The tri-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1866-1868, 1867-06-15
For the Standard.

r leigh Sentinel, in which my character APP
pears to disadvantage. Therefore ask room
in your columns for a word of explanation
and defence The card which seems to have
appeared in the Standard over my signature
was private note addressed to a friend IL
Lexington and not intended for publication
in which ascribe my discharge from the
North Carolina Railroad to my political
sentiments, and especially, to the fact that
attended the Union meeting in Raleigh
This I did not state as matter OF fact but
as my opinion, and it is my opiaiOn stu.
Mr.. James Anderson, Superintendent OF
the Road, publishes card in reply TO my
card, (so-called) in which he not only uSeo
very disrespectful and ungentlezaanty ia ~
guage in regard to me, but lays grave OF
fence to my charge. If the nature OF TINS
charge had been fully and fairly stated,
would have less right to complain. But 1t
comes in the form of an anueRd0, evidently
intended to suggest to the Imagination OF
the reader great deal that he had not the
bare-faced impudence to express, and winch
would not have been borne out by q full
statement of the facts. ,
He SAYS that as Conductor l collected
money from Mr.. VIM. Walker, a passenger,
and failed to return it to the treasury until
after detection" Now the facts in the case
are these-A Mr.. VIM Walker in letter to
the superintendent complains OF dlthculty
he had with Mr. Long, Conductor on the
evening of April Sd, in regard to his fare !;
said Walker not being willing or able to pay
the extra fare required of those travelling
without tickets. In this letter 1t appears
that Walker volunteers to state that IN pass
ing on my train, the morning OF the same
dav from Durham's to Raleigh. had charg-
ed him only the regular fare.
In nv report on the 4th, I reported no
money ms received between Durham's and
Raleigh. When the Superintendent showed
me the Walker letter I told him had no
recollection of any one getting on the tram
that day at Durhams, and was sure l col
lected no fare between that place and Ra-
leigh. In this l stated the simple truth &C
cortling to my recollection, felt that this
disa7owal ought to be satisfactory to the Su-
perintendent for think had right to be-
lieYc that character of eight years growth
in the service of the road, in which length OF
time had never been accused OF misappro-
priating the funds of the road, although
tens of thousands of these funds had passed
through my hands. 1 say think had
right to believe that this character would be
sufficient, if not to screen me from suspicion
of an attempt to defraud the company out
of the sum of one dollar and t,centy. fce CENTS
at least to entitle NE to a fill and fair inres-
tigdtion of so grave charge. But such in
yestigation was never had. was not sum-
moned before the President, confronted by
the witness, called to answer to the charge
and to explain my conduct. A character on
the road of eight years growth, suddenly
vanishes before the influence of single al
leged offence, that if true, might have been
readily resolved into mere oversight. Now,
all that 1 expected of Mr. Anderson; all
that now ask of a generous public is the
charity usually extended in cases of the kind.
There are many ways Of constituting the case
without the supposition of fraudulent pur-
pose. Might it not have been that no pas
senger got on the train at Durham's on the
morning specified? or is it not possible that
the passenger that got on eluded the Conduc-
tor purp0selyg Or if this was not the Sc.
(and I do not charge that it was) is it not
possible that the Conductor happened to
overlook the passenger? For nc man is in
fallible. Or If the passenger paid his fare
is it not possible that the Conductor through
Observation-Disclosures omitted to take the
proper note of the fact? 1t seems to me
that an unprejudieed mind might have found
some solution of the difficulty not necessarily
involving moral obliquity in the Conductor
AS passed Durhams on the 18th, that is,
before made my report, l was informed by
the assistant agent, Mr.. Long, of the difficult
ty between Walker and Long, and knowing,
as I must have known, that the difficulty
would very likely lead to an investigation of
the transaction of the Conductors on that
day, how is it possible that I, if sane man.
could on reaching the Shops. have so played
the fool as to withhold from my report this
particular amount, if had received said
sum from Walker? For the truth of NV
statement, refer to Mr.. Lyon himself
repeat that I have no recollection Of re-
ceiving money from any one between Dur
hams and Raleigh, on the day specified, and
do not believe did receive it, but if 1 did
receive it, my failure to report it was an
oversight. did not believe at the time of
my discharge, nor do yet believe, that that
little circumstance was the cause of nv re-
moval A reliable gentleman overheard a
number of men, some of whom were officers
of the road, conversing about the meeting at
Raleigh, and heard one of them, an officer
call it " a id negro meeting" and say that
all employees of the road who had any,
thing to do with the meeting ought to be
discharged"
Now all this took place before the Walker
affair occurred, and am prepared to proue it. |
The Walker affair camein just in good time.
1t furnished a splendid protect for dismissing
an employee for, or on account of his political
sentiments without the necessity of avowine
the real cause, which the President and Su-
perintendent lacked the candor and COURAGE
to do. Mr.. Anderson was my neighbor at
the Shops. was published in the papers
as delegate to the Union meeting from Ala
nance County. My attendance was public
thing, and l cannot see how an intellioent
man placed in the circumstances of Mr.. An
derson, could trut1fu1Iy ndhonestly say that
he knows nothing of my politics, and that
he did not know that I attended the meet
ing" If the Superintendent did not knw it,
the President did, and conversed with me
afterwards about it. presume the President
ordered my discharge. And with the facts
as have stated them, will leave a dis
eliminating public to judge whether an al
lodged error IN business involving the immense
sum of one dollar and twenty -five cents was
the cause of my discharge, or whether a foul
and coaoardly attempt to crush nv character
and my sudden and summary removal from
employment, acre only the results of political
malice and revenge.
have not written these things in the in
terest of any political party, or for the injury
OF honest men who chance to differ with me
In politics. but have been nrornn+od -