New Britain herald. [microfilm reel] (New Britain, Conn.) 1890-1976, 1928-10-10
BRANDING THE OTHER
FELLOW

not for the humorous features con-
nected with it and the prominence
of the litigants it would not be more
important than any other little
neighborhood brawl jerked INTO
courtroom for adjudication.
The point about the trial is that
when women 60 into the public
arena, where mud sometimes flies,
they must expect to have gown
ruined occasionally. You will get the
meaning. no doubt, without chart
of instructions.
1t appears that Mrs. Helen Brum-
ley Baldwin, an official of the d. A.
r. of Boonton. 10 or has been a zeal
Gus worker in the cause. When she
read in a newspap per that the Rev.
William H. Bridge Of that town had
invited Mrs. Lucia Aines Mead. noted
Boston pacifist, to speak in his
church she didn't like the idea at
all. Which waA her privilege. Per-
hap others in the town didn't like
1t either. while q fair portion were
willing to listen with patience.
Mrs. Baldwin. however. didn't
stop with thinking her opinions. She
stepped out in public about 1t. writ
ing a scorching letter to the local
newspaper, In which she attacked
the Rev. Mr.. Bridge and Mrs. Mead.
stating that tn csc and the Rev. John
Haynes Holmes. Professor Robert
Morse Lovett, Oswald Garrison Vii
lard. Jane Adams, Sherwood Eddy,
Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, Mrs. l.. X
Elmhirst (the former Mrs. Willard
D. straighD, Stanley High. and
Sarah Bardfeld were all playing
the Communist game"
When anybody steps out in public
in this manner. throwing a cobble-
stone of invective and endeavoring
to besmirch the reputation of re-
nowned public characters. a lack OF
care was exercised in'the first place.
And in the second place. the party
who does this deed. to our way OF
thinking, should not be at all irri-
tated If some OF those aimed at re-
turn the fire. That is common sense.
we believe: the person who throws
brick should at least expect any
thing from a pebble TO boulder In
return.
The Rev. Mr.. Bridge took UP the
cudgeis on behalf Of all. He also
wrote a, letter TO the little local pa
per saying that Mrs. l'aldwin'
statements were Lying imputations.
Maybe il the writer had not beer
minister and the object OF hi'
wrath had not been woman. h
would have written even a hotter
; statement, using words printable
Only on asbestos.
And SO the war started. Mrs
Baldwin sued for SANDER. demand
ing $4,000 damages. She claimed I
1900. ,rd m h,,s char baJ cnoEen 4
her about the letter and that she ha
received many notes mentioning i
| 10 that she was quite unneryed,
! not worse.
8 Why go further? Except to ia
that her original statement abor
4 Communists WIS not so very niue
= for the reverend pastor to get excil
E cd about, seeing that the word ha
lost all its force by being TOO cor
! sistentiy applied. 1t is not MOI
o forceful, indeed. than the much
I abused word "bolshevist." Ever,
= body knows plenty of both sort {
. people nowadays-the folk who d
;. not agree with ones pet beliefs.
e As for the ministers claim, VIII;
d does Lying imputation" mean
e Politicians during a campaign &
u away with much more serious stat
e ments. The whispering campaign I
II current manufacture is much mo
e slanderous and 'libelous and noho'
y has yet read OF anybody going
g Jail.
The trouble down In Boonton,
y j., was that two individuals talkt
r. out in public when they should ha
n kept their opinions in secret. Al
'e another trouble was that a count
IN editor printed two communicate
3. which should not have seen priI
n We are inclined TO blame the edit
re for not using much Judgment. ]
c. might have known that the woman
al original letter had no place
rs print if it tried TO hlacken the rep
III tations of reputable citizens; a
the editor having taken this ste
ds should nave induced the minister
nj tone down the second commune
he ton, or should have used the fabl
H. blue pencil
ne Rut above everything else is I
to incontestable deduction that tho
SO who enter the public arena shou
d. not he thin skinned: should be vi
ly ing to take as well as give.