The Big Stone Gap post. [volume] (Big Stone Gap, Wise County, Va.) 1892-1928, 1907-03-06
REPLY TO PUBLIC STATEMENT

WI Ntti fAir NI iIIHltN =
Public Statement. signed by
40 one, but purporting Go be-
Signed. Members of the ODD
Council To some of the state.
ments therein desire 10 reply
The substance OF some of tho
statements made by me at th,
Board Of Trade meeting is given
fairly accurately. but The main
point which I made. or tried
90 make, is left out. and am op-
portunity Is thus afforded to
misconstruc the statements
which are given NV chief
point was that "a. TOWN H
-n'. that the present supply
rs, or would he iu dry seasons.
wholly inadequate even for it's
present needs. and that DC could
never hope 20 bccom, city uu
al - procured "a supply suf
ncicut for both the present and
the future. and that. therefore.
this was the first and most ina
pOriant matter to which thr
Board of Trade should give
attention, that every effort
should bc exhausted 90 trv to
make successful the old rcscr
voir plan but NJ this could not
be done, then some other plan
should Ice adopted. AS old
ioilonius might have said. "Gct
water. Get n hy means 81 lhp
reservoir 81 YOU cam. I .r
F0fr.
This was my main argument
What ! said about Che $4,000
having "bo,n sunk Dad frog
pond and wasted - eras said i'm
TINS connection. 10 was wasted
unless the reservoir cam stn be
made 10 hold water. butt did
not criticise the old Council for
a single dollar honestly and
Judiciously spent DOB an effort
90 make the rescrNOira success.
voted for the bond issue.
knowing, or believing. that. 81
necessary. Slf.OoUO0 would Doe
spent ON the reservoir. 10 was
not my plan. but others in
whom / had coiidonce. believed
that n was the best plan. aud I
was willing 20 act On their
Judgment. Having done $50. 4
would bo the last man m the
town To blame the Old Council
for having done shat which
they were iu effect directed by
the people to DO.
No. gentlemen. ID would bo "a
begging OF the question To tr,.
20 make 1t appear that / criuci,
e0 Nou for any expenditure proc
perry M u e. ON the Reservoir.
What / did criticise YOU for was
ihat You did not 10 about this
expenditure IN a business like
way; that instead of employing
al expert engineer. aud doing
the work according 10 his plans
aud under his supervision. Non
discharged your engineer short
iy after the work was begun
and had the Job b0ssed bv men
who had either expert.
ence, nor expert knowledge. Ina
such matters, aud that ftsr5s
money had been wasted. You
say N. fdl .cas 4ot a.s.tar1of.
and that | was in error in say. f
ing that be had been discharg 4
ed. Ia this YOU are technical f
~ correct lie was not actual
~ discharged as city engineer; /.
but since your Statement al. +
peared | have talked with him /
and he tells me now. as hehad F.
told nae before. that he was ...
+" Gee ''m pat in charge of the
work. aud that after the first
lew months lac had practically
no supervision over AZ whatevor.
J further stated that TIE ques.
1on as 10 whether tho money
mad b en- toaesfiu expended
should be Investigated. You
won!d have IL appear that only +
a few suspicious characters
anu cxtremlets' ara If this OBI.
Mon, and that such are alone
responsible Tor the present agi
tasion. Permit me 10 say thar
there are a good many more Of
such suspicious character aud
&lfcmiois Az the town u Big