Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1881-11-01
!. MORE" ABOUT THE ACCEPTANCE
OF THE CHALLENGE.
The w. g. W. Agent at Last Heard From
In What He Thinks Flax"

The w. & W. Agent at Last Heard From
In What He Thinks " Flax"
How Eloquent He Is In His Blow About |
His Fair and Square Contract.
The facts are these: We accepted the |
challenge and still accept it, when the arti-
cles of agreement are drawn up in fair
,, and equitable manner. As to these, he,
alone, drew them up excluding all points in
our favor, and positively refusing to insert
any offers of amendments, or if naturally
in our favor, he, by a clause in some one of
his numerous articles, throwing it in his
own. As we could not agree on the con-
tract he presented, we offered to allow three
disinterested parties TO draw up one to be
accepted by both.
He positively refused to accept this offer,
thereby acknowledging his contract to be
unfair and in his own favor
He says We sprang it upon him. Here is
an extract from an amendment we offered,
dated October 81 "IHat 1re soiN meet you
ut from 2 to p. M. on t0-n0rr01C at the
fair grounds, as are stated BEFORE or are loiH
meet yoat IN tero eceeks at tie opera-house or
oaey other place that may be decided upon."
| If he wanted time, was not two weeks long
, enough for him to prepare?
t He refused to accept either proposition,
snoring hoso anxious he aodS TO meet us.
To show how much We were prepared,
r our judges were not chosen until Friday
|, morning To show that we wished thor
v ough test, we obtained two master mechan-
b les to thoroughly test, with file, all our
9 metal, wearing parts and construction.
He asserts that we had seen the challenge
is before the day we accepted it. We
o had never seen it before, but we hat
r. been asked by his sub-agents in contests why
At wedidnot aeceptit. Having repeatedly asked
m them for one, they claimed they could no
i'd find any. We had always said that w
Or would accept it, as soon as we could Obtain
it. He also says it was our company's ez
at pert who accepted the challenge through
r. us. He utters a .talsehood and knew b
was doing SO when ne said it, ae we toll
~ him it rested entirely with US e. & s.
If Here is another of his backdowns:
~ ''This is to certify that MIR. L. r. Burgie
iff manager for the W. & W, S. NJ. Co., cha
ey lenged Emory & Scarborough to duplicat
IT. two samples of work, which challeng
Emory & Scarborough accepted, and upo
od demanding of said Burgie to make th
en- samples, he positively refused to make
be and do not believe he did or can MAX
them, but that they were made by some or
to else.
m. II therefore take pleasure in announcing
ID to the pubic that Mr. Burgie made squal
ad back Gown and is afraid to compete wit
lsk the DAVIS fairly,
Try Emory & Scarborough propose to NAL
We all samples in the presence of the compan
of Respectfully,
no J. "a Turner,
al Hannah Schubert, Cordelia Turner, WI
70 Shultz, witnesses
=, Now we leave it to the public as to viii
in was the ones to back down, Mr.. B., Wi
,sv his absolutely fir, square contract, or OF
M selves.
ent We did not wish to carry on a war
words, but of tests.
The following is the report of the gent
men who examined our machine.
hr. Respectfully,
TIA, Emory & SCARBOROUGH.
I've EMORY & SCARBOROUGH After care1
examination of the Davis Sewing N
ar chine, we find the parts most exposed
-. wear aoeU hasdened other parts left {
'he posed well provided with suitable means
to taking up all lost motion resulting fire
,er wear, making it in our estimation pe
ov durable machine.
40 [Signed. }. Il. SHEPHERI
7ht- G. w. RILEY.
les Oct 80, It.