Peninsula enterprise. [volume] (Accomac, Va.) 1881-1965, 1899-06-03
Reply 20 Member OF Committee.

After two weeks of pent up fury
over what he considers malicious
attack by the ENTERPRISE, MEM
Der of Committee" ia Accomack
News, breaks forth in a paroxysm of
rage and not content with the utter
humiliation of the editor of that
paper, attacks in the most unjust
manner the writers of this article, and
while he disclains it, every signer OF
the petition presented by us for at
tempting to trick or job the commit
tee. Without intending to defend or
Justify the editorial in question, we
do say, he is the worst injured man
from the mildest blow we have ever
known. If this letter had been what
it purported to be,a ''plain statement
of facts we should have no reply to
make, but from what source he OBJ
tanned these facts we cannot tell I'M
less he drew upon his imagination
as we cannot in all sincerity see how
it could emauate from his memory.
Now as regards the petition COM
planned Of: We will endeayor to show
it was drawn Immediately under the
letter signed Committee" calling
the meeting for May 9TH, and not a
condition or suspicion of one cons
tanned therein that was not invited
by said letter. We will submit literal
copies from both letter and petition
and let the public Judge of the inius-
tice of the criticism.
Following is the extract from the
letter:
Sat the laying of the corner stone
and on the occasion of the unwilling
of the monument it is confidently ex.
pected that the sum of two hundred
and fifty dollars, at least, can be got
ten. But it is desired that the pledge
of the citizens of each locality, wish>
ing the monument, be given, at the
meeting above named, to the effect
that they will contribute an amount
sufficient to make up the said sum of
two hundred and fifty dollars, should
any deficiency occur. This is asked
as minimum inducement; due
weight will be given additional ones
COMMITTEE.
The petitioners after agreeing to
raise the $4,000, as requested in the
above letter, make use Of the follow
ing language:
1.-THE Monument Asso citation is ex-
pected to exert their usual energy
and diligence in raising this amount
on days named (meaning corner stone
laying and unveiling) otherwise, this
petition is null and void"
Now in what manner can this con-
tract be broken or payment avoided
by petitioners, save by the refusal of
committee to make an effort to raise
the deficiency, as clearly intimated
by them they would do on the days
named. And while the natural de-
duction from Member of Commit
tees" letter is, they would not try,
we dosnot believe it. Furthermore,
we do not believe, with the intimate
acquaintance "Member of Commit
tees has with the petitioners and
members of Confederate Monument
Committee, he has ever honestly
thought either party would have
varied one jot or little from theil
duty as expressed in contract. But
this is what he would have us be-
lieve by putting his committee in the
position of refusing to agree to con-
tract virtually asked for by their let
ter calling this meeting. Surely they
never intended that letter as a mere
Invitation for bidders, with no ex-
pectation of complying with its terms
The maximum sum asked for, public
ly, was $250.00, which amount We
supposed, with the money already il
hand, would complete the monument
as it was desired to appear and never
until the letter of last week, did We
know, that hauling, railing, turfing
& ETC., would be an additional ex-
pense. We were less fortunate thar
Parksley's business men who knew