Virginia citizen. (Irvington, Va.) 1891-1921, 1907-12-13
ANSWER TO Mr.. CURLETT.
EDITOR VIRGINIA CITIzEN:-

In answer to Mr.. Curlett's letter of |
asst week | will say in the first place
that l regret very much he has
made it necessary for me to answer
in order to protect myself. l had no
desire to give the matter any more
publicity than possible, but since Mr..
Curlett seems anxious to tell some per-
sons about it, who may not have had an
opportunity of learning the facts, will
have to reply.
Mr.. Curlett says that in his talks with
me about fixing up these bad places in
the road the discussion seemed to be "a
reasoning in circle" Now, if nv
reasoning was in a circle, 1 am sure Il
could prove, if could write as well as
Mr.. Curlett, that in his letter to the
CITIZEN he has made one and-a-half. if
not two, circles. / do not think, how
ever, that he has been very polite in
one statement that he has made.
He seems to have tried to
prove to the people of White
Chapel district that they have been
fools enough to elect as Supervisor
man whose judgment is so poor that he
actually tried to make three hundred
bushels of she'll answer in the place of
thirty-five hundred. Does any one but
Mr.. Curlett believe this? Why does he
use the same unfair argument that was
used before the jury in this case? He
may think it is all right and proper as
far know, but | have never known
him to use such an unfair argument
until this case came up. Don't Mr..
Curlett know enough about the evidence
in this case to know that it does not
accord with his statement? If he is not
familiar with the evidence, why is he
fioundering around in the dark SO lively?
1t must be owing to his interest in this
particular case; or to his bravery, which
he called our attention to in his letter.
But, although do not see the necessity
for it (the statement), have no reason
to doubt it as it appears to me from his
letter that he is not afraid of anything
In Heaven above, in the earth beneath.
nor in the waters under the earth" But
it is generally conceded, think, that
the bravest men do not usually publish
the fact. Why does he not know that
the evidence before the jury was, that
| instructed Mr.. Thos. Haynie to put
that three hundred bushels of shells in
one place just where the road crosses
the marsh from Curlett's land to the
Wheaton land-and why does he ignore
this evidence? Is he ignorant of it?
Why should he be? Dr. Lewis knows
of it, the jury knew of it, the judge
knows of it, the people who were in the
courthouse know of it-all who were
listening-and last, and it may be the
least in the Hon. John Curlett's opinion,
] know it.
Why should the Hon. John Curlett
pop up and say all this is wrong, if he
knows nothing of the evidence; and
that the jury came to their decision in
consequence of the good opinion they
and the people had of Mr.. j. VIM.
Chowning, when in fact there were two
witnesses who testified to the same
thing-that is to the fact that ]. VIM.
Chowning had instructed Mr.. Haynie
to put the three hundred bushels of
shells at the crossing.
| DIR. Lewis was kind enough to say in
his testimony that had always seemed
willing to repair the road with shells, if
could get them at a sufficiently low
price, buthe did not accuse me of want
ing to put three hundred bushels on a
mile of road if we did pay FIVE cents a
bushel for them.
Yes, Mr.. Curlett has informed us
where the blame belongs, although he
knows a very little about the evidence.
Now there. are only two persons who
really know all and especially the prin-
cipal point in this case. They do not
agree as to what those facts are. Mr..
Curlett claims that he is friend to
both. If only two men knew no one
supposes that Mr.. Curlett was one OF
them; but they know who they were
and now as Mr.. Curlett could not know
why did he not remain silent If he die
not want to injure either one?
| OiiS VI SACoS SWO Hlcil lCSllllcS 10 WHdl
he claims to be true and he has two
witnesses who give circumstantial evil
dence which no jury or any unbiased
man could ignore.
Does Mr.. Curlett not know that thi.
same evidence was given to the BoarC
of supervisors. What were they t.
do? decide against the evidence as yor
have done?
Mr.. Curlett ends his letter by what
may be a threat to me as am the mem
Der of the Board of Supervisors who
attempts to have the roads of White
Chapel worked, but may be mistaken
l do not claim that make no mistakes
by a great deal; but if he does mean il
as a threat to mel will say that as fal
as anything have done in connection
with the roads is concerned he is en-
tirely welcome to investigate; and al
he has given some of us some advice,
will just advise him that if he cannot
make better job of airing the roac
problem than he has in airing this shell
case, he had better conclude to abandon
the idea. j. VIM. CHowNING.