Daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1859-1865, 1860-10-20
TO THE PuRLIC.

Ny attention has been called to n carr,
published in the columns of the Dailv
Gn.on, of yesterday, over the signature Of
.. hlcOonald, in which he makes an effort
TO place me in false position before this
community. 1t will be remembered that
on the night of the IIth inst, the Repub-
licans OF the several Clubs of this city had
d torcnllght procession: the object of which
was the celebration of Republican yicto-
ries in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana
ana as the procession was marching down
Main street, it was attacked by set of
rowdies at the corner'of Main and WASH
lngton, in the First Ward. made several
unsuccessful attempts to avoid collision
with all or any Of the party making the
assault; and finding that all of my eff
1orts were toiled, and feeling that my life
was in imminent danger, / turned and
hred pistol. And do here call on eve
ry candid and law-abiding citizen who has
made himself acquainted with the nature
OF the assault made upon me at the time
referred to, whether my act in firing tho
pistol was justi6able or not. This is the
only question involved in the case. If it
was done strictly in self defence, and the
circumstances by witch was surrounded
wnrranting that conclusion, then am not,
nor could be made liable under the ordi-
nance made and provided to prevent mis-
chlevous uses of fire arms in the street.
air. Mcdonald tells you that his friends in
the First Ward are anxious TO know why
he did not summons witnesses in behalf
OF the city against me. In the FIRST place
if Mr.. Mcdonald had told you who those
friends of his are, in the First Ward, who
trouble his highncss SO much with their
anxious care in behalf of the city and its
interests, it would have given you very
good opportunity of determining as to
some OF thoss making up that mob of OUT
laws formed in large numbers at the juno
ton of Washington aud Main streets, on
the night of the 18th inst. Again, Mr..
Mcdonald attempts to make you believe
what he knew to be unjust to myself and
inconsistent with the facts in the case, at
the time he uttered it. Now does he not
say that there were no witnesses sum-
moned in behalf of the city, and that he
took it for granted that l was gentleman
enough to become a willing witness
against mysalf2 The Alderman saws that
Mr.. Mcdonald gave him the name of one
witness and directed him to issue his
summons for the same. His Deputy
gave the Alderman the name of an
other, and that he (the Alderman), at
his own instance, issued his summons
for third. All of those witnesses appear
edl ana teStlhc0 IN the suit of the city
against myself And still Mcdonald will
have you to believe that the city had no
witness, and that he had told his friends
(GOd save me from such friends!) of the
first Ward that he believed me gentleman
enough to be introduced against myself
Oh! think what BOBBY you have made of
yourself: and that simply to appcasc your
Friends eff the first Ward.
Now, taking for granted that Mcdonald
believed that would be witness in the
case, what does my admission to him, if it
was in the presence of Squire Duty and
Deputy Scroggins, amount to if Mcdonald
should know (and if he does not, Ger
tainly am notresponsible for his ignorance,)
that the Alderman is bound to take all my
statements together, both for and against,
and l am satisfied that nothing in my
statement to Mcdonald would warrant the
belief that was guilty of the violation of
the ordinance in question.
JAMES o. HAwLEY.