Valley of the Shadow
Page 1
No content transcribed.
Page 2

The Bond Question

(column 1)

Full Text of Article

We are charged by our opponents with intending to repudiate the debt of the United States, because we maintain that the government bonds should be paid in greenbacks, except where the acts of Congress authorizing their issue provided that they should be paid in gold. This is the charge that is made against us, but we presume there are very few sensible men in the ranks of our opponents who believe it to be well founded. Even if it were true, it would not very well become the Radicals to denounce us for it. Their own hands are not clean of repudiation. Every intelligent man among them, in this quarter of the country at least, is aware that under Gov. Curtin's administration, and when there was a Radical majority in both branches of our Legislature, the interest on our State bonds was paid in greenbacks, although the act of Assembly under which the bonds were issued expressly stipulated that the interest should be paid in coin. Here was a case about which there could not honestly be any difference of opinion. The act of Assembly was not silent about the kind of money in which the interest was to be paid, as are the acts of Congress in relation to the payment of the principal of the five-twenties. The act said the interest should be paid in coin. That was the bargain. That was the express agreement between the State and the bondholders. Nothing was left to quarrel about. There was no room for dispute. It was down in black and white. Anybody who could read could see it, and anybody whose head was lighted with a grain of sense could understand it. Our Radical State authorities saw it and understood it. But as if to show the world how little regard they had for right and justice--as if to show how far they dared depart from honesty and fair-dealing--as if to show with what brazen-faced effrontery they dared to repudiate the solemn contract of the State when they had the power--they refused to comply with the plain forms of the bond and compelled the bondholders to take greenbacks or get nothing. This was done by their Governor and their representatives in both branches of the Legislature. A more flagrant breach of contract, a more barefaced act of repudiation, never was and never can be committed anywhere. And yet it was sanctioned and defended and applauded by Radicals throughout the State.

Dare the Radicals deny this? And if they cannot deny this act of repudiation, committed by themselves, does it not become them to speak more modestly than they are in the habit of speaking about the alleged intention of the Democracy to break faith with the National bondholders? They charge us with intending to break faith with the creditors of the United States, which we deny. We prove that they have broken faith with the creditors of the State. which they cannot deny.

Now what is it the Democracy propose to do about the bonds of the United States?--We propose to pay them according to the terms of the several acts of Congress under which they were issued. We propose to carry out the contract entered into by the government on the one hand and the bondholders on the other. Let the bondholders produce the various acts of Congress under whose authority the several classes of bonds were issued, and if these stipulate that the principal and interest of all the bonds shall be paid in gold, we will insist that they shall be so paid. Let us see how the matter stands.

We have before us a pamphlet on the outstanding "Bonds of the United States, with a compendium of the acts of Congress under which they were issued." This pamphlet was prepared and printed by the well-known Bankers DREXEL & Co., of Philadelphia, to whom we are indebted for a copy.

From this pamphlet we learn that the first bonds issued to carry on the war were those authorized by the act of July 17, 1861. At this time specie payment had not been suspended by the government, and nothing was said in the act as to what sort of money either the principal or the interest should be paid in. On the 25th of February, 1862, Congress passed an act authorizing the issue of "five-twenty" bonds to the amount of five hundred million dollars. This was the second batch of war bonds. A section of this act made the interest on these and all other outstanding bonds of the government payable in coin, but nothing was said about the principal. The plain inference is that Congress did not intend to direct payment of the principal in gold. If they had so intended they would have so said.

This view of their intention is corroborated by the terms of the act under which the next batch of bonds was issued. This act was passed the 3d of March, 1863, and by its express terms both the principal and interest of the bonds issued under it are payable in coin. They must, therefore, be paid in coin. That was the bargain, and the Democracy, if in power, will carry it out. They will not follow the evil example of Gov. Curtin and the Radical Legislature of Pennsylvania.

The next bonds issued were the "ten-forties" and a small batch of "five-twenties." This was a five per cent loan of two hundred millions, about $3,882,500 of which were issued as "five-twenties" and the remainder as "ten-forties." The act authorizing them, which was passed March 3, 1864, says both principal and interest shall be paid in coin, and the Democracy will stand by the bargain. They must and shall be paid according to the terms of the contract.

Another issue of "five-twenties" was made in pursuance of an act passed the 30th of June, 1864. This act, like that authorizing the issue of "five-twenties" in February, 1862, provides for the payment of the interest in coin, but is silent as to the principal.

Another batch of "five-twenties" was authorized by an act passed the 3d of March, 1865. The Secretary was authorized to make the principal or interest, or both, payable in coin. If in coin, the interest was to be at the rate of 6 per cent, and if in currency, at 7. 3-10. By issuing 6 per cent bonds he binds the government to pay the interest in coin, but no obligation rests on it to pay the principal in coin, because no agreement to that effect was made.

Now it is seen from the foregoing that under certain acts of Congress both the interest and the principal on certain bonds were directed to be paid in coin, whilst under certain other acts the interest alone on certain other bonds was directed to be paid in coin. The bondholders contend that the principal as well as the interest of all the bonds must be paid in gold. We deny this, as did Thaddeus Stevens, and for denying it we are branded as "repudiators."

If the Radical legislators who framed the laws under which the various classes of bonds were issued intended that all of them should be paid alike, why was it not so put down in the laws? The very fact that they distinctly stated in some of these acts that both principal and interest were payable in coin, and in others stated only that the interest was so payable, proves beyond reasonable doubt that they did not intend that the principal of all should be paid in coin. Did the Radical Congress lately in session hold to coin-payment of all the bonds? If so, why did they not pass a bill directing the payment of all in coin? They had power to do that. The question was agitated while they were in session, and they could have settled it if they had seen fit. But they did not settle it. They knew that the contract did not require the payment of certain bonds in coin, and they were afraid to saddle the people with the additional burden which an act directing their payment in coin would have imposed. But after sneaking away from Congress without passing a bill to settle this important dispute, they are not ashamed (for there is no sense of shame in them) to mount the rostrum and denounce us as "repudiators," because we propose to pay the bonds in exact accordance with the laws under which they were issued.

But it is contended by some that inasmuch as it had been the practice of the government to pay off its bonds in coin, the "five-twenties" should be so paid, notwithstanding the absence of an agreement to that effect. There is no strength in this position. The war changed many things, and among them many time-honored practices of the government. Very few of these changes were for the better, but it does not become the Radicals to repudiate them, since it was they who made them. Among other things they changed was the lawful money of the country. It had been "the practice of the government" to recognize gold and silver only a legal tender. But the Radical Congress, with the approval of the Radical President then in office, changed this practice and made the paper money of the government a legal tender. This gave us two sorts of lawful money, one being coin and the other greenbacks. The latter became the common currency of the country, and where there was no express agreement to the contrary, all debts, public as well as private, were payable in them. On the back of every Government Greenback it is plainly printed that "this note is a legal tender for all debts, public and private, except duties on imports and interest on the public debt, and is receivable in payment of all loans made to the United States." On the back of every National Bank Note it is also plainly printed that "This note is receivable at par in all parts of the United States, in payment of all taxes and excises and all other dues to the United States, except duties on imports; and also for all salaries and other debts and demands owing by the United States to individuals, corporations and associations within the United States, except interest on the public debt."

On both these sorts of notes, the reader will observe, it is distinctly printed that they are not a legal tender for interest on the public bonds, but on neither of them is it printed that they are not a legal tender for the principal. The inference is irresistible that they are a legal tender for the principal, except where the act of Congress in express terms made it payable in coin.

And now is there a sensible man in all this section of country who will permit himself to be driven off from the support of the Democratic candidates by this dishonest Radical cry about "repudiation?" The Democracy did not repudiate coin-payment of the interest on our State bonds when the law called for coin, and they will not refuse coin-payment of the principal of such United States bonds as the law said should be paid in coin. But they will refuse to go outside of the plain terms of the contract in order to draw five hundred or a thousand millions out of pockets of the people and put it into the pockets of the bondholders. Always the friends of the people, they will endeavor to save them from the swindle which the Radicals propose to subject them to for the benefit of a few wealthy individuals who hold the "five-twenty" bonds.

Curtin on Seymour

(column 3)

Full Text of Article

Horatio Seymour is the object of incessant Radical assaults as a sympathizer with rebels. He is denounced as having been an enemy to the Federal Government. It is charged upon him that instead of seconding the efforts of the National Government to crush the rebellion, he was at all times devising ways and means to frustrate its designs and render its operations of no effect. Those who make these charges are fully aware of their falsity. They know that these statements are falsehoods manufactured for political effect. It is strange, however, that they should be so reckless as to continue the repetition of these assertions when they know that there is such an abundance of incontrovertible testimony to the contrary. We have long since ceased to defend our candidates by any statements of our own. They need no defence at our hands. Even were we to produce Democratic testimony as "clear as Holy Writ" to the unselfish patriotism which has invariable marked the career of Horatio Seymour, Radical orators and Radical presses would not hesitate to brand the proof as false and unworthy of credit. But they certainly will not have the hardihood to deny the utterances of their own favorite leaders. The compliments paid to Governor Seymour by Abraham Lincoln and the flattering letters of praise written to him by Edwin M. Stanton are well known to everybody and need not to be repeated here. The official letter, too, of Governor Curtin, acknowledging the obligations under which Governor Seymour had placed him during the war, is familiar to our readers. But, perhaps, it may be forgotten that Governor Curtin, who is known as "the Soldiers' Friend," and who, together with Colonel McClure, owns one wing of the Radical party in Franklin county, in a public speech at Harrisburg took occasion to do justice to Horatio Seymour at a time when he spoke words of very dubious credit in relation to Pennsylvania's officers and men. It will be remembered that when General Lee was about to invade our State in 1863, Governor Curtin called for men to resist his progress. The call was answered to a certain extent, but the men refused to be mustered in until they would be informed how long they were to be held, and where they would get their pay. Officers differed among themselves and bad feeling was engendered among the troops. Meanwhile the enemy was marching on. Governor Curtin telegraphed to Horatio Seymour, then Governor of New York, to send on men for the defence of Pennsylvania. How did Seymour respond? Did he say, "I am secretly anxious that General Lee shall overrun Pennsylvania and thus gain a splendid victory for the Southern Confederacy?" Not a bit of it. He went to work with all the energy of his nature, and before a single Pennsylvania regiment was organized, thirteen regiments of New York troops, at the command of Governor Seymour, were on the groundat[sic] Harrisburg, ready for action.

Governor Curtin went out to the camp to reconcile the differences and adjust the difficulties among our men, and here is the speech which he made to the Pennsylvanians on that occasion. Read it, and see what testimony "The Soldiers' Friend" bore in the hour of need, to the standard bearer of the Democratic party:

FELLOW CITIZENS OF THE VOLUNTEERS OF PENNSYLVANIA: I came here to-day to see your officers, who ought to be here to make their complaints in form. I have a right to expect the confidence of the volunteers of Pennsylvania, for I have never broken faith with them. I assure you, you will be retained just long enough to repel the present invasion--so long--no longer, be it sixty days, or thirty, or ten. But we cannot draw your pay unless you conform to the regulations of the army, and enter your names in regular form.

Look at the crowning of yonder hill! There are the troops of our sister New York, defending our frontier, where you ought now to be, instead of wrangling here about how you will enlist. Great God! What are you doing? Thirteen regiments from New York already on the ground, and in front, while not a regiment in Pennsylvania is yet ready!

Not satisfied with this, the Governor then drove over to the ground on which the New York troops were encamped, and, being cheered by the men, rose in his carriage and uttered the following words of compliment to them and the man who had sent them there:

SOLDIERS OF NEW YORK: Pennsylvania had a right to expect that her sister New York would come to her aid, but she did not have the right to expect that New York troops would be here on our soil, occupying the front of her defence, before her own troops were on the ground. From the bottom of my heart, I thank you for this generous alacrity. Bear my personal thanks, as well as the thanks of Pennsylvania, to your patriotic Governor for the promptness with which, through your presence, he has replied to our need. On some future occasion, I will in some more appropriate and formal manner, make known to him my grateful appreciation of his prompt action in hurrying forward to our aid this noble band of soldierly men! Again I thank you!

Is it not about time that the Radicals in this campaign should be doing justice to Governor Seymour for his conduct towards Pennsylvania when her Capital was threatened with destruction? One thing is certain, that whoever among them is found traducing him for want of patriotism in that crisis, it will not be Governor Curtin.

We give no Democratic vouchers for Seymour's patriotism and loyalty. They are not needed when we have Lincoln, Stanton, and Curtin uniting to do him justice. What next?

Congratulatory Address

(column 5)

A Great Meeting in Bedford

(column 5)

Full Text of Article

The Gazette says the people of Bedford county in favor of turning the Radicals out of office, met in the Court House, on Monday evening, Sept. 7, in overwhelming numbers. Democrats and "Republicans" from all parts of the county, were in attendance. The Court room, and jury rooms adjoining, the aisles, the vestibule, and every available inch of standing room, were occupied and many were compelled to remain outside, not being able to effect an entrance.

HON. F. M. KIMMELL, the Democratic candidate for Congress, in this district, was introduced to the meeting as the first speaker. Judge Kimmell proceeded to show how Radicalism had forced Negro Suffrage upon ten States of the Union, at the point of the bayonet, in a time of profound peace, at an expense of nine hundred and fifteen millions of dollars for the army and navy, one third of the public debt. He advocated the Democratic Seymour doctrine of paying off the public debt as speedily as possible in greenbacks where gold in not specified in the contract. He also advocated the taxing of Government Bonds, and one currency for all, the laborer and capitalist, the speculator and the farmer, the pensioner and the bondholder. He dissected the extravagance of the Radical gold pen and pen-knife Congress, until its corruptions and thefts of the people's money were exposed to the gaze of every man who chooses to open his eyes and see. Judge Kimmell's arraignment of the Radical leaders, was one of the most effective efforts we have ever listened to. The Judge was frequently interrupted by the plaudits of the audience, and when he retired from the stand, he was greeted with such cheers as only Democrats know how to give.

HON. CHARLES H. SHRINER, of Union county, was then introduced to the audience. He began by stating that he was one of those men who had voted for Abraham Lincoln in 1864, and that his "Republican" friends would remember that he made speeches for Andrew G. Curtin, in Bloody Run, Bedford and Schellsburg, in 1863. But he was one of those Lincoln men who could not go with Radicalism to its present extremes, and who intend to cast their votes for the patriot statesmen, Seymour and Blair. He said that he had come to this conclusion from the fact that the "Republican" party had violated every pledge they made to the people during the war. They had declared that the war was to be waged solely for the restoration of the Union, but at its close, instead of receiving the conquered people of the South back into the Union, they thrust them out, and for three years and a half have kept them out, and intend to keep them out until they shall be willing to exchange military despotism for negro domination. Was Negro Suffrage, Negro office-holding, the object of the war? Did our soldiers shed their blood, did our country waste its treasure, for the purpose of establishing a military despotism over ten millions of Americans, and to deep up a Freedmen's Bureau for the support of four millions of Negroes in idleness and thriftlessness? No! Never! He and other "Republicans" had told the people during the war that at least four millions of the Southern people were as loyal and true to the Union as any of the Northern people. This kind of talk suited the Radical leaders then, but it does not suit them now. He remembered a song which was sung by the "Republicans" during the war, descriptive of a scene in Tennessee, which would illustrate this point. The idea of the song was, that an old slave-holder, who was a Union man, had heard that the Union fleet was moving up the Tennessee river. He was very feeble and his faithful slave carried him to the river side that he might once more behold the exiled Stars and Stripes, the flag he so dearly loved. When at last the banner of the Union came in sight, the old man shouted,
"Hallelujah! Hallelujah!
The old flag's back in Tennessee!"
and handed his slave his emancipation papers. Now, said Col. Shriner, the large class of Southerners of which this old Union man was the type, are placed beneath the heel of a negro despotism, controlled by bayonets, in the interest of carpet-bag political adventurers from the north.

But want of space forbids a further report of this able speech. The whole audience was thrilled by the appeal thus made to their sense of justice and feelings of mercy, and we saw the big manly tear trickling down the bronzed cheek alike of Republicans and Democrats. Col. Shriner sat down amid the most vociferous applause.

Page 3


(column 1)

The Democratic Club of Waynesboro'

(column 1)

The Democracy of Greenvillage

(column 1)

Seymour and Blair Club of St. Thomas

(column 1)

Stoning Processions

(column 1)

Full Text of Article

The Democratic Torchlight procession in this place on Friday evening last, was stoned at various points along its route by Radical scoundrels who seemed to be acting by preconcert. Several Democrats--some of whom were in the Procession and others merely looking on from the pavement--were struck. The train which carried the Democrats of this borough to the meeting at Greencastle on Saturday night, was likewise pelted with stones.

This business of assaulting Democratic processions and other open-air assemblages with stones has long been indulged in by our opponents in this borough, and has too long been patiently submitted to by us. A law abiding spirit is a good thing: but like other good things, too much of it is as bad as none. Excessive forbearance encourages crime; and with the Democracy of Chambersburg forbearance has now ceased to be a virtue.

We warn all our political friends not to molest Radical processions or meetings of any kind. At the same time we advise them to protest themselves when they assemble together. Whenever a Democratic turn-out of any sort takes place, let a dozen or two of resolute men be supplied with stout hickory sticks and be thrown out in various directions, to watch for the sneaking scoundrels who heave bricks and stones out from hiding places, and let them test the weight and strength of their sticks over the head of every rascal caught throwing a stone.

Democratic Meeting

(column 2)

William J. Baer

(column 2)

Female College

(column 2)

Full Text of Article

The Board of Trustees appointed by the "Presbytery of Carlisle" to select a location for the Female College which it is proposed by the Presbytery to put in operation met in this place on the 14th inst., and adjourned to meet again on the 5th of October. We are so strongly impressed with the advantages that would accrue to Chambersburg from the location of the College here, that we feel like making a most earnest appeal to our citizens to exert themselves to secure it. We know very well that many of our business men are in straitened circumstances, owing to the losses they sustained by fire and robbery, but still there are very few among them who could not give something, and we all know that "every little helps." If all should join in giving, a very little from each would yield a large amount in the aggregate.

Let no man say that the location here of the proposed College would do him no good. Whatever tends to enlighten and refine a community, does good to every member of that community, except such as deliberately choose to be ignorant or vicious. Whatever makes a town conspicuous, and attracts strangers to it and increases its population, must of necessity add to the value of its property and increase its business. Whatever confers pecuniary benefit directly upon a few business men, likewise confers it indirectly upon every industrious citizen. Money received over the counter of a Dry Goods, Grocery or Shoe Store does not remain locked up there. It soon scatters out through the community and finds its way into the pockets of all sorts of mechanics, laborers, dealers and professional men.

Let it be borne in mind that this College is not to be a small affair, with only a dozen or two of pupils. The large-minded gentlemen to whom the Presbytery have committed the matter have in their thoughts an institution that shall rival the great Vassar Female College at Poughkeepsie, New York, which is attended by four hundred pupils. With the influence wielded by the Presbytery the aspirations of these gentlemen may be realized. But suppose they fall short one half. Suppose only two hundred young ladies come here from abroad to be educated, and put the expenses of each at $300 per annum. This will give $60,000 a year. Who will get this money? Not the officers of the institution. Most of it may go into their hands, but it will not remain there. It will be divided out to the farmer, the miller, the butcher, the baker, the grocer, the dry goods merchant, the shoemaker, he milliner, the dressmaker, and all sorts of tradespeople; and these, to turn, will still further divide it, till a portion of it shall be found in the pocket of almost every inhabitant of the town and neighborhood. Just think what such an annual expenditure would amount to in the course of a few years. Sixty thousand dollars a year would in the short space of ten years amount to the great sum of six hundred thousand. And probably at or before the end of ten years the amount disbursed annually through the College would amount to one hundred thousand dollars.

What a great thing it would be for Chambersburg to secure this institution. Why should we not secure it? Why can we not secure it? All we have to do, in order to make sure of it, is to raise eight or ten thousand dollars. Several other towns will probably raise that much, but we have greatly the advantage of them in the property which we are able to offer for the consideration of the Trustees. They have examined Col. McClure's mansion and are delighted with it. This property can now be bought for about one half the cost of the buildings and grounds, and in this fact lies our advantage over all competing towns.

We have stated that the "Presbytery of Carlisle" propose to establish and endow this College, but it must not be inferred from this that the institution would be sectarian. Its influences would be religious but not denominational. Children of parents belonging to all branches of the Protestant Church could receive their education there, and yet adhere to the religious tenets of their own denomination.

We appeal to our citizens not to let this College go elsewhere. A few individuals have already subscribed one-third of the whole amount required to secure it for us. These few have subscribed very liberally. Let all do something. Let the wealthy give their hundreds and those in poorer circumstances their tens, and we shall soon rejoice in an institution of learning for females which will stand without a rival in the whole State.


(column 3)

Full Text of Article

A young man named Lecrone, who was returning to his home near Waynesboro', with a party of six or eight others, from the Democratic meeting at Greencastle on Saturday night last, was shot and killed by a man named Benner, who, in company with others, was returning to his home in Greencastle from the Republican meeting at Waynesboro'. Benner was lodged in the jail of this place on Sunday morning.

An inquest was held on the body of the deceased on Monday forenoon, when the following testimony was taken and the annexed verdict rendered:

Inquest held at the house of Samuel Lecrone, father of deceased, by D.B. Russell, Esq.

Jurors.--H. Stonehouse, foreman; Jeremiah Gordon, John Zody, Jacob Hershey, Samuel B. Snively and Henry Besore.

Physicians present.--Drs. E.A. Herring, John J. Oellig and William Wright.

Drs. Oellig, Wright and Herring sworn--Made post mortem examination; found that a pistol bullet had entered the frontal bone 1 1/2 inches above the left eye, passing obliquely through the brain, striking the parietal bone near its centre, passing downward and lodging in the base of the brain. There was extravasation of blood along the line of the bullet. Portions of the inner table of the skull were found lying in the anterior portion of cerebrum.

Franklin Miller sworn:--About 1 o'clock on Sunday morning, the 20th day of September, I was returning from the Democratic meeting at Greencastle along with deceased and others. At Jeremiah Gordon's we met a party in a hack or spring wagon; four persons with torches, John Adams driving. We cheered for Seymour; the party in the hack cheered for Grant. I was driving in a buggy in front of the party shot at. Some one struck at the lights; can't say who. The firing then commenced. Three shots were fired. Saw the dec'd fall from his horse; saw the flash of pistol twice from the hack. There were eight to our party--six on horseback and two in buggy. The hack or wagon of the other party was not covered. I followed the other party after Lecrone fell. A man on horseback came back from the wagon to us. We told him Lecrone was killed. He said he would stop them. He rode forward and the party in the hack increased their speed. I passed them at Shull's and got to Greencastle in advance of them.

Jno. A. Nicodemus sworn:--Started from Greencastle in company of deceased and others. Met various parties as we went along who cheered for Grant while we cheered for Seymour. One of these parties stuck out a torch and a banner in our faces. There were Oliver Besore, Frank Miller, Otis Nicodemus and five Lecrones including the deceased. In front of Jere Gordon's met party in a two-seated carriage; four in party; I think they had four torches. We did nothing but cheer. When I had passed about ten yards I heard three shots fired; saw the flash of two shots; they were level shots. The flashes came from the carriage. Some one said one of our party has fallen off. I dismounted, went back and found Lecrone lying on his face. This was after 12 o'clock on Saturday. Turned deceased over; he gave a groan. I then mounted and followed the party in carriage; overtook a man riding; told him Lecrone was shot; he said he would see the party and bring them back. He rode forward and we saw the party increase their speed. I called to them frequently and loudly; was within fifty yards of them; they paid no attention; Miller got ahead of them; they put out the lights. I then overtook the party and Adams called me around the buggy and explained how it happened. Adams stopped wagon and told me he had nothing to do with the shooting; that he and his brother were sitting in front seat and knew nothing until they heard the shots. Benner then said he had fired three shots; he was much troubled, went on everlastingly, cried and said he would rather have lost both arms than have shot him.

David C. Nicodemus, sworn:--Between 12 and 1 o'clock Sunday morning last, I was returning from meeting at Greencastle with a party of 6 or 8, among whom was deceased. Part was on horseback and two in buggy. At or near Jeremiah Gordon's, we met a party in a double seated buggy.--There were 4 persons in the buggy, and I think they had 4 lights. Both parties cheered. One of the parties in buggy stuck his light at me. I knocked it out. Did not hear deceased say anything. Very soon after they fired 3 shots, one right after another. My horse scared and ran toward Mr. Gordon's barn. I looked back and saw deceased fall from his horse. I saw several flashes come from the carriage. Can't say which shot killed Lecrone. I went back to deceased. We took him into Mr. Gordon's house. There were no shots fired by our party. The only firing we had was when one of our party emptied his pistol in the air on the other side of Shady Grove. The hack drove on after the firing.

Oliver Besore sworn:--On Sunday morning, about 1 o'clock, our party, among whom was deceased, returning from Greencattle to our homes, met a carriage containing 4 persons in front of Jeremiah Gordon's. It was a 2 horse wagon with 2 seats. These persons had lights. There was cheering on both sides. I saw a light knocked out; then 3 shots were fired out of the wagon. Saw 2 flashes; they were about level. I took side of wagon next Gordon's house; deceased took the opposite side. Daniel Lecrone, I think, struck the light. I followed and overtook them near Loose's. Night was not very dark; some stars shining.

Jacob Lecrone sworn:--Mr. Miller and I were in the buggy ahead of our party coming from Greencastle; about 30 feet ahead of the party. In passing carriage of Adams and his party we cheered and they cheered. No words except the cheering were spoken by either party. The firing commenced soon after.

Henry Lecrone sworn:--I was with party returning from Greencastle to our homes. We met the party in spring wagon at Gordon's. Both parties cheered. Otis Nicodemus and my brother knocked out lights that were stuck out at them by parties in the wagon. I heard three shots and saw Lecrone fall.

Verdict--Deceased came to his death at the County aforesaid on the morning of Sept. 20, 1868, at 1 o'clock, from the effects of a wound produced by a bullet fired from a pistol in the hand of a person believed to be one George Benner, of the Borough of Green Castle, in said County, said bullet striking the deceased in the forehead, penetrating the skull, passing through the brain and lodging at the base thereof.

Immediately after the finding, the deceased was interred at the family burial ground at Salem Church.


(column 4)


(column 4)
Page 4
Page Description:

Advertisements and agricultural advice appear on this page.