
contains an article in which favor.
able mention is made of the United
Mine Workers, including Mr.. White
The journal, in it's issue of November
3rd, copied the article referred to-
and in the caption the following is
omitted from the headlines: eek
vice-President John p. White" Again
in line twenty-one of said article at
ter the word land" should appear
the following: Hon. John p. White,
vice-president Of the United Mine
Workers, whom everybody in his ma
tive state loves to honor, and no man
stands higher with those who know
him." .zs4n ,
The copy of the Labor Advocate
containing the original article is al
hand, and in comparing the article
published in the Mine Workers Jour
nal of November Bird. the omission OF
Mr.. Whites name In both headlines
and body of the article seems to have
been with intent. Those having
copies of the Mine Workers Journal
of November 3rd, may make the com
parison for themselves. They will
find all favorable mention of Mr.
White contained in the original copy
of the Birmingham Advocate entirely
eliminated and could scarcely have
occurred other than through design.
Desiring to ascertain the motive OF
the editor of the Journal for thus
eliminating the complimentary ref
erences made to himself. while those
favorable to Mr.. Lewis seemed to be
copied verbatim, Mr.. White address
ed letter of inquiry to the editor
and, through the courtesy of Mr.
White we give a verbatim copy Of
both Mr.. Whites letter of inquiry and
Mr. Scaife's reply, which read as fol
lows:
MIR. Whites Letter Dr.
"Oskaloosa. Iowa, Nov, 10,1910
Mr.. VIM. Seattle. editor United Mine
Workers Journal, Indianapolis, Ind;
Dear Sir and Brother: There ap
pears in the columns of the Journal
of November 3rd, an article purport.
ing to be copied from the Birming'
ham Labor Advocate. viii you kind
ly inform me whether or not the ar.
ticle appearing in the Journal is a
verbatim copy of the one in the La.
Dor Advocate? In other words, has
the Journal reproduced the article
just as it appeared in the Labor Ad.
vocate? A prompt reply will be ap-
preciated. Yours very truly, John
p. White. kt
Mr.. Scaife's Reply
indianapolis, Ind, Nov, 12,1910.
Mr.. John p. White, oskaloosa, Iowa.
Dear Sir and Brother:-Replying to
your favor of the 10th, the original
copy of the article you refer to, being
newspaper clipping, was not pre-
served, and in its absence / cannot,
from memory answer your question.
My recollection is that it was sub
stantially as received, with a few UNI
important omissions, perhaps due to
the convenience of the printing Of
flee who arrange the heads, as the
custom under Sexton, before l came
here. Yours very truly, William
Seattle. @
AS will readily be discerned, the
reply of Mr.. Seattle is vascillating,
and it is painfully apparent that in
his weak and irresponsible reply he
seeks to cover up the real design.
The unjust advantage being taken
of Mr.. White is resented by his
friends and supporters who are indig,
nant that such bias should prevan
in the conduct of the Journal owned
and controlled by the rank and file
OF the United Mine Workers and in
tended to be the exponent Of free
speech, but now evidently detected to
espouse and advance the cause of his
opponent.