Daily Republican., 1888-04-27
The stove Os,e Again,
IooMMUEIokTnD,

Dotios that you printed ia your pa
per on the 24sh garbled and only par.
ttsl account OF q trial before Squire
Monaghan. where Mrs Philiv McDow.
ell Was plaintiff and Oleaver 81 Hollis,
defendants.
As you pretended to report tho case,
why did you not do 1t correctly and
fully2 Your report 10 very much like
the trial. one sided affair.
You state THAT Mrs. Mcdowell pur
chased Victor Oock stove, for which
she paid e15. Instead of delivering the
steve purchased, the firm sent O range
named The Finest"
The ovidenoe was first, receiptsd bill
for No 8 Finest and fixtures, received
BY Mrs. Mcdowell from Uleaver &
Hcllis, when she purchased the stove
and paid for IL.
Mrs. McDowell's evidence was that
she was shown this "No Fineat" by
Ar. Oleaver, and was told by him that
1t wac "Vlctor Cook" and he sold 1t
TO her for a "Viotor Cook;" that posi-
lively abe was not shown q mo. s Vic.
tor OeGk" and fixtnres by him; was not
a5Ee1 623 for IL; that Mr.. Cleaver did
nob tell her Il WAS "Finest;" that she
did not tell him that ehs could not pay
30 much money for stove.
Mrs. Gfubb was the next witness,
and her testimony was about the same
in every particular as the last wit1ese.
The next witness called by the plsin-
tiff was Miss Ksts Kleni, who testi.
hsd that they were shown the "Vicior
Oook" By Mr.. CJeaver, and that they
were there In front OF them for con
siderable time before going around to
where the 'Einesl" wers kept.
j. Fl. Oleaver testified as follows
Showed them No. Victor Cook and
fixturaB. asked S23; aid they could no.
pay 30 much, and wanted cheaper
stove. lie sho Rra them o No Finest
and fxturso, for Sl6; they bought IL. /
hsd bill made out for No. Finest
and fixtures, and receipted, and they
paid for 1t. ..#
Now, in the frst place. 1 want 70 say
that anybody who kGows Harry
Olshvor knowg that he 10 incapable OF
doing such miserable and contemplate
trick for the sake of making q sale.
Again, he would hardly bs fool enough
to sell No. 8 Victor Cook and fixtures
for less than 1t cost. .."
Tho whole trouble IVES that these two
old ladiss (who 1 hardly think could
tell gouy1 from cut'glass deosnter)
did SoJ Esal!y know what they wanted,
noe y bat thay dld buy.
We would have willingly returned
them thelr money had they come back
or sent bAck and said they had made u
mlstAks Aud did not wSnt the stove.
Bat iOat6ad Of doing so In q decent and
respectable manner, they sent Mics
-, don't know her name-either
daughter or ntece, think, who COM
msnoed by accusing hr. OleGvtr Of de-.
libeFntely and wiltully deoeiving and
CHEATING the old ladies By selling one
st0ve and sending another. She lot her
tongue run on at such rate and was so
exsspsIa.ing that Mr.. Oleaver finally
teosMe veXed and declared that he
would not return tine money; that they
could hLvs M. Victor cook and Az
tnres at $2l 90, or keep the stove they
bought. Nov, one wo,d TO the very
learned judge anu jury, eud then l am
done.
1t would like to know how you oould
give the verdict that you did, based on
the evidence Of those two old ladies,
wkan they were oontrsdioted by the
bill and receipt rendered. by Miss Kate
Aletnle, (tbeir own witness), by Mr.
Clesvar's testimony, and by my own
also.
In . oeurs OF Justice, such o case
wouid net be considered. In the rame
OF common sense, what 10 the use TO
make 3 bSrgalu or sale of any thing II
1t can be upset in such manner as you
did In this case?
GEORGE a, HOLLIS.