The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-11-13

--~-------.s-
believe It? Lot us 20 on with orr
work for tho church OF God and build
up the church. not turn aside to ,lin-
GRACEFUL wrangle Hike this."
1 Dr' christian. who has been ono or
tho sishers OF tho resolution proposed
70 amend by striking out the last
Clause relating to withdrawal OF re-
porters' privileges. ROY. -. NJ. Beck
nam presidins elder OF the DanviIln
Dlstr1ct. proposed as q. substitute for
tns Whole resolution to the effect
thAL s'nce certain members OF the con-
ference had understood the use OF the
l.Word modified" to Indicate that Dr.
Cannon was dislngenuous or insincere,
] tho conference puts itself on record
1 that such Is not the case, but that II
the word modified" was used merely
70 refer TO condensed statement,
there WIS no censure OF the reporter.
teorgo z. Adams, secretary OF the
blackstone Female Institute. made an
/ impassioned and vehement speech for
4 the resolutions. attacking the press
generally for Casting reflections on
Dr. cannon and tho Virginia Confer
ence."
Mr.. Hatcher Defends Reporter.
rev. .. 9. Hatcher. pastor OF Broad
1
! u felt yesterday constrained to take
the floor to say o. word In defensc OF a
man who has not the privilege OF this
moor" He made personal statement
as TO who the reporter for The Times.
/ Dispatch at the conference was and
asserted that there were laymen who
could be as true as preachers.
read the account" he continued.
and read it in a friendly way. 1t
merely means that there was a con-
densed statement. that DR.. Cannon did
not speak so long as before, but In
! substance said the same thing as
when Mr.. Branch was present. II we
propose to criticize every little verbal
inaecursey in newspaper reports we
VIII be here for year The paper had
no intention to mislead. Or. Cannon is
too we'll known for people to believe
that he made one statement when Mr..
Branch was here and other in his alb
sence. l know the reporter and have
as much confidence in him as have
IN Dr. Cannon or other members of this
conference"
Wants an Apology or Retrnction.
Dr.. Cannon had not been in the hall
! when the resolution was presented and
called for the reading. Rev. J. c..
Reed objected to the whole Of the ac-
accounts given in the Richmond pa
pers. Rev. j. x. Jolliff thought that
4 The Times-Dispatch account OF the
Branch-Cannon affair had merely ag-
gravated the situation by accusing Dr.
Cannon of Withholding part of state
ment He thought there should be CEN
sure from the fact that in tho entire
article there was no apology or retrac-
ton.
Rev. George W. Wray, who has re-
ported a number of meetings OF con-
ference for the Norfolk Landmark, said
that speakers should be certain of tho
language they used in public meetings
where they were liable to be quoted
In the press. He asserted that Mr..
Branch was not a trained speaker. and
spoke under some difficulty, being con-
tinually interrupted by questions, and
that under the circumstances 1t would
have been utterly impossible to catch
every word he had said, and that be-
fore taking action th~ conference
s"ouio be sure that the paper meant
to misrepresent
| AntaEonjxinE Press.
/ AS to the incident In question, he
said Or. Cannon had read his state
ment and had later reread that part
relating to .Ir. Branch; that in what
was read there was no modification.
He asserted that members OF the con-
| ference was dependent on the news
not always exact in the choice OF their
i words, He thought 1t a serious thing
/ to, antssonize the press, as the con-
! ference was dependant on the news
papers to spread Its work broadcast:
4 that DR.. Cannon was too big a. man
to make all this fuss about, and that
| The Times-Dispatch had printed his
statement as requested Mr.. Royal Of
| fered to withdraw, his paper In favor
| of that OF Mr.. Beckham. but his sec
ondn would not permit the paper to be
withdrawn.
Cannon supports RESOLUTIONS.
Or. Cannon said he regretted exceed
insly to be made the centre OF mat :