The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1875-09-23
Another Letter From MIR. Stuart.

We find in the Richmond Dispatch of the
18th welltimed and well-toned letter from
Hon. A. III. Ell. Stuart, of this city, i'll reference
to the completion of the James River and Ka-
nawha Canal from Buchanan to Clifton Forge.
1t has been called for by letter written by Col.
Ed. Pendleton, of Botetort, in which that
gentleman, after reviewing and pretending to
correct Mr.. Stuart's calculations and figures,
gives preference to the railroad scheme over
the canal, between the points named. Col
Pendleton has accidently fallen into his mis-
fakes by basing his remarks upon obsolete es-
Inmates for the canal, there being several in
existence, but the one adopted by the authorl-
ties of the canal is that upon which Mr.. Stuart
predicated his first letter.
BY way of parenthess, we will say that it
is characteristic Of Virginians when feasible
and in every way desirable improvement IS
suggested, comprehending the general good
such as that brought to the attention OF the
State by Mr.. Stuart-there are always local
politicians, or aspirants for notoriety, who
make it a business to attempt to defeat the
public interest by introducing some other
scheme, that might benefit some particular To-
Guilty in greater degree. Mr.. Pendleton
lives about, or probably in, Buchanan The
construction of a railroad from Clifton Forge
to Buchanan would create some business in
that place, by reason of transfer of freights,
etc., while the general benefits, which should
be regarded as paramount in considering pub
lie enterprises, would have to be overlooked.
1t is extremely unfortunate that such is al
most invariably the history of all the in prove
ments in this State. Our patched up system, or
want of system, Of railroads, previous to the
war, and the vast sums of money expended in
little local turnpikes, resulting from the rrac-
tice Of sslog rolling in the Legislature. look
inc to no comprehensive scheme or plan Of
general utility, are fair exhibits of the states
manshp of those who claim the attention OF
the public in such matters.
We hope the suggestion of Mr.. Stuart, for
tilted by so many strong arguments and figures,
will receive that impartial consideration which
its great Importance demands, unembarrassed
by the local prejulices and comparatively triv-
ial objections that it may have to encounter
1t is great State improvement, worthy OF the
earnest attention of the whole people of the
Commonwealth, and above the range of local
Jobs and entangements, and it should be SC
regarded by every true friend of Virginia.
The following is the letter Of Mr.. Stuart, as
we find it in the Dispaech:
STANTON, VA, September Is, 1875.
| To the Editors Of the Dispatch:
| Gentlemen,-l have read wiJh and attention
the letters OF Mr. Edmund Pendeton, of Botetort
and Mr.. Frank lin Stearns, OF Richmond, published
in late Nos. of your paper, in which they undertake
to CueStiOu the OF some OF the Statements
contained IN my letter to General Anderson on the
subject of the extension of the James River cana
from Buchanan to Clifton Forge. 1t is true tina
Mr.. Pendeton acquits me OF any purpose to mis-
at least impute to me degree of carelessness il
dealing with facts which, If well founded, would il
NV Judgment be inexcusable; for hold that no on,
is justihabe in making publication unless he ha
at least used proper diligence to ascertain that his
, | statements are trae.
In answer to this implied mputation beg leave
to say that derived most OF the important facts
sntean Of reat nteiigence and
BILE integrity. Mai, McMahon was the contracto
above Buchanan, and should therefore have fel
warranted in giving the facts to the public upo1
human memory, thought it possible he might b,
mistaken i'll regard to some matters OF detail, ant
to insure precise accuracy my letter, before publ
cation, was submitted to officers Of James River
Company for careful scrutiny and revision by com
parison with the books, and reports, and estimates
Of their officers and engineers. This according
, ly DONE and whel ever there was any discrepancy
between the recollection of Maj. Mcmahon and tls
records of the Company, the figures OF the latter
were adopted The statement of facts in my letter
therefore, rests on the authority OF the gentlemen
who constructed the work. revised. corrected, anl
verified by careful comparison with the archives
the James River Company.
| I will add that since my letter was puDllShed
have had the pleasure OF reading letter, dated 26tl
August, 1875, addressed to Maj. Mcmahon by MI. u
| NJ Harris, the Skilfu engineer and superintendent
of the James River Company, which susIains am( s
literally, the statements and estimates OF Maj. Nc
Mahon In that letter, after discussing the subject
of the extension OF the canal in various aspects, MI
Harris concludes by saying, Il think, with $l20et0
i'll money, or its equivalent, we can make the con
nection and hazard some contingencies"
With this narration CT facts leave it to the pub
lie TO decide whether can be Justly charged with
having presented the facts set forth Id my letter
lightly and unadvisedly.
| But Mr.. Pendleton charges that am in III
saying that the work west of Buchanan has not beer
damaged more than two per cent. OF the origina
cost. And to make good his charge he specifies the
particulars in which it has been damaged. d
course did not profess to have any personal knoWl
and, indeed, if L had made personal inspection o
| it doubt if wou i'd have been competent to form
an intelligent opinion the subject. as an 11eith
| er an engineer nor a contractor. But here again
James River Canal Company to that of Mr.. Pendle
ton. In the letter of Mr.. Harris, above referred
he says: Il have been the line lately, and fine
that the mechanical work has deteriorated but lit
tie .
Pendeton is mistaken in his estimate of the dam
| age which the work has sustained; but ii there b.
| a lingering doubt on the mind OF any one it mus
vanish when say that am authorized by Maj. Nc
Nahon to state that he will cheerfully undertake TO
work to as good condition as it when the Com
pany received it from him.
Respectfully, your obedient servant,
ALEXANDER H. II. STUART.