Brownsville herald. [volume] (Brownsville, Tex.) 1910-current, 1928-10-02

IS CONCLUDED
Judge Seabury Writes
Final Letter To
DR.. HaIlam

The Herald has received the fol-
lowing letter from Judge r. W. Sea-
bury. chairman Of the democratic
campaign in the twenty-seventh
senatorial district, to DR.. S. X. Hal
Ian, chairman Of the anti-Smith
campaign, with a request for publ
cation:
In your letter TO me published in
The Herald September 30th. you say
that the COMMON tactics Of those
defeated in argument are to try TO
win by calling their opponents hard
names. That Is a true saying. And
as ! have called you none. and you
have said that ! have forgotten the
ethics which -uide gentlemen in de-
bate" 0 must imagine that you
have been beaten in some argument
or debate between US.
You must not let that worry you,
Doctor. The plain fact is that there
has never been any debate between
you and me. All / did was 10 chal-
lenCe as untrue. without any init
nation of false intent. the statement
you were reported in The Herald Of
September 18th, as having made in
your opening campaign speech at
Harrington, to the effect the New
York law giving negroes the same
rights as whites in hotels. restau-
rants, publ cconveyances, etc. was
put upon the statute books by a
Tammany-controlled legislature; and
| proved its falsity by showing that
the law in question had been enact
ed by a republican legislature about
the time Governor Smith was born,
and that il was absurd to charge
u to the democracy, TO Governor
Smith. or even to Tammany.
Now. you cannot debate a subject
like that. II is either so, or it is
not SO. The New York statutes and
court decisions would settle the
question. They settled it in my ia
vor.
One would have expected that YOU
would promptly admi. the falsity OF
the published statement, and follow
the admission with an explanation
or an apology. Instead OF this, you
wrote me a letter. composed mainly
Of your views on the true and false
issues OF the campaign. with bu. a
single pertinent paragraph directed
70 the charge ! had made.
That paragraph was illuminative.
Il showed that The Herald reporter
had gotten his information from Won
AFTER the meeting. and that YOU
had given him as part Of your snow
en- address an elaborate treatment
of n large subject, hich YOU had
not even mentioned at Harlinren.
Speakers often give out in advance
a written speech. and later vary il
very greatly in actual delivery. Per-
haps that Is legitimate, as YOU now
argue. But il is certainly rot legiti-
mate TO state positively. as having
already been said or done. a thing
that you know was not said or done.
And when YOU do this TO a reporter,
knowing that he will publish il, il is
still the more ~indefensible. for il
not only tends to mislead the read
ing public, but. when discovered. in
Jures the newspapers reputation for
accuracy or for probity.
whether or not you merely said
Cnct at Harrington. but TO the re-
porter that New York had So a
law. and he volunteered the addition
that the law had been enacted by a
Tammary controlled legislature, the
fact remains that you did not correct
the published statement for a week
after you knew il had been attrib-
uted TO you, and for five days after