The Hartford herald. [volume] (Hartford, Ky.) 1875-1926, 1911-10-25
THE HERALD AND
MR. C. E WOODS
In Which Former Makes
Amende Honorable
FOR PRINTING ROSS LETTER
Explanation of What Brought
About An Unpleasant
Incident.
THE HERALD is ALWAYS FAIR

THE HERALD IL ALNA FAIR
Several months ago aug, 23) in
commenting on Judge O'Rear's op-
ehing speech at Ellzabethtown in
which he said that there are 10000
voters in Kentucky who annually
sell their votes, The Herald, in a
two-inch editorial, disclaimed this
allegation as unjust in its sweeping
charge and unfair to all voters alike.
About two weeks later we received
communication from Mr.. c. E.
Woods, of Richmond, KY, in which
he took issue with us and claimed
that Judge O'Rear was not only
right, but that he Woods)- thought
the estimate of "floaters" In Ken
lucky ought to be increased to 1907
900, as he had heard 1t said that in
his own county of Madison there
were 1900 men who sold their suf-
frage. We received Mr.. Woods ar
ticle too late to print in the issue
of that week, but were surprised to
see that he had furnished our local
contemporary, the Hartford Repub-
can, with the identical article,
which they printed in their regular
Friday issue. We printed his ar
ticle, however, quoting the law
against both the buyer and the sell
Ter OF votes, and invited Mr.. Woods
and Judge O'Rear to go after the
malefactors and thus verify their
bold charge. We assured Mr..
Woods that, as the controversy was
between himself and ourselves, it
was unnecessary and a reflection
upon our journalistic courtesy for
him to send his articles to both pa
pers, and he was offered space for
reply.
A week or two later, but again
too late and too long for our current
issde, we received another commu-
nication from Mr.. Woods Of a very
lengthy and voluminous nature. We
made editorial note of it, saying it
would appear in our next issue.
Again we were surprised and this
time dumbfounded, upon opening
the issue of the Hartford Republic
an on Friday, to find the identical
article OF Mr.. Woods again display
ed in its columns, after our assur-
ance that what he sent US would be
printed. The articles were mailed
at such dates as to reach them, but
not us, in time for publication. We
felt hurt at these unkind methods
and intimated as much,
In his second article. which occu-
pied about five columns, Mr.. Woods
devoted about one-fifth Of his mes
sage to reply to our invitation to
punish the alleged voters, and all
the balance of 1t was taken up in a
severe and caustic arraignment Of
the political record of ex-Gov. James
IB. McCreary. Seeing that Mr..
Woods had jumped the original sub
ject, we replied TO him at some
length in the same issue, but said
that inasmuch as he persisted in
sending the same articles to both
papers here, we could not afford to
be reprinting after our contempor-
airy each week, especially as the ar
ticles were principally an attack
upon Mr.. McCreary. However. We
told Mr.. Woods that at any time he
wished to confine himself to the in
itial subject, to come ahead, and
that We would "be glad to entertain
him with any reasonable space"
In the meantime, however, in our
next issue. appeared an article writ
ten by Mr.. James M. Ross, under
the pen name of Fair Play" in
which the author attacked the po-
litical record of Mr.. C. E. Woods,
presumably in an effort to defend
Mr.. McCreaTy by showing up Mr..
Woods record. The Herald did not,
editorially or otherwise, endorse
this article, but merely said: Eve
have always tried to be fair In all
editorial dealings, and OF course will
allow Mr.. Woods a like amount of
space to reply to said article" That
was in our issue of September 81.
copy OF which we sent Mr.. Woods.
Mr.. Ross had said in his article that
we we're at liberty to reveal his real
name at any time. which we stood
ready to do.- g e osAeiet
We hsard nothing from Mr..