The Waterbury Democrat., 1938-06-10
FAIR PLAY EXTENDS JUST so FAR. BELIEVES
 THIS WRITER
June g, 1888.

Editor, The Democrat:
 What Do You Think?" is the heading on column on the editor ial page of the Waterbury Republi- can, devoted to letters received from readers. Underneath that heading is the advice, Write Letter..
 But the Waterbury Republican, I can state factually, does not care what at least one reader thinks, a reader who trusted too much in The Republicans invitation and the sense of fair play that invita- ton implied. This lady, friend of mine, wrote a letter to the editor of the Waterbury Republican some two weeks ago. The letter was never printed. Why? Let me tell you.
 On May g Rev. Dr. John Curry Walker of the Second Congrega- tional church delivered a sermon ill which he advocated the resignation of Mayor Frank Hayes. The Re- publican announced that fact with gleeful headlines and carried a lengthy account of the minister $ sermon.
 The lady to whom I referred sat down and wrote a letter to the Re- publican, signing her name and giving her address, but asking that neither name nor address be printed This is, I understand, customary in letters to- the-editor- columns.
 T,, r, lot e,l, pulpit was not the place from which Dr. Walker should deliver diatribe of invective. His sermon, she said, had failed to reveal any of the spirit of Christian charity which he was supposed to be teaching and practic- ing.
 Also, in her letter, the lady pointed out that Dr. Walker and other local ministers who now were crying for blood and spreading doctrine of hate had sat by complacently while Communists in Spain butchered and robbed the priests, nuns and lay persons who clung to the Catholic faith. These ministers, she said, didn't bother then to deliver ser mons or give statements to the news papers.
 That, in the main, was the letter And the trusting lady looked in the paper next day, but no sign of il appearing in print. And the next day, and the next it likewise was absent.
 She thought, perhaps, that the letter might have miscarried in the mails, but that seemed impossible Then, one day she received letter from the editor of The Republican Inside the envelope was also her own letter. The editor said he re- gretted that he was unable to print her communication, and that he couldn't possibly do so unless she gave permission for it to be printed over her name and address. Anc accompanying his message was, as an obvious hint, her own letter.
 Or, rather, the patched-up rem nants of her letter. It had beer torn into small bits and tossed aside Then, apparently, the editor decided that probably wasn't the best policy rescued it from the waste-basket, ol wherever it was, and patiently pasted it together again. The lady is still keeping it as a souvenir ol the fair play (what laugh Of Int Republican.
 The lady engaged in some core spondence with The Republican editor, but got nowhere. Her lettel wasn't printed. Incidentally sh' has a phone at home, and sh' wondered why it never occurred t The Republican to call her up t' check the authenticity of her let ter, before tearing it up and then in presumably an attack of the public c-might-hear -about-thiS fever sending her back the patched piece after an interval of several day when the letter had lost its timeli neSs0
 The once-trusting lady has de cided now that it's waste of tim to write letters to The Republican unless their contents are in con formity with the papers editoria opinions. She'll know better tn next time. she says. but she stil wonders whenever, she sees in Tn Republican, or it's counterpart, Tn American, letter which is printe, without the writer's signature.