The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1871-08-17
MI GIbbs ChnmplOn PIOw.
LOUISVILLE, o., Aug. 10, 1871.


asTrnth will bear the light Of inspection
at any time. and those who hope 70 pront
through Misrepresentation will gam noth-
ing in the enc" ....;.o-
t;on IN the DEMocRAT dated August ~,
signed Gibbs Plow Co. Which we wish TO
remark. and our language IS PLAIN, IN re-
card TO the above as used by Gibbs Pio"
Co. there is something decidedly peculiar
which the same we now rise to explain.
The Plow Company charges the Louis
Vile correspondent of the Rep. q Hep:
with violating the ninth commandment
in his report of the plQwing trial which
lately took place on the farm OF Mr.. Slus-
ser near Louisville.
Plow Company asserts that SAID ceres
pondent knew that there were no judges
appointed and no decision rendered: we
deny it. There was decision rendered,
Mr., Slusser was the judge. he was TO de-
eide by purchasing the plow which IN ms
opinion proved to be the superior. He
selected the Champion, paying the regu-
lar price for it, Twelve dollars) IN prefer
ence to the Monitor which was altered to
him at two dollars under price viz: ten
dollars.
Again Plow Co. asks, why has no men
ton been made Of the match at Sandy
vile? Why, friend Plow Company, bless
your innocent heart, if we were to make
mention of all the public and private trials
at which the Champion has come of VIC
torious we could occupy near an entire
issue of this paper. But in regard to the
Sandyville match, Plow Co. says this was
gotten up in the interest of the Champion,
other manufacturers remaining IN igno-
A -
We rise again. Other manufacturers re-
naming in ignorance OF course there were
other manufacturers remaining in igno-
rance, there is yet other manufacturers
remaining IN ignorance and there will be
! other manufacturers remaining In igno-
rance, Notwithstanding the fact that the
light of the Gospel, science and civilization
is spreading all around them. But Plow
Co was not in ignorance Of the match
that was to take place at Sandyville. They
were notified of it. They acknowledged
the receipt of the notice, promising TO be
there, also stating in their letter TO their
agent at Sandyville that they had beaten
the Champion at Canal Fulton. They had
beaten it at Louisisville, and they could
beat it at Sandyville or any other vile.
Now we will state the facts Of the Sandy
vile match in as short and sweet man
| u6E dS poSSlDlS. lEc plOh6 cIGclCO AiA
; trial were the Robert Jones, Ironsides, and
Champion. There were no judges appoint
: ed and consequently no decision, but on
} trial of draft the Champion drew from
twenty-five to one hundred pounds lighter
than the other plows, at the same time
running deeper and turning a wider fur
row. The Gibbs Plow Co. was not on the
I ground. The Gibbs Plow Co. had no plow
there, and there was no plow on the ground
that day that ever did belong 10 the Gibbs
Plow Co. Then in the face Of these facts.
we would ask how IN the name OF truth
. could the Gibbs Plow Co. plow have come
! | off triumphant. We would now ask of
Plow Co. fiiend, have you ever read the
ninth commandment Have you q proper
/ understanding of the doctrine it teaches.
/ if so, then it is our duty TO inform you
: that you have departed.
If we had space we would explain the
: latter part Of Plow Co. communication
y and tell how we were so innocently hood
: winked at Fulton. Suffice 1t to say that
: our friends mind is 50 much absorbed in
self, that it has led him to believe that
the "Glbbs shops" Of Canton are the only
u manufactures in existence He las failed
to notice the fact that John Ball & Co., o!
s. Canton, make few PloWs. There is an
10 occasional plow made at Akron, Massillon
; Mansfield, Waynesburgh, Louisville, some
of which establishments are near as large
. as the extension (25x50) works Of the
Gibbs Plow Co. Of Canton. Yet when
z there is anything going on in the plowine
: line and the Gibbs Plow Co. is not notified
of it then manufacturers remain in igno-
:. rance.
We notice card in the Rep & Req
from one ]. C. Nunemaker. Now we knoW
that fellow and would like to give our
> opinion Of him As he is q church mem
5. Der in good standing we do not wish to b
II understood as insinuating that he IS in the
d least dishonest, but his reputation foi
J, truth & veracity in the vicinity where he
J. resides is rather on the decline. We sym
l. pathize with Bucher.
IF Yours Respectfully,
V n. SEIBERLIEa & Co.