Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1851-04-22

be in eompd tition with Elkton. In
view Of his admissions and what ]
have Just asserted he stated to the
committee, which l am prepared to
prove when called on, ] leave it with
the public To determine Mr.. Kirk
lands sincerity in bis denials and
lprotestation$ Of innocence as to the
sum and substance of what he says
l charged him with, viz drplicity,
double dealing, deception, unfirness,
or in his own language, if you rather,
"acting in bad faith. .
| The next item claiming attention
in this marve llous production Of III,
K, is sit was an unexpected thing for
Elkton to biz 50 largely. The dele
gates from Fayetteville could not
understand the thing and in this
way, he says, @they appear to have
come to the conelusionthatI Chez had
acted in bad faith" Yes, we agree
with lM. X. that at was an unex-
Ipected thing for Elkton to bid 50
Ilagely," and .how, l would ask, could
it have appeared otherwise, giving
your statements the least credit? -
Outside Of the contents of a letter
received in Fayetteville, from you
short time before the meeting Of the
locating committee, in which you led
the cor immunity in and about Fay
etteville, to believe that Elktonf
i would not be in competition for the
Il location, we learned from your own
Hips on the day the committee met at
Col. Rebinson's, that Elkton "stood
f no chance for the location!'' | am
not surprised to hear you say's.it was
an unexpected thing for EllSton to
bid SO largely" and that 1.-The Fay
! etteyille delegation did not under
stand" it. 1t is by no means a mat
? ter of SUI prise. And it is at least,
| one fair conclusion you seem to have
: come to, and have had the candor to
: state publicly. '|This conclusion ap-
S pears to have continued on their
! minds CT delegation,) until Wednes-
3 day morning. the time at which |
! left, you say. By this l understand
t YOU to admit that / was not alone in
! concluding you chad acted in bad
] faith towards Fayetteville,-the 9TH
$ er members of the delegation (Gibsoli
and &'eD were sufficiently wrought
t upon by the force Of circumstances
# and your statements, tobelieye;us as
e Ibid tn; t you had acted in bad faith.
G And, Notwithstanding you say after
an explanation from you, they ex7
n pressed themselves not only satisfied
: but promised to disperse this impress
e sion frommy mind. on their return
! to Fayetteville, it is clear if | jumped
r to an understandable conclusion there
. was sufficient in the wind to mislead
r others, and among them some ofyour
l best frien DIS; those least disposed to
5 do you an injury. Your affirma-
, ton of Gibson and Steel's state Of
mind ndipromise, after your eXpla-
nation, and their repeated denials
, since, makes up an issue betT cen
r YOU and them | do not feel myself
| called upon at this time, to take a
part in.)
Now since you assert that the en-
tire delegation from Fayetteville,
were laboring under "false impress
FsiQns" why did you not in your pub
lication, relieve me by stating what
induced these 'sfalse impressions?''
How, insist, could we have possibly
suspicioned you with acting @in bad
faith towards Faye tteville, leaving out
Of view your statements and con-
duct? Then put the question if it
was not your declarations and cd IN.
duct that forced US to believe y pu
bad acted Gin bad faith towaId Ids |
Fayetteville, in the name Of all that,
is sacred and good what was it? As
q member Of the Fayetteville dele
cation, | claii "a to be unable to trace
it to any other source. You disclaim
any intention of this matter being