The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1892-03-11
THE TURNPIKE QUESTION.
Answer to MesSrs. FriersOn, Farrell
ct ais.


allow me space in your paper, To reply to
the article, lately published, written by
Luther FrierSon, about the COLUMBIA
Central Turnpike. His evident purpose IN
publishing that article, as appears IN al
most every sentence, was to so prelHaice
the public, and the County Court, against
the owners OF this Turnpike, As lnat Inc
County Court would refuse TO allow Us to
recover our lost property.
To accomplish this purpose, among
great number of other ugly charges, he
asserts, that we were guilty OF two crimes.
One was false s1cedrtHg and the other J"f-
gcrg. Did he knew what he was DONG
when he made these charges through the
public prints? As to the false swearing,
lie says we filed a bill against him, IN
which we charged and swore, that he had
opened a shun road through his farm;
around toll gate No. }, by which we nad
lost tolls heavily. We did so swear. lie
swore he had done no such thing. We
proved what we swore was true, ana me
supreme Court said we had sworn tne
truth, and ordered him TO close up ms
shUn road, and he did 1t.
So much as to false swearing
Now as to the forgery.
Two petitions were circulated, one was
where NIr. Frierson and his friends had
indicted us 50 often, for allowing the road
to contract II stated that we were not IN
fault about it-that it had been contracted
:
then amply wide enough for all pubic
needs. and asking the Judge to dismiss the
indictments Horace Rainy and | pro-
cured all the signatures, about 20 persons,
living along the line of the pike.
The other petition was about the bridges
across Bigby Creek. Mr.. FricrSOn accuses
ms of forging one mans name to this
+ ' nv false representations. We assert that
we never procured anv mans name to it,
and that we never asked any one to sign it.
Mr. Purh so states. and we will herein
conv Il paper. signed by him, in which he
states he procured all the names to it, and
that we had nothing to do with it.
In reference to the forged name to this
petition- and our procuring other names
to it, by false representation, Mr.. tTlersOn
makes the following charges.
zone witness swears he dld not siSn tle
petition and that his name is a ItHEeL for
Gerg-anOther, who could not read sWears
that Mr.. Horace RaiLey procured his sigma
ture by telling him that IT was pc
tition. not to require the farmers along
the pike to move their fences back,
50 as to make the road wider
another Swore, that it was represented to
him, that if the bridges had to be built,
the toll gate would be moved beyond Mt.
Pleasant 50 that he would have to pay
toll TO get to Mt. Pleasant.-Sevcfal swore
that their signatures were procured, by
making /
were built ''OId Uncle Jimmy PuSh
would be turned off fro:u keeping the gate
Bv such misrepresentation were the sig
natures nrocuTed.' -
IN show how much of truth or faischOOd,
there is in these charges, l copy two pa
pers. now in my possession, and which,
| ipon application, will be shown to any
one.
James Pugh states that he was gate
| keeper at gate No. /, on the Columbia Cen
trial Turnpike. An elfort was made to open
his gate, because the bridges across BiSoy
/ Creek had not been rebuilt. He circulated
/ a petition among his neighbOrs, asking the
/ Turnpike Commissioners not 70 open his
gate. because there was no public necessity
! Tor said bridges. lie obtained all the
/ signrrs to said petition, about - III mum
! - ifost of the persnDs signed their own
- L,'t eorIt. ,te-e -igucd by others. at
tI,. r,,',,,o.t of the narties. Neither W s.
~ I, - - IT, Poinev had ANYTHING
/ - IN ,,r,cI,ri,,e, .iguGrs to said peti
/ 10 90 WIN I'roCGl iIiS D ~
/ I3n. harch, fOu 20 r.,lIo.rs. w
~ me oIneI PGiISi w So Ir state thai
N"ilcc1 81 - III G. ~, HntL If the same
they are IA "a, iiSl ~ 9o' sil,nod natiIinn
name. J. w :Na'iUe' o,, - Phi in refer
PresenteGq 70 nun ~ "ri'lS9 ni,,hy "
Ga,, ~ IT, f'' E71,r,o ned asa witness in