The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1914-08-21
FRED DOMINICK
REPLIES TO AIKEN
ABUSE CAN NOT WIPE OUT THE
RECORD THAT Is WRIT.
InxectiTe Can't Pull Away From Rec
Ord-PRlying Politics With An
derSOn POStmastership.

To tie Voters of the Third District:
! Mr.. Aiken has issued what he terms
a brief answer to the letter of James
NJ. Baker. While he claims it needs
no answer yet he labors through seven
columns Of small type in vain Ell
fort to answer. The greater portion
of it is devoted to abuse and bitter
personal attack on Mr. Baker
Mr.. Baker is amply able to take care
o. himself. Mr.. Aiken made the first
attack on Mr.. Baker when at the New
berry meeting he gratuitously and
voluntarily broug-t Bakers name in
tee campaign when no one had even
suggested it. l stated then as | state
now that l hold no brief for Baker but
! in answer to the charge O: Mr. Aiken
will say that Mr. Baker was elected to
the highest office within the gift OF
the United States senate and defeated
none other Ihan brother Of President
Wilson. If he is all tie mean things
Mr.. Aiken says he is Mr. Aiken must
have very little influence with the SEN
ate taat he could not prevent the cleo
ton of Baker as clerk when such men
as a brother of President Wilson were
in the running and especially in view
of his admission that ne made the ef-
fort to encompass Ills defeat.
In abusing and attempting to answ-
er Baker Aiken uses my name very
frequently and tries to make point
that my published speech and Bak-
ers letter reviewing Aiken,s record
came from the same source.
This is true ard that fact but
makes stronger the truth Of
the review of the record Of Aiken.
The source is the Congressional Re-
cord where Mr Aiken's record is
writ and the fact that my speech and
the Baker review show the same
source and are similar is proof beyond
question that the statements therein
contained are true and Aiken may
twist and squirm and fill columns
with invectiye but he can't run away
from that record. 1 stated at the
opening of t1e campaign that would
discuss and criticize Aiken's record
but that I would not indulge in per-
sonalities. l have lived up to that
position l have nothing to conceal
and no tracks to hide.
As he refers to me in h. effort to
give "Aikens true record l desire
briefly to review Aiken's statement
and his record He does not refute
nor correct a single statement made
in my speech reviewing MS record be-
cause he can't do so. l will refer
only briefly to the several matters he
claims are not correctly quoted and
show by his own words that they are
correctly quoted, besides Mr.. Lieual-
Ian assistant librarian Of the senate
makes affidavit t2at the Baker article
as published hs been compared with
the Congressional Record and that
every statement in it is correct.
AS to the chairmanship OF District
of Columbia committee and Ollie
James 1 quoted from an article in tae
Columbia State O.: May 18th, 1913.
Aiken tas not denied that. 1t is: "lt
was commonly understood in the ways
and means committee that Mr., Aiken
did not seek the Craftsmanship be-
cause he had not been a regular at
tendant on the committee hearings,
was not familiar with the work and
die not fee! competent to serve" Mr.
Aiken has not denied tAis statement,
nor does he now deny it.
AS to the Anderson postof1ce: Nr.
Aiken says it was the policy OF the
Democrats that where Republicans
were gifing salts. action tat they
would be allowed to serve out their
terms. If that be true why did Mr..
Aiken make change at New0erry al
ter promising that there would be no
change? Why did he make change
at Pickens? Why did he make
change at Westminster? These post
masters had not served out their terms
and there was no complaint on the
part of the patrons of tie several Of
fees as to the efficiency OF the ser
vice. There was complaint at Ander-
son. Mr.. Aiken will scarcely deny
that. IN fact he says there was, but
CONTINUED ON PAGE A.