Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
VOLUME 5
October 15, 1953
NUMBER 23, PAGE 5b

Correcting Some Misrepresentations

George W. Dehoff, Murfreesboro, Tennessee

The article by my good friend, Brother Marvin Powell, in the Gospel Advocate of September 3 misrepresents me. In the first place, nothing about Brother Powell or the Fourth Avenue church where he preaches had at any time appeared in the Murfreesboro bulletin. It is obvious, therefore, that Brother Powell was the person "unreliably informed" and that "He could have gotten the true facts had he taken the time to do so." Every article which I have written about the Franklin lawsuit is true and any preacher who has copied material from me will not need to run any corrections.

The statements attributed to me are misleading. I freely grant that in a long conference with attorneys lasting several hours there is room for honest misunderstanding. However, the alleged statements gathered from here and there and used out of context do not correctly represent me. I have always preached against whiskey and its sale or use either legally or illegally. In the recent campaign I preached at least fifteen radio sermons urging people to vote dry. I never stated I had been misinformed about the characters of the men leading the distillery financed organization to keep legal liquor. I stated that I had known Mr. Henderson for years and held him in high esteem, and that I knew nothing about Brother Robert Richardson, hence, we would deal with him as a man of honor and integrity. Brother Powell and I both agree that I never made any statement about the third plaintiff. I have none now fit to print. I never wrote an unkind letter to Mr. Henderson and certainly never apologized for writing him. (A copy of the letter will be supplied to any one who would like to read it.)

Just for the record: I commend Brother Kenneth L. Fielder for his fight against liquor especially when the opposition used every means, including full-page slanderous advertisements, to destroy him. He was not sued for any of his allegedly abusive language but on a legal technicality. I have no desire to discuss this lawsuit at this time. Errors such as this article misrepresenting me should teach all of us to use a marked degree of caution in "writing up" our brethren. Unless an article is written because we love our brother and want to help him in the Lord's Word, it should not have been written in the first place.