Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1872-08-09
[For the vindicator. ]
A Correction.


we were busy, that we could not pay
that attention to it that it merits, but will
have something to say at the end:
Mr.. Editor Against my wishes feel
compelled to correct the errors which per-
wade your statements Of the doings Of the
Street Committee and myself in the last
"Vindicator." Out of respect for the read
ers Of your paper, you should lay aside your
inquietude and spite, and scrupulouly state
only facts in your criticisms against those
who are the objects Of your jealousy. Your
extrayagant Misrepresentation are as fol-
lows.
"The Street Committee proceed to tape
line Augusta Street and find Malkwood's
stone-wall, Utley's and Ceases porches and
Fuller's fence on the Street, and, the Ccun-
Gil having ordered the Ordinance concern
ing distractions to be rigidly enforced, no.
THY these gentlemen to remove them. They
don't like this and flick in traces"
This is entirely new and and frs, had its
origin in the brain of the Editor. The Street
Committee never did any such thing, to
which all these Gentlemen will! testify.
ga prominent Councilman expostulates
and tells them the advantages of pavement
far exceeds the damage. They still object
and the services of an engineer, Col Liiley,
is secured and the lines run accurately,
when 10 and behold the line on the Yves.
tern side is found to run into the lot of Coun-
Gilman Evans, taking off p feet at one end
and about 5 feet at the other, and the sim
gular discovery is made that Col. Lilley is no
engineer"
[ am almost at loss to account for this
invention. The Editor certainly has been
imposed upon. The readers of your journal
will be surprised to know that this quotation
does not contain one single fact. The ser.
vices of Col. Liliey were secured in con-
formity to resolution of the City Council,
and without complaint from any one Col.
Lilley has only run an experimental line,
and has informed the Chairman OF the Street
Committee, that he has not the time to
make complete survey of the line as re-
quired by the City Council, and declined to
give his certificate to the accuracy of the
survey already run
"The wrong OK seems to be gored. The
question is, will the Street be aightened,
and will the same argument apply which
was used by Councilman Evans to one who
was ordered to straighten on 'toher side ?"
How absurd is this quotation. l said to
COL Lllley, to locate the line without respect
to persons or property, and if it is found
| that l am on the Street | will cheerfully
give up what dose not belong to me. and
have no doubt every gentleman along the
line will do the same. So your question is
answered. and the Street will he straight
ened SO soon as the line oan BE- accurately
run and located, wiMoM respect to persons
or property.
Gas the ordinance concerning obstruc-
tons is to be rigidly enforced, we would like
to know why the Street Committee obstru,t-
ed the side walk by constructing fence,
on the Street. adjoining Aaron Shovele:s :?
Are they building fences for indivil.al:, q
If SO, VIC have several jobs in That line W e
would like them to do;
This quotation is obviously contradictory
for if an obstruction it can not be on private
property. AS the Committee on Streets are
not building fences for individuals your
''jobs" must be left III done, am sorry
to Inform you
ga Coon TnING.-To have the privilege
of corporation hands to improve private
property. Ii any body don't think 50, if be
can, let him try it,
The Street Committee repudiates this in.
sinuation and answers uneauiyocally and
emphatical!y. it is not true, and cali upon
the Editor Of the ':Vindicstor to state.
when, where, and the names CT the hands
employed to improve private property
Your attention is respectfully directed to the
foregoing. that you may inqlre as to the
facts herein set fortn
Remain Yours &c,
JNO b. EVANS
First as to The spite, jealousy &c of the
Editor and the :'ipyenton of the Editor, >"
and the forgetfulness Of the fact that we
stated We had learned &c. The Editor, in
his sanctum, was informed of what he
wrote, by gentleman, who has supported
Councilman E0ans, at every election, and
Influenced more co7ored votes than any man,
in the ward to secure his election. This we
think is quietus on this subject.
As to tape lining the Street, we submit
the following
81 saw the Street Commissioners meas
uring the Street at Markwoods, with mpe-
line and suppose it was to ascertain the line.
Lilley's stake vas FIVE fee. inside Council
man Evans Lot
G.. G BUNCH.n
Query-How could the Com'rs know,
and why tell the property owners they were
on the Street, and that they must move their
fences &c., unless they had measured, as no
Engineer had rHn the line at that time p
This is too thin Mr. Evans.
AS to the next quotation, WHICH is assert
ed not to contain "single fact"
There is no question that property own
ers did object and that Liley was called in
two facts.
II, Jno. W. Utley, say that Councilman
B. T. Bagby told me tina. the improvement
contemplated by the Street Conf would
enhance the value of my property more than
the damage, pnd am under the impression
that Uouncilwan Swans told NE the same
thing.
J. W. UTLEY."
Utley also says Llley's stake was five
feet inside Of Evans present fence
81, B. F. Markwood, heard Harrison
S!anker, and others say, that the Street
Com'rs were not satisfied with Lilley's line
and that he heard them say they intended
to get anather Surveyor to make re-
survey.