Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1912-08-09
The Columbia State Again.

The Columbia State, which compli-
ments us with the appearance Of being
very much worried at the attitude Of
The Yorkville Enquirer toward the
present campaign, has been devoting
considerable space to us this week. 1t
gave us another broadside in its issue
of Tuesday, and on Wednesday 1t re-
produced our editorial of last Friday
and came at us again.
In view of the position we have as
sumed and which we are doing our
best to maintain, 1t is not our desire to
engage In too heated a controversy
with the State. In the first place we
do not feel equal to the superior con-
troversial experience and ability Of our
big Columbia contemporary, and in the
second place we do not care to run the
risk Of being driven from the attitude
we are trying to maintain into an at
titude of reckless partisanship like that
held by the State. Of course, If we
really believed that the welfare of our
people or the good Of South Carolina
absolutely demanded such thing, we
would not hesitate; but as we have
maintained all along we do not see 1t
that way. However a part of the States
editorial of Tuesday seems to call for
some further notice at our hands, and
after reproducing the same, we will
make such comments as seem proper.
The editorial referred to is as follows:
The right Of newspaper to change
it's policy is not to be questioned, but
the significance Of the change is fair
topic of discussion. The Yorkville En-
quirer in the present campaign Is
neutral, but it's neutrality, by reason
of it's contrast with The Enquirer's
and anti-Jones. Whether The En-
quirer harbors that purpose or not Is
beside the question. Facts are facts:
Last week we reprinted an article
from The Enquirer printed in 1910,
when the anti-Blease candidate was a
Prohibitionist, opposing the election Of
Mr. Blease Possibly The Enquirer
would explain that it is a prohibition
newspaper that Mr.. Jones Is not a
Prohibitionist, hence its course is con-
sistent. Therefore we quote an edito-
rial expression from The Enquirer
of August 4, 1908, when Blease was a
candidate against Governor Ansel, the
latter running on local option plat
form
But Mr.. Blease is himself the en-
bodiment of the liquor issue-liquor
and graft" Elsewhere we reprint the
whole article.
Stronger language could hardly have
been employed. 1t has never been
withdrawn and no apology has been
offered for it, so far as we recall.
Are the people of York county to
understand that The Enquirer Is will
ing to be neutral in a contest for gov
ernor when one of the candidates Is,
in it's opinion, "the embodiment OF
graft?"
Does The Enquirer consent to rest
it's claim to the respect of its own
people without further explanation?
Perhaps our contemporary will dill
gently insist that it sees no difference
between the two candidates this year
but it can not and will not establish
that position. The Enquirer does
discern a difference. Here is the test:
The Enquirer will not say that Ira
B. Jones is embodiment Of graft" Be
ing a responsible newspaper, The En-
quirer dare not say it. The Enquirer
any expression imputing personal dis
honesty to Ira B. Jones. No RESPONSE
BILE newspaper has done 1t or will do It..
The Enquirer has not hesitated to dis
cuss the present governor in past years
with the utmost freedom; 1t has spo-
ken of him as though he were an un-
convicted criminal. Now it Is "neutrar
as between Jones and Blease but 1t Is
careful, cautious and watchful that 1t
say no word conStruable as rejecting
on Ira B. Jones as an honest man.
Last week a North Carolina news
paper printed a letter rejecting on the
reputation for honesty of Senator +. NJ.
Simmons, d candidate for reelection
Immediately that he saw it Senator
Simmons telegraphed lawyers in the
town where the newspaper is publish
ed to institute proceedings for criminal
libel and for damages against both the
writer of the letter and the editor OF
the newspaper. Next day the editor and
the correspondent telegraphed Senator
Simmons, withdrawing the expressions
and apologiZing for them.
The Enquirer is not afraid to say
that Mr.. Blease is the embodiment of
graft" 1t dares to be neutral between
a candidate that it has described as
''the embodiment of graft" and Mr..
Jones. but, challenged to employ the
same language against Jones, it will be
silent. The reason is plain. No reSpOn-
sible newspaper will speak in light
terms of an honest mans integrity.
The ENQUIRER has denounced BleaSe
repeatedly; it does not fear Blease be-
fore the courts and juries of South
Carolina. 1t will take no liberties with