The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1914-08-28
CHAIRMAN PEBBLES
DEFENDS POSITION
BEFORE COMMITTEE
DENIES INTERPRETATION PLAc-
ED ON RESOLUTION ON PRO-
HlBITION.
INTENDED TO STRENGTHEN PARTY
Purpose Was To Give Such Endorse
ment that Old Line Democrats and
Independents Would Be Satisfied
Says Author.

to The Herald with reference to his
resolution before the recent meeting
of the committee, resolution that
was tabled by the committee:
Your first editorial OF Saturday,
the 22nd, deals in part with some
matters in which | am interested per-
sonally, as a democrat and as clti-
zen and your positions thereon seem
SO unwarranted that | feel it proper
to ask you to publish this communi-
cation as to some extent at least
proper criticism and correction of
your representations.
Referring to resolution intro
duced by me at the recent meeting
of the Maury county democratic ex-
eeutive committee, which reads as
follows:
"'5. And, that whereas, it must
be acknowledged because true, that
the democratic party in Tennessee is
greater than any plank in any plat
form any of it's conventions may adopt
and that as a fact it has radically
changed its position upon the whisky
question and it's policy in regard to
the same and pledged itself to main
tain the present prohibition laws
and to enact such other laws as may
be necessary for their enforcement;
Therefore, be it especially known
that the democratic executive COM
mittee of Maury county, with men,
bership processing to be to the manor
born and proud Of their heritage,
does now, Notwithstanding any per-
sonal views of any of it's members on
this yexing political question, cheer
fully submit to the rule of the major
ity in the party and in loyalty pledge
itself, as the platform has promised
and in ratification thereof, uncondi-
tionally to the prohibition of the sale
of intoxicating liquors within the
borders of the state of Tennessee
"You say in said editorial:
"'That resolution contained the
statement that the democrtic party
was greater than any platform.
obviously that resolution of mine
contained no such statement as you
say it did, but contained the state
ment of truth the opposite of and
in direct contrast with your state
ment of it's contents.
THAT the contents of my resolution
and what you say it contained are
opposite in meaning was pointed out
in your presence in the argument be-
fore the committee; not only this,
but it was made known in your pres
ence before the committee in said dis
cussion, that l was the author of both
the English resolution and my resolu-
tion and that the same were prepar-
ed by me as integral parts of one res
olution and that it was then and there
pointed out in your presence and
before my resolution was tabled that
the Interpretation, that the party
being greater than the platform, the
platform could be or might be repudi-
ated,' was impossible of application
to il. .,
ut was further pointed out in your
presence at said committee meeting
and in the discussion of my resolu-
ton that the resolution was one to
more specifically endorse the prohi-
bition plank in the platform and as
the resolution says pledge the Maury
county democratic executive COM
mittee, as the platform has promis-
ed and in ratification thereof, un-
conditionally to the prohibition Of
the sale of Intoxicating liquors with
in the borders of the state Of Ten
nessee.'
! "In your original report of said
committee meeting proceedings,
which you published in your issue of
the 18th inst, and again in your
weekly of the 21st inst, which report
YOU say in your editorial Of the 22nd
inst, was full and accurately you
say: There was only one fight be-
fore the committee and that was on
a resolution of Chairman PEBBLES to
more specifically endorse the prohi-
bition platform in spite of the indi-
yidual views of the members of the
committee
"In other words, in your report
made while the matter was fresh in
your mind and with the resolution
before you, and while quoting there
from, you concede that the resolu-
ton is one, (using your own Ian
language) to more specifically en-
dorse the prohibition platform and
vet in your editorial Of the 22nd, you
deny that this was what it was-I say
YOU deny it, because you tell Of some,
-, - 10 oontaiuod which IN did