Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1881-11-04
To the Public.

My exhaustive letter in Tuesday morn
ing's paper concerning the controversy be-
tween Messrs. Emory & Scarborough and
myself, gave them ample time to reply if
matters had been as they represented them
to be, or if I had misrepresented any
thing" as they claimed They did not
point out single point in the contract that
was unfair" that as they had previously
claimed. They did not dispute word that
l said in explanation of it, which is a viz
tual admission of everything that claimed.
They knew the public would expect them
to clear themselves of attempting to bluff
me, and after seeing that 1 could not be
bluffed, backing down, as I charged, and
the public can appreciate how completely
they were pushed to the wall by the fact of
their silly attempt to make the public be-
lieve that tried to palm off the certificate
as having been given to the No. 8, and the
still sillier thing of showing the public, in
the same paragraph, the gerry reason mhy
| Everybody kneo that it did 1ot refer to the
No. 8; but to machine that was in every
| particular so far inferior to the No. that
the Wheeler & Wilson Company abandoned
it and brought out the No. 8, necessitating
changes in their factory and machinery
which cost nearly half million of dollars.
That, is pretty strong testimonial to the
No. 8, and ought to satisfy anybody, that
| if any lady could think so much of an ''old
No. e." that she would idolize No.
which is as far head of the ''old No. -
as it was head of hand sewing. The gen
tlemen claim that the lady had been soici
ted by my agents to exchange her old ma
chine for No. 8, which may be SO.
knoao it is, if the lady says SO; but
may be able to tell them a circumstance
that they may not know Of
The lady called at my Office one day anc
requested me to go over and examine hel
machine, stating that ''she had seen the No
8 and SO much preferred it that she desired
to exchange for one. did go over, bu
we did not trade. Now, will the gentlemen
please tell the public achy the lady did no
get No. 8.
(Tell it correctly, gentlemen, or else
shall correct you with some more sworl
testimony.
Now, as to their remarks about Mr. Tur
ner's certificate, care nothing. and tn
public will care nothing about what h
said.
| have produced the secoy7, testinnony o
two gentlemen whose veracity and STANDING
cannot be questioned, that the certific at
was false, and I take it as little unwal
rantable in Messrs. Emory 4 Scarboroug
to again refer to it. Their doing SO con
firms me in my opinion that they took tn
advantage of him, and that he did not kno'
the nature of the article he signed.
1t would have been better for them
have devoted their time in explaining to tn
public why they are not capable of attendin
to their own business; to pointing out th
unfair (?) clauses in the contract which the
, refused to sign why they were willing
2 comply with what they pretended to accept
why they don't undertake to wear out tbs
old No 2 machine with two of their ne
ones; why they did not also pretend to al
cept the other challenge, which was on th
same sheet of paper as the one they pre-
tended to accept, and how they ever got
into their minds, what funny thing
would be to bulldozc me.
E Respectfully,
:. L. r. BURG1E.