Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1852-1859, 1853-04-15
Errhe Pittsburgh Journal publishes the letter Of

EJThe Pittsburgh Journal publishes the letter Of
Mr.. Sorng Of Philadelphia, on the Hempfeld
subscription, and makes its comments thereon, in
which the most prominent feature is the inconsis-
tency of his statements and promises. The Jour
nal harps upon 'bargain made by an unscrupu-
lous clique of men, principally from Philadelphia
AMI Wheeling, to sell the great interests CT Phila-
delphia, while the only proof he adduces is the re-
mark of Mr.. Strong, that some of the friends OF
the Hempfeld voted for the repeal Of the guage
law. He very prudently remaks however, that
Mr.. Srongs letter is cautiously written, asserting
nothing strongly &c." Had the editor OF the Jour
nal been equally cautious he might have saved
himself from the ridiculous inconsistency of as
serting that the "Hempfeld Road would build up
system of Western and Southwestern Railroads
for Baltimore" when in the next breath he UT ges
upon Philadelphia the Importance of securing the
Steubenyil'e and Indiana Roal across the Pan
Handle. Now we would like to know, if the
Hempfeld travel is to go 10 Baltimore, what in the
name of reason is to prevent that of the Steuben-
vile and Indiana Road from taking the same direc-
ton travellers by that Road will ndi tust as near
10 Baltimore by the Baltimore and Susquehanna
Road as travellers by the Hempfeld would find it.
Nay, more, does not the same argument kill dead
epery railroad connection OF the Central Pennsyl-
uaniy Road acest Of Harrisburg? And while the
Journal harps upon that portion of Mr.. Strong's
letter having reference to the bridges at Wheeling
as not being sufficient, &C., in the next breath he
assures The public that the Steubenville Road
''aoiube completed in gear, Virginia link bridge
aad ALL" What remarkable position for Pitts
burgh Elitor. and the official head of that sweet
city!! We agree with the Journal that "he had
no time to argue the question. &C.," for truly we
would almost think that the ftgreen bottle'' had
demented the Journal. or that he is yet feeble from
his late indsposition and possessed of as little
pacity for thought, as he has had time for argu-
ment. The plain fact is, that the Journal thought
that he could make something out of Mr.. Strong's
letter. set 10 work at it, found himself mistaken,
and was ashamed to acknowledge it, and in the
effort to produce something. has begotten the
strange production 10 which we allude, and hence
the manifest absurdity Of this document. Will
This head of the Anti-Bridge city be kind enough
to inform us by what process he means 10 complete
that bridge in year, by what authority, of what
height. and all the rest of the particulars in gen.
eral nd in particular, whether he has obtained
charter from the Supreme Court by virtue of which
he will make such quick work of this bridge. We
presume under these circumstances that Captain
Naylor will not be candidate for Southern chimes
next winter. Well, our citizens had best be
r.ady.
Since writing the above we find in the Bulletin
the following letter from Judge Conrad on Mr.
Srong,s letter, which sufficient explains the let.
ter of Mr.. Strong and takes the las: plank from the
Journal:
For the Evening Bulletin.
An article appeared in The Pennsylvania lnquir-
er OF Saturday, over the signature of H. K. Strong,
assailing the Hempfeld Railroad, the City Goun-
els, and by implication the senatorial representa-
lives OF the city, of which it becomes proper to
state that IN its entire scope ard puIport is un-
founded in ruth. Tie charge that the Hempfeld
Bill was passed at thc price Of the repeal Of the
Guage Law. is proved, by The character of the
rotcs"n the two subjects, TO be impossible, and,
SO Tar as my knowledge extends, is without the
slightest justification i'll the facts. The statements
made in relation to the Hempneld Road ate but
repetition OF Pittsburgh caIumnes, frequently and
concluSyely retuted, aud unworthy, until present
cal with some evidence TO support them of further
notice.
R. II. CONRAD,