The Mathews journal. (Mathews C.H. [Court House]) 1903-1937, 1911-06-08
THUR s DAY. JyNE stait
Having been criticised IN Z

Sentlnel written by MIR. PerCival
Hicks. OF North. for on editorial
IN reference to Hon. Carter Glass
and belieidng that the criticism
was beth unjust ana misleading,
the editor Of the Journal address
ed the following letter to the
Southside Sentinel On Monday.
Editor Sentinel:-
I was Surprised
to see in your last issue a sharp
criticism of The Mathews Journal
by MIR. Percival Hicks, Of North.
During the time that have con-
trolfed the policies of the Journal
IT'S columns have been offered
freely at all times for the discuss
sion OF all topics thag are OF inter
est to the people Of this section.
MIR. Hicks and others have taken
advantage Of this offer and their
articles have beeh printed with
pleasure, regardless Of whether or
not the tiews expressed therin
were IN accordance with those
held by me. IN view Of this fact
MIR. Hicks shows excFetable taste
whet1. instead Of frankly taking
issue With pYe through the COL
unns OF the Joarnal and giving
its readers an opportunity to
Judge tie merits Of his conten-
ton, he takes me TO task in
paper whose readers Ithe ma
Iorlty at leaSt( not being sub
tScFTbers to nav paper have no
means of finding out whether lam
rightly or wrongly condemned,
Having among your readers.
friends whose opinions | value.
and not desiring to be damaged
in their eyes by this misleading
article. | send you the follow
ing brief refutaticn of its charges.
From the PFofusion of words
used by Mr.. Hicks gather
that; First | am an ORGANIC
alton man, who would follow
certain leaders regardless of their
mistakes. This is altogether un-
true. Since ! became old enough
TO vote | have supported men
known to be anti organization
partizans with one single excep
ton, that being our present gov
ernOr, Hon. VIM. II. Mann If
I erred at that time (which do
not belleve) the Sentl.man from
Moth did likewise, as he worked
and voted for the same candidate
that did. Shades Of Julius
Caesar. but won't that Jar those
who have been reading Mr.. Hicks
late articles.
Second: That ] have accused
MIR. Glass of inconsistency and
thereby committed an unpardon
able sin. The first did but not
IN the way MIR. Hicks would have
YOU believe. copied on Nav.
2Eth. an editorial from the Lynch
burg News tMr. Glass paper)
written on Feb. I'd. 1910. which
praised Mr.. Swanson admins
tratIon in general Terms and com
ptmented the energy, fidelity
AID ability with which he ha" dis
Charged t h duties of h s Office.
Commenting on this said that no one
who heard Mr.. Gil ass speak here
wound think that he ever saw anything
at any time to admire In Claude
SwaDSon did not mentio
nor did the artiSle Copied, refer
to tive standing of tie States ffnan
ces,. as Mr.. Hicks article would indi-
cate. 1t was not the editorial which
appeared in the News which Mr..
Glass states iu his speeches was bias
ed on erEoneOaS statdinents made By
Mr.. Swanson IN q speech at Surrav c.
H. and IS therefore repudi ated bv hi m
(Glass,. That editorial appeared in
the News in No2. 1910 and che one +
copied appeared In Feb. t9u.
have no objection to Mr., Hicks
attempting to create demand for his
Candidacy for the Legislator by air
ing his views in the Sous Inside Senti-
rel but do object to being che but Of
his unjust criticI SIN while he is I'm
pressing upon this people the great
iced they have fer his services He
had better save some of his annnurf.
ton t2r Che opposing candidates, re
may need It all and more.
Respectfully
" M. Mintgt
Note-This article was written pre-
vioas to the receipt of Mr.. Hicks card
annOunoinH HIS candidacy for 6hA