Shenandoah herald. [volume] (Woodstock, Va.) 1865-1974, 1912-02-16
THE TOLL GATES AGAIN

Sentinel attempts to assa1l the
position of the HERALD, by Hank
ing it.
Under what the text books call.
'sThe fallacy of changing the
point in dispute" the position
which the gentleman assumes IS
defined as follows:
Zone of the parties in a con-
troversy, after having tried III
vain to establish hiss Irrelevant
conclusion, dextronsly shifts his
ground of dispute and pertlnaci-
ously claims that to be true which
HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED,
while the true matter of conten-
ton is left without an honest
confession of his ina bility to pove
his assertion. That is suffi-
Gent reply to the gentleman's eff
fort to establish his propositions
which have not been disputed.
The gentleman attempts to
Justify the Turnpike Company in
its imposition Of toll upon citi-
zens of the town by declaring
that the town took the toll gate
into the town. This may be true
or it may not. The lot which
the Turnpike Company purchas-
ed was originally decided as a
town lot and in the plan Of the
town was designated as No. "a.
No other lot in the town has that
number.
Again the gentleman says the
Board is truly thankful that 1t is
not incumbent upon 1T to at
tempt to convince the HERALD Of
the truth of known facts, &c,
and yet that Board by its Secre-
tary, Judge Newman, and its
Counsel, the learned and astute
Speaker of the House of Dele
gates, attempted to convince the
Committee of the State Senate
and ingloriously failed. They
could not convince even one MEM
Der of that committee. The COM
mittee unanimously reported in
favor of the bill which prevents
their multiplication of toll gates
on the Valley Turnpike, and the
Senate of Virginia passed the bill
with only one dissenting vote.
Whether the Speaker of the
House, who is the counsel of
Turnpike Company can prevent
its passing in the House of Dele
gates remains to be learned.
Again the gentleman claims
that the Turnpike Company is
keeping up. free of charge the
main street of the town for the
use of the town. This is not
correct. The main street of the
town was kept up by the town for
over three quarters of a century,
before the Turnpike Company
took possession of the street, mac
admized it. and for seventy years
has been exacting toll from the
travellers who pass over 1t. Who
is so simple as to believe that the
Turnpike Company built the road
for the benefit of the town
They keep it TIP for their own
benefit. and because the law COM
pels them to keep it up. When
ever they fail do so, they will be
required to open their road for
public use, free of toll.
After an effort to impose addi-
tional burdens upon the country
people, he has the boldness to
assert that they (the town. are
also having the country people
taxed to keep up the main street
of the town itself, for the benefit
of the town people. No one is
simple enough to believe this
statement.
Because the HERALD is oppos-
ing the effort of this company to
tax the country people for the use
of the main street, he would
create an antagonism between the
untry and the town in order to
compel them to pay the Turnpike
Company for the use of the main
street of the town.
It may be unnecessary for the
HERALD to continue this discus
sion, but it will continue to advo-
cate what it believes to be justice
to the country and to the town.
He " would insinuate that the in |
terest of the people of the.towni i.
antagonistic to that of the coun-
try. This is not correct. TheI
town is interested in the prosperi-I
ty of the country and the country |
is interested in that Of the town |
We want free communication be-
tween them. The town, if freed
f~o.,. <ha s4r1shs1c which fIic ~or