Franklin Repository: January 31, 1866Go To Page : 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
A Parody For The Times
(Column 4)Summary: The poem addresses the dilemma over how treasonous southerners should be treated and re-integrated into the nation.
Full Text of Article:Virginia Loyalty
Yesterday, as I sat writing
Of the wars and of the fighting,
And was getting tired of telling,
What had oft been told before;
Saying things I thought most cutting,
Suddenly there came a butting,
And a wooly head was stuck in,
Stuck in at my office door.
'Tis some darkey with a voucher,
Thought I, writing as before;
Only this, and nothing more.
I was tired of darkey capers,
And bent close above my papers,
Hoping thus the black intruder
Would go wander from my door.
But I hoped and wished most vainly;
For he knocked and butted, plainly
Showing that he was determined
To have speech upon the floor;
Showing that he really thought he
Had a right upon the floor;
May be this and something more.
"Come in," said I in vexation--
For I hated, like the nation,
Thus to have the fellow thumping,--
"Come in, Darkey, I implore.
What the dickens! is the matter,
That you make this awful clatter,
Make this horrid din and batter,
Thus against my office door?
Do you want to be a slave, and
Serve your master as before?"
Quoth the nigger, "Nevermore."
"I'm the spirit of a fellow
Who was murdered at Fort Pillow;
Murdered when I begged for mercy;
Pinned by bayonets to the floor;
And I've come to ask in reason,
Is this now a proper season
To have rebels who have strove to
Stab the nation to the core
Taken in, bid freely enter
Through the Nation's open door?
Only this and nothing more.
"We have fought as do the bravest
For your lives, your homes, your safety;
Bones of colored men lie strewn a-
Long the Mississippi's shore.
Black and white are bound together,
Mutual suffering forms the tether.
Now I ask, should we be ever
Made mere vassals as before?
Answer that, if nothing more.
"History tells us of a nation,
That, when owing its salvation
To the slaves who nobly fought to
Keep the foeman from the door.
Granted freedom to such heroes;
But sir! even bloody Neroes
Never granted pardon freely
To the "rebs," a thousand score,
While the serfs remained in bondage,
Whipped and cursed as before.
Banish that, if nothing more.
Ask your soldiers who extended
Help and succor as they wended
Dubious paths 'mid Southern forest,
Faint and weary, sick and sore?
Who it was that always waved them
Onward, praying God to save them,
And return them as he gave them
To their homes and friends once more?
Ask them this, if nothing more.
"Ask them when they heard the thunder
Rending earth and sky asunder,
And the black and white stood close al-
Lied amidst the battle's roar
If the fear of gun or halter
Ever caused us once to falter?
If a fighting reputation
Did not greet the colored corps?
Ask them this, and one thing more:
"Ask them, now the war is ended,
And the flag has been defended
By two thousand colored
Men who form the Afrique Corps,
If they'll push us from our places,
To make room for rebel faces,
Will they have us vote, or those who
Brought such horrors to their door?
Ask them that; there's nothing more."
Thus the darkey said, and started,
And the walls before him parted;
But he waved his hand and said, with
Look I ne'er had seen before,
"Good-bye, white man, as a nation,
God has given us salvation;
And, UP THERE the humblest private,
Sir, in all the colored corps
Is your equal evermore.
(Column 8)Summary: During Senator William's travels through Virginia, says the article, he was shocked to discover that white residents of the state "were utterly devoid of respect for tolerance of the United States Government." William's experiences indicate that "Virginia loyalty" is "well nigh an absolute myth."
Origin of Article: New York HeraldEditorial Comment: "The Richmond (Va.) correspondent of the New York Herald says that Senator Williams, of the Reconstruction Committee, has visited Richmond, to make inquiries as to the state of public sentiment there and says:"
The Law of Evidence
(Column 1)Summary: The editors cast their support for a bill currently under consideration in the legislature that would repeal the law of exclusion, which bans witnesses from testifying in a suit if they have an interest in the decision.The Deserter Vote Again
(Column 2)Summary: Offering tacit approval for a bill introduced by Senator McConaughy that would place severe restrictions on deserters' suffrage rights and would inflict serious penalties on election officers who permitted them to vote, the editors note that any attempt to disfranchise deserters "must be made entirely effective now, or it will never be done."
Full Text of Article:The Pennsylvania Militia
Senator M'Conaughy has read a bill in place relating to the votes of deserters, which is now in the hands of the judiciary committee. It recites in a preamble, the provisions of the act of Congress disfranchising deserters, and also recites the fact that none but citizens have ever been electors in the State. It then imposes a penalty of fine and imprisonment upon election officers for receiving the votes of deserters; also upon persons offering such votes, and upon any persons who advise and encourage such persons to vote. The Adjutant General of the State is required by its provisions to furnish an official list of all the deserters in the State, as shown by the records, and file with the clerk of the quarter sessions in each county, a certified list for the county, which record shall be received as prima facie evidence of the fact of desertion; but the person offering to vote may be sworn and disprove the record by his own testimony before the election board, subject to the usual penalty for perjury.
We do not assume to say whether this bill is right, or that it will meet the peculiar circumstances of the case; but the fact that an able lawyer has offered it, and that it will doubtless pass the careful revision of the judiciary committee, gives assurance that, if passed at all, it will be framed for practical results rather than to meet the wide-spread conviction that deserters should not vote. Had the legislature acted on this vital question several years ago, as did Ohio and some other States, there would have been no difficulty in framing a law to meet the case fully; but when legislation is to be perfected after the commission of the offence, and nearly half the judicial tribunals and election boards mean to defy such laws in any and every way they can, the perfection of a bill is by no means an unimportant duty. To this end we bespeak for the proposed measure the most careful consideration of the many able legal minds of the legislature, so that we shall not enact laws to see them successfully defied.
The Union men of the legislature should appreciate the fact that the laws relating to the disfranchisement of deserters must be made entirely effective now, or it will never be done. Before two different courts of this State, in Cumberland and Fayette, election officers have been compelled to pay costs for refusing to nullify the act of Congress; and in Crawford, we believe, election officers have been convicted for accepting such votes, and there are now scores of actions on the case or indictments pending which will be decided in the same conflicting manner. We do not hope to have the law so settled by the Supreme Court during the present year, as to make all accept a common duty and enforce it; and to the legislature, therefore, this question is presented surrounded with many and grave embarrassments. The time is past for any legislature that will not stand the highest judicial test. The necessities of war belong to history; the laws of peace again abide with us, and legislatures and courts must conform thereto. Instead of the safety of the people being the supreme law now, in the supremacy of law is alike the safety of the people and of the government.
We have in Pennsylvania not less than thirty thousand deserters. When treason plunged us into causeless war and had grappled with the nation in deadly conflict, they spurned their own priceless inheritance, and with matchless perfidy to themselves and their country, they refused their aid to save the noblest government of the world. They eminently deserve to be henceforth aliens to the institutions they refused to maintain and strangers to the great birth-right of American citizenship; but the retribution, however just, must have all the sanctity and ceremony of law. What we desire is that the remedy shall be complete in all the requirements of both law and justice, and then a faithful people can enforce obedience in all sections of the State.
(Column 2)Summary: With the report of the Inspector General of the Pennsylvania Militia almost completed, it is clear that participation in the enlistment program has been less than ideal. Almost one-third of the state's sixty-six counties failed to make any return of persons liable to military duty, treating the enrolling act of 1864 with "supreme contempt."[No Title]
(Column 2)Summary: After touring the South to examine cemeteries where Pennsylvania soldiers were buried, the State Commissioner has issued a report that "reveals a condition of affairs anything but comforting to the relatives of the deceased." At Andersonville, Danville, and Petersburg, the report contends, Union soldiers were interred in such a haphazard manner as to make identification difficult. Accordingly, "it will be seen that the probabilities of removal ... are extremely slight."High Prices
(Column 5)Summary: The author of the letter places blame for the current economic difficulties on the lending practices and monetary policies of the nation's banks.
Full Text of Article:
To the Editors of the Franklin Repository:
We closed our last article by stating, that when an unusual demand for gold exists, our banking institutions speedily become drained of their gold, or refuse, in violation of their obligations, to pay it out. This refusal is a disregard of the requirements of law ordinarily regulating the operations of these institutions, but they trust to the leniency of the legislatures, and the public, for a continuance of their privileges, and begin to retrace all their financial footsteps, preparatory to resuming the redemption of their paper at as early a day as possible. In order to re-occupy a position, in which they can again hope to do so, they contract their circulation, calling for the payment of as much of the paper of individual debtors, as is available. In the year 1837, the bank note circulation was $149,185,890. In 1843 it amounted to only $58,000,000. The sudden contraction of the currency is a public calamity, ruinous to thousands of enterprising business men, who had reason to regard themselves as in a prosperous condition. By decreasing the quantity of the circulating medium, they render it more difficult for their debtors to pay. No accommodations can longer be obtained from the banks which heretofore had constituted the fountain from which flowed freely the money that had served as the very life blood of the business community. Other lenders are scarce and cautious. The banks, although delinquent themselves in the payment of their notes, are exacting from their debtors. In order to meet individual indebtedness lands must be sold. Purchasers are few--prices are low--ruin and suffering abound. This has been the history of banking under that law, with a currency composed of paper, resting on a specie basis for its redemption.
Whether the present system of national banking, although undoubtedly in many respects an improvement on the late state system, will, as claimed by its advocates, obviate the evils of these calamitous expansions, and contractions, remains to be proven. The old system embraced all the checks and guards against the undue issue of paper, and penalties for the enforcement of its redemption, that the jealous watchfulness and ingenuity of a hostile, dominant political influence could devise. But it is a self-evident fact, that in a country whose commercial intercourse with other sections of the world results in an annual balance of indebtedness against it, unless gold is a production of the soil of that country to an amount exceeding that balance, a paper currency based on specie is an unreliable representation of value. Unfortunately for the country, the balance of trade is too frequently adverse to us. Excessive importation has too frequently been succeeded by financial ruin and prostration of business.
It is manifest, we must either abandon our ruinous foreign expenditures, or relinquish the idea of ever possessing a stable paper currency, based on specie for its credit and redemption, unattended, occasionally with the evils and disaster mentioned. Mr. Stillwell, of New York, in a recent article in opposition to the views of Secretary M'Culloh, and advocating a still more expansive paper currency than that now authorized by law, argues that "the market price in this country on all imported goods is controlled by prices in Europe, the tariff and the demand for exchange or gold. Every per cent on the price of gold or exchange above par, is added to the price of imported goods, in other words it acts like a tariff upon imported goods, and this addition to the costs of imports is called protection to home production or industry, because it enables the producer at home to get a higher price." If the protection herein claimed has reference as it most certainly should, to producers of articles competing with those of foreign manufacture, is in my opinion delusive.
In what manner is the producer of the home article benefited? The high price of gold raises at once that of every article that can be made to produce gold abroad, including grain, flour, cotton, &c. The advance in the price of these necessaries of life steadily increases the cost of labor and material to the home manufacturer. So that when he deducts the increase of his expenses from the augmented price of his wares, he will realize but little protection from that source.
Money, although regarded, as before stated, as a measure of value, is considered by Mr. Carey, of Mass., who ranks high among the political economists of the day, "a commodity, influenced by the law of supply and demand." He argues that when wheat is abundant, a bushel of that grain will command less wheat for a dollar, than when the currency is contracted and money scarce." In other language, when money is scarce, it is dear, when plenty it is cheap.
Hence arises the rule, sustained by the history of the markets of the country, that the increase of the volume of currency of the country, is always attended with a corresponding advance in the price of almost all articles of consumption. In countries in which the currency is a metallic one, and necessarily of limited extent, all articles of production are proportionately low. On this subject Secretary McCulloh writes, "a reduction of the currency reduces prices, and as prices are reduced, the demand for it falls off, so that, paradoxical as it may appear, a diminution of the currency may in fact increase the supply."
The truth of the latter part of this quotation, could only be realized when business had had time to accommodate itself to the altered state of the currency, certainly, not immediately subsequently to a contraction. The Secretary admits in his report to Congress, that if the war could have been prosecuted on a specie basis, the advance in prices occasioned by the demand of the Government could have been held in reasonable check, but that, with a paper money, all articles needed, responded in price to the daily increase of the currency. On the 1st January, 1837, when the bank notes in circulation amounted to $150,000,000, flour was $10 per bbl. On the -- January, 1843, when circulation was 58,000,000, flour fell to $4.69. It is true, however, that the price of flour does not always furnish a correct index of the effect of the currency on the markets, it being so much influenced by the state of the foreign markets, and extent and quality of crops of grain. But in the instance given, the diminution of price was attributable to the reduction of the amount of, and consequent appreciation of the currency. If the foregoing view is a correct one, a sufficient cause for the present inflated prices would be found in our at present redundant currency. The bank note circulation of this country in 1860 was $207,000,000. Now, the paper currency, including United States notes amounts to almost $800,000,000. In view of these facts, Mr. M'Culloh proposes a reduction of the currency, by the gradual withdrawal from circulation of the United States notes. This he deems necessary, in order to moderate prices, check speculation, and restore business to a healthy condition. The present apparent prosperity of the country is a delusion, that, if not wisely controlled, will, ere many years, be dispelled by the utter prostration of business and credit, and the consequent suffering and want of thousands now happy in fancied security and wealth. After the withdrawal from circulation of the U. S. notes, proposed by the Secretary, the National Banks would doubtless augment their circulation to the maximum allowed by law, which at present is $300,000,000. The accommodation furnished by that volume would be ample for all the legitimate necessities of business. In opposition to these views Mr. Stillwell, of New York, a gentleman of eminence as a financier, advocates a continuance of the present state of a redundant currency, and attributes the present inflated prices to the ordinary influences of the law of supply and demand. He argues, that in this country for several years past we have had more buyers than sellers, and a very insufficient supply--hence the rise in prices. That nearly 2,000,000 of the producing classes of the country were withdrawn from their daily pursuits, and converted into consumers. That during the war thousands of millions of dollars worth of property were unprofitably consumed. In support of the position, that prices respond promptly to the increase or diminution of demand, he instances some facts that are worthy the reflection of any person desiring to arrive at accurate conclusions, relative to the questions we have been considering.
Two years after the commencement of the war, cotton in bags was scarce, and advanced in price to one dollar per pound. Manufactured cotton was then plenty, and did not advance half as much. At the close of the war, cotton in bags became more plenty, and fell more than fifty per cent. Manufactured cotton being then scarce, after a short depression, suddenly rose to a greater price than before. He instances California, in which country, when the currency was gold, a few years since, the price of labor and every article of consumption, owing to the great demand and short supply, rose above any of the prices we are now paying here in currency for the same articles.
He also attributes the advance in prices, in part, to the high rates of exchange, which as before stated, he claims acts as a tariff on all imported goods. Now, it is questionable whether the high rates of exchange are not the result, in part at least, of the depreciation of the paper currency, increased to redundancy. Gold and exchange have advanced, only in comparison with a currency many times the amount of the gold it professes to represent. In addition to demand and supply, and high exchange, he enumerates the tariff and internal revenue laws, as influencing prices. Consistently adhering to his main position that demand and supply regulates all prices, he attributes the varying price of gold at different periods of the war, solely to the foreign demand being greater or less. He attributes the fall in gold, subsequent to the close of the war, to the reduction of the demand for gold occasioned by the sale of $300,000,000 worth of bonds of the United States in Europe. Was this fall not rather owing to the appreciation of our paper, occasioned by the termination of the war? Had the war continued the Government would have become still more heavily burdened with debt, until her credit would have been ruined. It was the belief in the ability of the Government to suppress the rebellion, and ultimately to liquidate her indebtedness, that sustained the credit of the Government during the war. But when, upon the termination of the war, belief became certainty, increased confidence in the solvency of the Government, at home and abroad, was the natural result. United States notes appreciated as well as United States bonds.
Mr. Stillwell argues that the withdrawal of U. S. notes would be ruinous to the business of the country. If withdrawn gradually as proposed, leaving a larger currency than we enjoyed previous to the war substituted for it, how can it produce such disastrous effects, especially if increase or diminution in the quantity does not influence prices? It is true debtors, including the government, would be compelled to pay their debts in a currency dearer than the one in which they were contracted. This they had reason to expect when their indebtedness was created; and they of all classes most require a remedy for existing financial evils. Should the monetary revulsion, glimmerings of which some fancy they already see in the distance, be visited upon us, individual credit, at least, would be annihilated.
Mr. S. argues that the credit of the government is better security for the ultimate redemption of the currency than any specie basis that can be devised, and that the value of the National bank notes being thus satisfactorily secured, the quantity that the banks should be allowed to issue, should be unlimited, except by the law of supply and demand. This is begging the question. How secure the value with an undue quantity? True, he state elsewhere that money is "that which redeems debts, and is not itself a subject for redemption," and adds that "coined paper or legal tenders are an addition to gold, not a substitute for it." This would certainly be a very pleasant view of that portion of its indebtedness for the government to take, but I fear that it is one that but few holders of its notes would enjoy.
In conclusion, the deduction I would make relative to the inquiry first herein propounded, is that the present inflated prices are attributable to the combined influence of the following causes, which decrease in degree of effect in the order in which they are enumerated: redundant currency; unusual demand for and short supply of most articles of consumption; the internal revenue exactions and the tariff.
There are some other questions, somewhat discussed in this article, that your readers may determine for themselves. I have already occupied more of your columns than I had intended.
Local Items--Court Proceedings--Second Week
(Column 2)Summary: In the second week of court proceedings, the following cases were "disposed of by jury verdicts. J. W. Douglas vs. Nicholas Bonebrake--Feigned issue, framed to try the validity of a judgement given by John Ditch to David Royer, Trustee of Mary Ditch, wife of John Ditch. Verdict for the plaintiff. Peter Stenger vs. J. Philip Roman--Feigned issue, framed to try the validity of a judgement given by Hezekiah Easton to the defendant in this issue. Plaintiff claimed judgement was usurious and in violation of a contract between Easton and the defendant. Verdict for the defendant. Louisa McKesson, Executor of S. R. McKesson, dec'd, vs. William Adams. Judgement opened. Defendant bought a farm in Montgomery township from Samuel R. McKesson, the farm having been purchased by McKesson at a Sheriff's sale as the property of Jacob Rinehart and wife. Mrs. Rinehart has made a contract with Frederick Foreman prior to the Sheriff's sale to put out a crop of wheat and in consideration of the lateness of the season he was to have two-thirds of the products which he carried off. The defendant claimed to have the value of this wheat deducted from the judgement he had given for purchase money. He failed in his claim. Verdict for plaintiff for $605.42. Philip Karper vs. Benjamin Cook and John Noel. Summons in debt founded on two promissory notes. Noel being endorser for Cook. Cook made no defence. The counsel for Noel rested their defence on the ground of lunacy and the habitual drunkenness of the defendant. There was much conflicting testimony. Verdict for the plaintiff for $769.29. William Wilhelm vs. D. S. Reisher. Assumpsit. Plaintiff is a cattle broker of Baltimore and had a contract with defendant to purchase and send to market cattle for their joint profit. The defendant contended there was a partnership and that plaintiff had mistaken his action--Account Render being his remedy. After repeated asseverations and denials by the parties as to this point, a verdict was rendered for the plaintiff by agreement for $1,800. Marcy C. Miller vs. John H. Hartle. Ejectment for a mill and tract of land in Antrim township. Title was admitted in Michael Zellar, who made a deed to Henry Miller and Henry Miller, Jr., went into possession. Henry Miller, Jr., shortly after died. The defendant purchased the property in question from Henry Miller, Sr., during his lifetime and went into possession. This action was brought by the widow of the younger Henry Miller and the question at issue was for whom the deed was intended, the plaintiff claiming the title by parol gift form the father to the son, aside from the fact asserted that the deed was intended for him. Verdict for the defendant.
(Names in announcement: J. W. Douglas, Nicholas Bonebrake, John Ditch, David Royer, Mary Ditch, Peter Stenger, Philip Roman, Hezekiah Easton, Louisa McKesson, S. R. McKesson, William Adams, Jacob Rinehart, Frederick Foreman, Philip Karper, Benjamin Cook, John Noel, William Wilhelm, D. S. Reisher, Mary C. Miller, Henry MillerJr., John H. Hartle, Michael Zellar, Henry MillerSr.)Full Text of Article:Local Items--The Normal School
COURT PROCEEDINGS--SECOND WEEK.--The court sat during the whole of the week and the following cases were disposed of by jury verdicts, all the other cases put down for trial being either settled or continued. J. W. Douglas vs. Nicholas Bonebrake. Feigned Issue, framed to try the validity of a judgement given by John Ditch to David Royer Trustee of Mary Ditch wife of John Ditch. Verdict for the plaintiff. Sharpe for Plff. Kimmell for Dft.
Peter Stenger, of C., vs. J. Philip Roman--Feigned Issue, framed to try the validity of a judgement given by Hezekiah Easton to the defendant in this issue. Plaintiff claimed the judgement was usurious and in violation of a contract, between Easton and the defendant. Verdict for the defendant. W. S. Stenger and Sharpe for the Pl'ff. Kennedy and Kimmell for defendant.
Louisa M'Kesson, Executor of S. R. M'Kesson, dec'd, vs. William Adams. Judgement opened. Defendant bought a farm in Montgomery township from Samuel R. M'Kesson at a Sheriff's sale as the property of Jacob Rinehart and wife. Mrs. Rinehart had made a contract with Frederick Foreman prior to the Sheriff's sale to put out a crop of wheat and in consideration of the lateness of the season he was to have two-thirds of the products, which he carried off. The defendant claimed to have the value of this wheat deducted from the judgement he had given for purchase money. He failed in his claim. Verdict for plaintiff for $605.42. Brewer and Sharpe for Plff.; Kimmel and M'Lellan for defendant.
Philip Karper vs. Benjamin Cook and John Noel. Summons in debt founded on two promissory notes. Noel being endorser for Cook. Cook made no defence. The counsel for Noel rested their defence on the ground of lunacy and the habitual drunkenness of this defendant. There was much conflicting testimony. Verdict for the plaintiff for $769,29. Geo. Eyster, Kimmell, McLellan and Rowe for Pl'ff. Sharpe, Brewer and Gehr for defendant.
William Wilhelm vs. D. S. Reisher. Assumpsit. Plaintiff is a cattle broker of Baltimore and had a contract with defendant to purchase and send to market cattle for their joint profit. The defendant contended there was a partnership and that plaintiff had mistaken his action--Account Render being his remedy. After repeated asseverations and denials by the parties as to this point, a verdict was rendered for the plaintiff by agreement for $1800. Brewer and Sharpe for the plaintiff. Kimmell and McLellan for defendant.
Mary C. Miller vs. John H. Hartle. Ejectment for a mill and tract of land in Antrim township. Title was admitted in Michael Zellar, who made a deed to Henry Miller, and Henry Miller, Jr., went into possession. Henry Miller, Jr., shortly after died. The defendant purchased the property in question from Henry Miller, Sr., during his lifetime and went into possession. This action was bought by the widow of the younger Henry Miller and the question at issue was for whom the deed was intended, the plaintiff claiming the title by parol gift from the father to the son, aside from the fact asserted that the deed was intended for him. Verdict for the defendant. Reilly and Sharpe for the plaintiff; Kimmell and M'Lellan for defendant.
(Column 2)Summary: The piece laments the fact that local residents' interest in establishing a normal school in Chambersburg has cooled since the project was initially proposed. Because of its proximity to border counties and Virginia and Maryland, the article proclaims, Chambersburg is uniquely situated to attract a large number of students, which would inevitably add a significant infusion of cash to the local economy.Local Items--The Second Concert
(Column 3)Summary: Offering luke warm praise, the article notes that the second concert by the Musical Union of Chambersburg was largely a success.Local Items--Our Confidence Man Caught
(Column 3)Summary: After swindling Chambersburg residents several weeks earlier, a con man was arrested en route to Philadelphia following a similar performance in West Chester last Friday.Local Items
(Column 3)Summary: The following men were selected to serve as the Board of Directors for the First National Bank of Waynesboro: W. S. Amberson, George Besore, Alex. Hamilton, John Price, Samuel Frantz, Jason H. Clayton, Daniel Mickley, George Jacobs, and Henry Good. At a subsequent meeting of the Directors, W. S. Amberson was elected President and John Philips Cashier.Local Items--A Call
(Names in announcement: W. S. Amberson, George Besore, Alex Hamilton, John Price, Samuel Frantz, James Clayton, Daniel Mickley, George Jacobs, Henry Good)
(Column 3)Summary: Informs readers that Rev. Agnew Crawford, son of Rev. Dr. Crawford, has accepted an appointment from the Presbyterian congregation of Manchester, N. J., with a salary of $1,000 and a provision for his residence.Local Items--Prisoner Removed
(Names in announcement: Rev. Agnew Crawford, Rev. Dr. Crawford)
(Column 3)Summary: Announces that Sheriff Doebler departed with William LeMott, who was sentenced to the Penitentiary last term, last Tuesday.Local Items--Returned
(Names in announcement: Sheriff Doebler, William LeMott)
(Column 3)Summary: Arthur Bennett and Lieutenant William Eaker, both of the 77th Regiment, have returned home.Local Items-Appointment
(Names in announcement: Lieutenant William Eaker, Arthur Benett)
(Column 3)Summary: Upton J. Cook has replaced Joseph Boggs, who died, as the Postmaster for Fayetteville, Franklin county.Married
(Names in announcement: Joseph Boggs, J. Upton Cook)
(Column 3)Summary: On Dec. 27th, Dr. Frank A. Bushey, of Hanover, Pa., and Mary Ellen, daughter of Dr. A. Carl, were married by Rev. W. F. Eyster.Married
(Names in announcement: Dr. Frank Bushey, Mary Ellen Carl, Dr. A. Carl, Rev. W. F. Eyster)
(Column 3)Summary: On Jan. 18th, John R. Hazelet and Anna A. Plough were married by Rev. P. S. Davis.Married
(Names in announcement: John R. Hazelet, Anna A. Plough, Rev. P. S. Davis)
(Column 3)Summary: On Jan. 29th, James T. Underwood, of Springfield, Ill., and Elizabeth Coble were married at the bride's father's house by Rev. J. K. Miller.Married
(Names in announcement: James T. Underwood, Elizabeth Coble, John Coble, Rev. J. K. Miller)
(Column 3)Summary: On Jan. 18th, Stephen D. McVitty and Mary A. Gaston were married by Rev. William A. West.Died
(Names in announcement: Stephen D. McVitty, Mary A. Gaston, Rev. William A. West)
(Column 3)Summary: On Jan. 15th, David Wolff, 83, died in Amberson's Valley.Died
(Names in announcement: David Wolff)
(Column 3)Summary: On Jan. 18th, Snively, son of Thomas Skinner, died at Dry Run. Snively was 10 years old.Died
(Names in announcement: Snively Skinner, Thomas Skinner)
(Column 3)Summary: On Jan. 27th, James P. Speer, 38, died in Upper Strasburg.Died
(Names in announcement: James P. Speer)
(Column 3)Summary: On Jan. 24th, Mary McConnell, 63, died at the residence of J. Denny Walker, near Fannettsburg.Died
(Names in announcement: Mary McConnell, J. Denny Walker)
(Column 3)Summary: On Dec. 12th, Mary Catharine, only daughter of James H. and Sallie J. Clayton, died at Cherry Grove, near Waynesboro. She was 11 months old.Died
(Names in announcement: Sallie J. Clayton, James H. Clayton, Mary Catharine Clayton)
(Column 3)Summary: On Jan. 5th, Thomas M. Durboraw, formerly a resident of Chambersburg, died in Waynesboro, Augusta county, Va. Durboraw was 60 years old.Died
(Names in announcement: Thomas M. Durboraw)
(Column 3)Summary: On Jan. 6th, Joseph Boggs, 65, died in Fayetteville, after suffering the effects of a lingering illness.
(Names in announcement: Joseph Boggs)
Description of Page: This page contains advertisements.