The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1876-08-09

through correspondent from Pike
county, has been publishing some absurd
ald false charges against Mr.. Williams,
the Democratic candidate for governor.
These charges have been copied with sp-
parent zsal by the Republican press
throughout the state, and while they are
utterly false they are calculated to do
harm unless corrected. This we propose
to do. We have given the matter careful
consideration, and have hunted up the
facts In the case in order that they may be
presented to the public in the Or, psr light.
The Journal charges that the Hon. James
ID. Williams, after making a contract with
poor man to rebuild some fences for
him, refused to pay the man for his
labor. allowed himself to be sued, and the
jury gave the verdict against him. The
facts in the case are these: John Williams.
a son of the Hon. J. d. Williams, made a
contract with man named Tevebaugh to
rebuild fences which had been washed
away by the freshets of last yea- The
fence to be rebuilt was on the land of Mrs.
Dunn,
WIDOWED DAUGHTER OF Mr.. WILLIAMS.
Tevebaugh accepted the contract, and
when he spoke to his partner he told him
that John Williams had agreed to pay him
three dollars per hundred for hauling aud
replacing the old rails. His partner tol
him that he had misunderstood John
Williams, that he did noG mean
tree dollars per hundred. but
three dollars per thousand. Tevebsugh
insisted that he was right, and his partner
refused to have anything to do with the
contract, remarking that 'a law suit
would grow out OF il the work was done,
and the charge of three dollars per hun
dred was made" Tevebaugh did the
work, without any further consultation
with John Williams, and when he
refused to pay 1t, but offered him
compensation at the rate of three
dollars per thousand. This T refused,
brought suit and Judgment was rendered
against John Williams. He, Williams,
seeing the great Injustice of the verdict,
appealed the case to the Circuit Court.
We have the official d0cumsnts before US
AS We write, and the name of the Hon.
James ID. Willisms does not appear. and
u ntil he was here about the first of July
ue did net know of the pendency OF the
lawsuit.
THE ABsURDITY OF THE WHOLE THING
is manifest when the reader thinks for a
moment OF three dollars per hundred be-
ing paid for hauling and replacing old
'ails. No man can be found who would
say that any such price was ever made or
ffsred by any farmer in this county.
revebaugn evidently misunderstood
John Williams, for Williams says it
was never his intention Cd offer more
han three dollars per thousand for
Ibis work. The whole matter is evidently
a fabrication OF some imaginative cuss
who has more regard for high-soundirg
phrss ses and we'll rounded periods than he
mas for truth We have talked with sew
ersl Republicans from the neighbor-
mood wnere this rarssction occurred,
and they all agree that Tevebaugh
WAS evidently mistaken. Some of
Grese gentlemen endeavored to dissuade
him from bringing the suit and take the
pay offered him by John Williams. There
IS no man in Knex county who believes
that the Hon. James D. Williams would
wrong a poor man, or allow any one in his
employ to do it, il be could prevent 1t.
ANOTHER CHARGE FROM THE SAME SOURCE
is this: II is said that during the freshet of
1875 Mr.. Williams hired his nephew, who
owned a small fiatbost, to help him re-
move some cattle from the bottoms to dry
land. This nephew, who was a very poor
man, had his family, household furniture
and stock on this fstbost. to save them
from the overflow, and at the re-
quest oil Mr.. Williams he unlosded his
property and assisted Mr.. W. to save his.
When he returned he found his stock had
wanCered eff and drowned in the back
water. A few days afterwards
the nephew went to Mr.. Williams and
sske MIN for two dollars: Mir: Williams
gave it to hun, saying: "1ske it; l sup
pose will fave to support all you id
worthless cusses, and L have lost more
than all OF you." The above in SUBJ
stance is the absurd and ridicu-
lous charge published by the Journal.
NOW FOR THE REPUTATION:
The man who did the work for Mr.. Will
liams was not his nephew, the man did not
lose anything by the assistance be render
ed Mr.. w, for none OF his property was
destroyed. When he came for his pay Mr..
Williams did not act as reported,
sbove, but, on the contrary,
gave the man five dollars and
a hundred pounds OF -four. The
man was we'll salts fed with his remunera-
ton, and SO expressed himself. The in
we have given In regard to this
last charge was furnished us by one of the
most prominent and Influential Re-
publicans In this county, who lives
In Harrison township. He does not sp-
prove of such charges as those made
against Mr.. Williams. In this article we
have endesvored to refute these charges
rairly and dispsssionstely, and we hope
the Indianapolis Journal Will have the
fairness to retract them. We believe In
q public man If he has done
wrong, but this habit of printing false
hoods and ISLANDERS is one TO be greatly
Such charges, of course, have
no effect where Mr. Williams is so well
known as be is In this district, but as some
injury might be done him ia other parts OF
he state, we have deemed 1t expedient,
after q careful review of the facts, to make
The statement as gwen above.
A young man named Bussey, who has