Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1912-06-04

party and the people of the State have been brought
to shame and disgrace by the Watson mesallance'
aLet US Keep the record Straight" says the
Constitution.
onr contemporary is not always happy in its
selection of words to express its real meaning EVIL
IDENTIFY it means exactly the contrary for it proceeds
at once to mis-statement of the facts in order TO
present the record in manner far from straight.
Speaking of Watson, it says:
aHe toas brought back into the Democratic
party fun fIed0ed and fuIlpGnopIied during the
famous state campaign Of 1906"
There is but one objection to this statement and
that is. it is not true. Watson did not return to
the Democratic party in 1906. AS far as we are
advised he has never up to this hour even claimed
to have returned to the party Whether he claims TO
have done so not, it is perfectly clear that ne is
not a Democrat but the most malignant, and least
harmful enemy of democracy
The party organization has some things to be
thankful for. All Democrats in Georgia should be
duly thankful for this. IS
In 1906 and in all the years since, Watson was
and has been a common political bushwhacker, seek
ing to destroy in order that he might crafty his
own malignant hatred and promote his own selfish
ends whenever wherever, and by whatever means
he thought would yield him the greatest returns
In 1906 his INSCRIPTIONS methods were not I'M
derstood as they now.
He was then considered of honor.
It was assumed that If he should return to the
Democratic party he would recognize the obligations
that bind every Democrat to party loyalty at least
when he participates in the party primaries. But
Watson has demonstrated his unworthiness of such
confidence and trust He has assumed obligations
that are considered binding upon men of honor, by
participating in Democratic primaries, and then
promptly repudated those obligations by boiling the
nominations Thus he has shown that he is not
worthy of the confidence of friend or foe.
And Furthermore, he has forfeited the right to
socate politically or otherwise, with gentlemen who
observe their obligations. Watson is neither Demo
crat nor man who respects his obligations; there
fore when he forced his Objectionable upon
a Democratic convention, he should have been
promptly kicked out, and since he does not respect
obligations he should receive the contempt of all
men of decency.
1t is true that Watson and his political associates
were invited and encouraged to return &c the Demo
cratic party in 1906. Nearly all of his associates
did return. Watson, for reasons not disclosed at
that time voluntarily affiliated with faction of
the Democratic party and rendered whatever assist
ance he could in bringing about the nomination of
the candidate of that faction for the governorshp
In other campaigns, without claiming to be Demo
crat but masquerading such, he has affiliated with
the party and participated in its primaries For
time his afhliation considered a return to the
party and until he proved himself traitor he was
acceptable to Democrats generally. The fellowship,
however, that accorded him was merely an in
stance Of misplaced confidence. He quickly proved
himself unworthy of this confidence and by that act,
disassociated himself with those who regard their
party obligations.
But what is the attitude of our contemporary?
Ashamed Of the manner in which it has humbled
itself in the dust to appease the Watsonian wrath
and by way of opoogy for the disgrace it has brought
on the Democratic party it now seeks to shift the
responsibility for these conditions upon The Journal
and it's friends.
The Journal is frank to assume whatever share
of responsibility is properly and fairly chargeable to
1t in the beginning. But in simple justice we should
be credited with the fact that soon as discov
cred the true character and the preposerous demands
of this political charlatan, Immediately lent
best and most successful efforts to the duty of kick
ing him out Of the party with which were
affiliated.
Our sin was great but our repentance and expia-
ton complete.
We committed grievous error, but we have
atoned for it best could, and shall continue
to atone for it in the future.
The difference between The Journal and its
temporary is this: The Journal made an honest
mistake by giving Watson credit for being man of
honor in the first instance. AS soon as we discov-
cred the mistake we earnestly and honestly endeav
ored to correct it. Our contemporary did not begin
its woong of this paragon of virtue until after his
true character had been exposed, and it did not re-
ceive him fully and cordially into its embraces until
after he had perpetrated at least attempted to
perpetrate the blacklist reachery that his evil mind
could conceive, toward those who had found him
political waif and befriended him.
The very wickedness of the man seemed to be his
chief commentator to the sympathy and fellowship
of his present defenders, but even this not su
cent to induct him into the utmost and ultimate full
ness of our contemporaries alteration. 1t needed
the swagger of the boss the crack of the ringmas-
ter's whip, the threat of deserton, the fear of
communication from the favor and the smiles, of
this political mountebank, to make the submission
of the leaders and the consequent disgrace of the
state complete.
When these dire threats were uttered. our con-
temporary and its colleagues humbled themselves