Newspaper Page Text
60LDLY UTTERED (/Continued From First Page.) classified civil service. But they won't fX0 ii?at least, they won't do It now. "It 1 hud the making ot tho laws ot tills country the iirst tiling 1 would du would bo to lncludo In tho civil sei ? vice every collector, deputy collector, and everybody c-onnectou wiui wie ?in?. - ual revenue system In local collections, and put tho whole service on an enec-1 live, non-partisan basis. I kndw that' ll would bo a source of economy. lj know It would give the President a great deal more lime to devote to other dutleB. 1 know that It would savo a| good many Congressmen their seats, and I know that it would tend to the| elevntlon of the public service." The President's speech on "trusts' follows: Hpoch-Mnktng Decision*. 1 propose to take up the question wlilcn hus occupied the attention of the American people lor now twenty years, that of industrial combinations known as "trusts." During tho last year we have hud two great decisions by the Supreme Court of the United (States, They arc epoch making, and the public has not yet come to realize the effect that those decisions ure cer? tain lo have. It is not that the coii Structlon which the court hus put upon the uct iB different from that. Which most members of the profes? sion, und most subordinate courts, and Indeed the Supreme Court itself, had before Indicated ss the proper con? struction of the statute, but It Is that It Is now dually settled, by two fully considered decisions in respect to two of the largest and most powerful of j these combinations, what their illegal- < ity consists m, and how they ure to I be treated, in view of the finding that they are illegal anil do violate the provisions ot the so-called anti-trust or Sherman act Persons who do not understand the ! effect of these decisions und really | dp not understand the law have a great deal to say which Is Intended to lead the public to the belief that In Borne way or other the Supreme Court has emasculated the statute and pre? vented Hb operation against objec? tionable and injurious trade combina? tions and conspiracies. Nothing is1 further from the tiuth. When the statute was passed In 1M(> the expressions used In It to de line object and what It was pro? poned therein to denounce as Unlaw- . fnl were not new. but they were suf-' flyiently broad and Indefinite to re quire Judicial construction to settle lheir meaning. Congress was deullng v. Ith a subject matter In respect to' which It may be assumed that the i legislators themselves were not clear I us to the exact limltutlons of the meaning of the words in the statute I they were pas-ing. They knew there' was an evil which they hoped to re strain by the enactment of this law und they relied upon the courts In their construction of the law to hedge about Its operation such restriction as would prevent the statute from be? ing so wide In |tM application a.- to In jolve absurdity and the Iropractlca <e r|,e ,;ar|y decisions under th? law can not be said to have been for .,,,r,i"" T.leclslori In what wad known as the .Sugar Trust cose?the Knight case?was really a retrograde f ' rV\1d onp w,''r'> seemed to limit much the operation of the statute [? encouraged the organization of com !? nations which the same court has Mnce round v|oUw thfl ttatul0 T', tase could not be effectively- present i, h ,thr r<VJrl the recotd had not been properly mnd> up. and Jhe questions arising were treated n the opinion In such a way as to g| '?? New Tuberculosis Remedy Based oo Medicine To say that a ?pedtlc exists for the > ur? or nopsurnp.'iju is perh.-.ae i.u i ';"1*..a !-:ta,0umo"'- hut i? Rukrnan's Alterative we have .-i medicine that hits been the means of saving manv a 1 fa to yours ot usefutnt.ts, an.1 lu purina I'tntlr tuilng a large number , ; . on ???>mptive>. ' ertalnly a pera-in afflicted with a wasting disease- should be 'well fed with wholesome, nourishing food, but frequently raw eggs in quantities ? ?? ' "u digii i e bruakdov.... and linn! no food tioj.- -he-s. As fo,- m>IA, a very good food for iiij-i -, out a producer of biliousness for some. Any diet that keep* a consumptive well nourished Is the right one, but what is going to cure the patient'.'? Kckman's Alterative has cure'i ami is ? urlng many a case of consumption. Dot t/hose speak who know. Here Is u specimen: "90 Savannah St., Rochester. N. T. "Gentlemen: On June 3. 1907. 1 was | operated upon for tubercular peritoni? tis at St. Mary's Hospital, Rochester, N. Y. After the operation my physician gave me up as hopeless. T was then urged by a priest to take Eckman's Al? terative, which I did. My wsight at the time was 72 lbs. 1 began to im? prove, and steadily gained In health and strength. I now weigh 125 lbs. and am absolutely cured. Believing < owe it to myself and others. I make] this statement. "EDNA FINZER. (S:sn? d sHldSVlt 1 Eckman's Alterative Is effective in bronchitis, asthma, hay fi-ver. tin oat and lung troubles, and in upbuilding the system. Does not contain fio'ftn, opiates or hablt-formlng drugs. For pale by Owens & Minor Drug Co. and other leadlDg druggists. Ask for book? let of cured cases, and write to r>k man I.ahoratory. Philadelphia, Pa., for additional evidence. Give Us a Trial That's all we ask. If you once start giving us your work, we will have no trouble in holding you as a regular fatrc.ii. At least that has been mr experience down through the years. The Royal Laundry, Hon. 300-813 North Seventh Street. Visitors Cordially Welcome. Get Everything Needed for Comfortable Traveling at ROUNTREE'S 703 E. BROAD STREET BEST trio Impression that the opera tlen or | the law would be most restricted, be? cause ot the limits or Federal Juris- I Uictlon. Indeed, some law officers at the government did not hesitate to bay tnat under this decision there was, Utile hupe ot reaching thy evil alined, ut through Federal uctlon. It has required twenty years uf Mttgut'ou to I make the statute clear. Hut. now It) Is clear. 1 shall not attempt to give It a Close, lawyer-like interpretation, but 1 think It Is not departing from tho declaration of the court to bay that j nicy Und any contract in restraint of trade, made tor the purpose of ex eluding competition, controlling prices, or of maintaining a monopoly. In part or In whole. Is contrary to lue btaVutc und Is subject to injunction and In-i dlctment 'under this statute in tho i I cucrul courts where It affects Inter- I Stute truUe. tltiery to Bryan. j Now, 1 would like to asK Mr. Bryan | or uuy of the other publicists und , J Jurists who have been denouncing this i opinion as the surrender of tin: rights I I ot the people and a usurpation of | > Judicial power to tell the public what I particular contract or restraint of In- . terstate trade he would condemn Which would not be condemned with- : In this definition of the court. The difficulty with tho literal construction; of the statute is that It would de-j i nounce a great many minor or Incl- | tieiital restraints of trade, which made j the statute ridiculous and weakened i Its effect and lent support to the crltl- < cisjus and contemptuuu? treatment of the statute by those . who were op? posed tu Its passage and enforcement. ! I For instance, tak<- the Instance cited I by a Federal circuit Judge In which j he .-aid that under the literal con j function of the statute which muM j lie enforced; If there were tuo per- j Sons doing a vs agon-express business; across a State line und they united in a partnership, the union in the. partnership would be a restraint of In? terstate trade in violation of the sla- ! tute. Such a result I? really a, re- i duclia ad absurdum, and no one who wan In fivor of making the ntctuto 1 effective for the purposes for which It was passed, and had any Intelll-i gent appreciation of what the statute ] ! ???? Intended to accomplish and what I it meant, would contend for such a! construction. It is true that In ani: of the decisions of the Supreme Court! there whs u statement made that the term "reasonable" could not be in? troduced Into the statute because Con? gress had not put II there, but the very same court, and the very same | Judge, when a case arose presenting ; u restraint of trade that must be con-I denmed as unlawful If a literal mean- | Ing were to be given to the statute, said In so many words that It must, i be reasonably construed, and thut It , must not be held to include contracts j that were merely Incidental restrains of trade and were not made for that 1 purpose. in one of these cases a man owned some steamboats that did] an Interstate business on the Ohio! Hlver. lie wished to sell out. He | did sell out, and in the bale of the j steamboats he wished to sell the good will of the line which he had been I running. Accordingly ho stipulated I that he would not himself engage in ' that business between those same points tof a certain number of years. This was interstate business' and his! contract was In rettralnt of trade, but the Supreme Court held that It was a mere incidental restraint, i. c, incidental to the sale of the good will, and so was not within the sta- i tulc. functioned I? Common Law. This would have been the same .it common law, where from time Im- ; memorial such a restraint as this has been held to be reasonable because limited to the necessity of preserving the good will which the vender was selling, and which but for such an agreement would be worth nothing. In other words, the Supreme Court in1, this case gave a reasonable construe- I tlon to the statute and eliminated from Its operation those harmless use- i ful Incidental restrains growing out! of lawful contracts which are mud', j lor a nentlrely different purpose from that of controlling prices or maintain? ing a monopoly by suppressing compe- ' lition und which have always been recognized ah properly enforceable by I courts of both luw und equity. 1 re- j peat again that in spite of alt the i denunciations that WO have heard of | the decisions of the Supreme Court in i the Standard Oil and the Tobacco < .ises, there is not one who has crltl < lzed them that can formulate a con? ti act In restraint of trade that ought to come within the statute that does not come within it under the decision of the Supreme Court. It is said that the Supreme Court \ has read something Into the statute j that was hot there before; that it] has Insered the word "reasonable" be-1 tore restraints of trade, when the! same court had said thut this could I not be properly done, because Con- j gress had evidently not Intended to] Include such a limiting word in the I statute. This Is not fuir to the court, j It is true that the court, in the early | cays of the construction of the sta- i tute, had said that It could not limit i the statute in effect by excluding from , its operation what was deemed rea- J sonable at common law. But as oth- I er case arose it found it necessary to! make exceptions to the literal opera-1 tlon of th- words "restraint of trade," 1 and It did so by excepting what was! minor, or incidental, or Indirect, and j including only those cases where tho chief object of the contract or com- j blnatlon was the restraint. Ih doing SO the court said that It must give the statute a reasonable construction and not one leading to absurd or ridiculous lesults. In the last two cases the court did not change the substance of the reasoning and scope of the pre? vious decisions, hut only treated the exceptions previously termed "inci? dental and indirect." as excluded from the operation of the statute in the light of reason. I. e., in conformity to the evil sought to be reached. Now. in what way has this Injured the pub? lic weal? What combinations or ar? rangements can escape under this in? terpretation that any sensible man would wish to have condemned? Did the court not condemn the Standard Oil Company, the father of all trusts, i in the history of which every form of! criminal illegality was practiced? Did It not, on the other hand, condemn the Tobacco Trust, of much later ori? gin and framed under the advice of cunning counsel for the very purposes ef evading the condemnation of the statute und at the same time securing and enjoying the monopoly the fram ers of the statute intended to pre? vent and punish? PulutH llroad Distinction. Let me renew a?iiln the Invitation to any of the vociferous critics of the decision of the Supreme Court to use their legal Imaginations and state the facts of a case not condemned within the rule of construction put upon the statute by the Supreme Court, but in? cluded within their construction of it, which reasonable men would think It wise or proper to make criminal. Now. i desire to call attention to a very broad dlstlnclon that many persons have failed to draw o\- per? ceive between a reasonable construc? tion of the statute which the Su? preme Court has Insisted upon and the Introduction of the word "reasonable" in the statute so as to lead to a re ' suit by which combinalons for the t purpose of restraining trade with ft] clow to controlling prices and main I taining a monopoly could be held to be reasonable and thus lawful. Un- | til the decision of the Supreme Court i in these last two cases there was a j clearly defined hope in the minds of | many business men who had reached | the conclusion that it was impossi? ble to conduct business on a free com- 1 I potittve basis, and that it was neccs- i jsary to secure monopolistic control of I prices and competition In order to make business reasonably profitable, that in some way or other the sta tute could be construed so as to make I It apply only to unreasonable monopo? lies and unreasonable exclusion of., compettlon and control of prices. ; They had in their minds the thought that in some way or other a stnndard ; could be set by whiqh If those who \ enjoyed" the monopoly and the re? straint of competition and the control, of prices did not abuse their power to the point of seeking: from the public ?xqrWfctant ivqfttj,, ttte.tr arrangements Why is the soda cracker to-day such a universal food ? People ate soda crackers in the old days, it is true?but they bought them from a barrel or box and took them home in a paper bag, their crispness and flavor all gone. To-day there is a soda cracker which is the recognized staple ? Uneeda Biscuit. Uneeda Biscuit are the most nutritious food made from flour and should be eaten every day by every member of the family from the youngest to the oldest. Uneeda Biscuit? soda crackers better than any ever made before?made in the greatest bakeries in the world?baked to perfection-? packed to perfection ? kept to perfection until you take them, oven-fresh and crisp, from their protecting package. NATIONAL BISCUIT COMPANY could be held to be only reasonable and not within the statute or pun? ishable by law. In my message of January 7. li'10, on the Interstate, com? merce and anti-trust laws and Federal incorporation. I used this language: Good and Bad Truata. Many people conducting great busi? nesses have cherished a hope and a ] belief that In some way or other a I line may be drawn between "good trusts" and "bad trusts." and that it I is possible by amendment to the antl-| trust law to make a distinction under j which good combinations may be per- I mltted to organise, suppress compe? tition, control prices, and do It all legally If only they do not abuse the power by taking too great profit out of the business. They point with force j to certain notorious trusts as having i grown Into power through criminal j methods by the use of Illegal rebates ] and plain cheating, and by various .acts utterly vlolatlve of business hon? esty or morality, and urge tho estnb ! lishment of some legal line of separa? tion by which "criminal trusts" of this | ff? A a>Jf?9tf* /Instantly Relieve !lJ4IJIl oiand raFidly Curc ^ ' "'^Gout, Rheuma? tism, Rheumatic Gout, Sciatica, - -j i Lumbago, and all PEI -LX \ pains in the head, 0 ? \ face and limbs. GOUT X. FOUGERA A CO., 8ole Agents, New York. All Bfcuggjgts._ kind can be punished, and they, on tht other hand, be permitted undo? the law to carry on their business. Xow the public, and especially the business public, ought to rid them? selves of the idea that such a dis? tinction is practicable or can be In? troduced into the statute. Certainly under the present anti-trust law no I such distinction exists. It has been proposed, however, that the word "reasonable" should be made a part I of the statute, and then that it should be left to the court to say what Is a reasonable restraint of trade, what Is a reasonable suppression of compe? tition, what Is a reasonable monopoly. I venture to think that this is to put into the hands of the court a power Impossible to exercise on any con? sistent principle which will Insure the uniformity of decision essential to Just Judgment. It Is to thrust upon the courts a burden that they have no precedents to enable them to car? ry, and to give them a power ap? proaching the arbitrary, the abuse of which rnigW. involve our whole Judi? cial system In disaster. This paragraph has been quoted and spread on the record of tne Senate on the motion of a Senator who con? sidered this to be'at'variance with the decisions of the Supreme Court. In? stead of being at variance, It Is In I exact accord with those decisions. Issue .Met by Court, j Again, from thoso who have given up free competition as an economic force that ought to bo encouraged or I enforced, and who are utterly opposed to the spirit of the nntl-trust law. w? have frequently heard the question, I "Well, suppose you convict those largo combinations under the statute, wh&t, i arc you KOjtoaT tA.Afc ap.O.V-t it? You can. perhaps, send some men to tho penitentiary for creating these, com? binations which have cheapened tho cost of production and given you most of your foreign trado and much of your prosperity, but what are you going to do with the capital invested, the plant, and the organization? You can confiscate it and ruin your coun? try by a panic, but you can't divide, Euch combinations Into their compo? nent parts ogiiln. for the lines of di? vision have disappeared Into a com? mon ownership." The cou'rt has met the Issue and th queries presented by the doubters and the scoffers. It has vindicated the majesty of the law. has Illustrated tho wonderful elasticity and adaptability of remedy by injunction In equity, and has at the same time manifested a due regard for the welfare of the Innocent business men ur.d the community at large, who. In a cataclysm caused by the eonllscaion of such enormous capi? tal as are Involved In these combina? tions anil a suspension of the legiti? mate part of their business, would be burled with them In a common ruin. The court has exhibited a courage, in facing the necessary results in en? forcing the statute that. Instead of prompting an attuck on It. ought to Piwke every American proud that we I have such a tribunal. It Is now en-j forcing Its decree against the Stand? ard Oil Company and against the To? bacco Company, and It Is making those great combinations divide them? selves into actually competing parts under uch provisions In the decree that an Injunction shall be constant? ly operative to prevent by contempt proceedings any assumption of the old relations of a monopoly. ThbJ was an easier mutter In reference to the; standard Oil Company, because it was easy to divide up the various com? panies that were united by the own- '< erhlp of xtock of the companies In a j single holding company. Tobacco Case Olfllcult. In the Tobacco Company tho decree could not bo worked out so easily, mid It will be necessary to scparalo the properties owned by single com? panies and to distribute these plauts Into different and differing ownerships in order to create competition between them and maintain that competition by t the power of a continuing injunction against ?ny future union, or any "grcf/nent to avoid future competi? tion. It needed these two great de? cisions to teach the business public that at least not In the supreme tri? bunal of ;hls country would the claim be listened to: that in this day and l,oneratioii we have psssed beyond the possibility of fret competition as con? sistent with proper business growth, or that wc have reached a time when only regulated monopoly and the fix? ing of prices by governmental author? ity are consistent with future prog? ress. We did get along \ylth com? petition; we can get along w-ith it. Wt did get along without monopoly; we can got along without It; and the business men of this country must square themselves to that necessity. Hither that, or we must proceed to State socialism and vest the govern? ment with power to run every busi? ness. The decision of the Supreme Court is In the highest Interest of the public, and I am glad to think that business men who have been violating the trust law are now buijig made to see the necessity for putting their houses in order, changing their original- organizations, giving up the idea that It Is necessary to control markets in order to make profits, and reverting to the old principle of free competition, in which all limit upon it to prevent its being excessive must be self-imposed by the good sense of each competitor and not by any ar? rangement or contract between com? petitors or secret stipulation or wink or nod. The decision of the Supreme Court as it grows to be understood In tho near future will be u signal for the voluntary breaking up all combina? tions in restraint of trade within the inhibition of the statute, and will, I hope, lead to a complete revulsion of feeling on tho part of the business men of this country and to a clear understanding by them of the limita? tions that must be Imposed by them upon any business combinations mude by them in the future. T)*> operation of the statute has illustrated the slow? ness of Judicial procedure, and of this 1 have often made complaint: but in the settlement of issues of this im? portance two decades are no great length of time, and it in that period we shall have stamped out an evil which would certainly have curried u.s to socialism as a reaction from the vicious control of the few, the time spent, the effort, and the litigation are , worth the cost. There have been times when among others I have thought that the enforcement of tho law might have been facllltaed had the courts visited Its breach with se? verer punishment, but "Though the mills of thw gods grind slowly, yet they grind exceeding small," and with? out the severity that some of us urg? ed and would have' been glad to see used, a revolution In business meth? ods where they have heretofore been vlolatlve of the statute will bo ac? complished, and with least, disturb? ance to business which is lawful. In a special message on the sub? ject of trusts which I sent to Con? gress January 7, 1910, I said: It is the duty and the purpose of the Executive to direct an investiga? tion by the Department of Justice, through the grand Jury or otherwise, into the history, organization, and purposes of all the Industrial com? panies with respect to which there Is any reasonable ground for suspicion that they have been organized for a purpose, and are conducting business on a plan which is in violation of the. anti-trust law. The work Is a heavy one, but It Is not beyond the power of the Department of Justice If suf? ficient funds are furnished to carry on the Investigations and to pay the counsel engaged In the work. I wish to repeat this now, and to say further that the Attorney-Ocn eral has Instituted Investigations Into all the Industrial companies above de? scribed, and that theso are In various stages of completion. I am glnd to be able to add that If Concress shall continue needed appropriations, every trust of any size that violates the sta? tute will, before the end of this ad? ministration in 191?. be brought Into court to meet and acquiesce in a de? gree of disintegration by which com? petition between Its parts shall he restored and preserved under the per? suasive and restrictive Influence of a permanent und continuing Injunction. Opposed to Amendlnc ' n w Under these conditions. I am en? tirely opposed to an amendment of the anti-trust law. It Is now a valu? able government osset and Instrument. Tested and brought Into practical and beneficial use by twenty years of liti? gation and construction by the high? est court, why should we imperil Its usefulness by experiments? The out? cry sought to be raised In some quar? ters, followed by proposals of amend? ments prepared without a real un? derstanding of the law or the court's decisions, may serve the purpose of promoting unreasonable and unreason? ing discontent, but certainly ought not to be considered seriously. When an amendment Is proposed, let tho proponent state the defeot In the statute the amendment Is to rem dy, and how It will effect it. Tf the avowed purpose 1" to make It impossible to use reason In the con? struction of the statute as the Su? premo Court did. let the mover of tho amendment formulate a ease of re? straint of Interstate trade not con? demned under the Supreme Court's construction of the statute, which ought to he condemned. Eet us avoid general expressions. T^et us avoid charges of Improper motives. T,ot us come down to concrete cases and facts and make a showli. r for an amend? ment that n lawyer and n legislator can understand and weiarb. and not he content with mere rhetoric and lan? guage useful only for declamation. In mv message of January 7. 1910. I advocated the passage of a stntttte vhich shall permit the incorporation of companies eng'iged In Interstate commerce liv the Federal government ' believe that a statute might he ,lr,,?-n to fum'sh 'the protection which vnuld Induce companies engaged ? ?<>l?flv In Interstate trnd< to take Oil Federal Incorporation, and that hy ?the supervision which inlgyt be main? tained by an executive bureau of ^be 201 E. Broad St. We Call Attention to peoal Sales esVs School Dresses annd Coats Also in Women's Waists, Satin Dresses and new Muslin lUnderwear. Full particulars may be found in to-day's NEWS LEADER AND JOURNAL. i government over their transactions It I I would be possible to prevent future I violations of tho anti-trust law by j those companies on the one hand and I to secure to th?m a freedom from con . st.int foar of prosecution on the other, i Hut this statute would In no way be | ? an amendment of the anti-trust law, i i which has now reached a porlod in its i history when It I? roally accomplish ' in^c the purpose of Its framers and Is enforcing a reform in the business [ methods of this country which will be [ as useful as It Is widespread. j PROGRESS OF SEWER WORK Dig Project on Virginia Avenue Is Waring Completion. Assistant City Engineer Koegan, in charge of the Virginia Avenue sewer, the groat drain which will serve th? I j larger part of Clay Ward, reported' j yesterday tnat the tunnel through solid granite had now run 1.500 of: the total of l.SHO feet. Two of tho shafts have been connected, the calcu- j latlons having been so perfect that,: working from one shaft to the other, j the tunnels met less than a half-Inch out. Only tho Sectio? leading out to tho. canal at Ifnxall Station remains to' 1 Ibe completed, and Mr. Keegan thinks! the entire granite hill \vjll have been I pierced In forty-five rroro working ! days. The whole is then to be lined i i with concrete and connections made. ! He thinks the contractors. Stamper.! Ragland & Co.. will finish the JoJb com? plete in January. I. J. Smith i- Co. has the contract; for the threo main branches on Hamp? ton Street, Colorado Avenue and i through Shlelds's Woode. While this1 part of the work is somewhat bo-j I hind schedule, the engineers bellevo they will be In a position to put In the I lateral sewprs, hou.t* connections and street ba6ins In the early spring. AMBULANCE PURCHASED Fast Motor Vehicle Coming From Lo? comotive Works. Following an all-afternoon discus? sion by u subcommittee and an almost! equally lengthy discussion before tho! full Committee on Relief ot the Poor last night, the committee entered into contract with the American Locomo? tive Company for purchase of an Alco automobile ambulance of shaft-driven typo, with nn-horsepower motor, cup 1 able of running sixty miles an hour, the body to be tbullt according to city specifications. The prosent motor ambulance Is an Alco, 45-horsopowor car. The contract price of the new car Is $4,100. For some time tho committee dis? cussed changing the color to a steel tint, but decided that Inasmuch as the present yellow had been used for city ambulunces in Richmond for a gener? ation and was readily recognized at it ! dlstanoe the present color would ho j retained. CHILDREN'S DAY AT FAIR School Hoard Asked to Give Holiday on Friday. Because of the danger to children in the great crush of Richmond Day at the State Fair, It la planned to have the school holiday on Friday instead of on Wednesday of fair week. At the meeting of the executive commit? tee of the Fair Association, held lent night, a committee was appointed to make a request of this nature to tho | City School Board. The custom bus prevailed of desig-? natlng Wednesday as Richmond Day,, this being the biggest day of the week. Invariably the school authorities have picked that day for a holiday. It Is the Intention now to have Friday called Children's Day. and to make especial i preparations for entertainment in the i shape of fireworks designed for the! school children's amusement. Signatures of Leading Citizens Secured by Man Writing From Lynchburg. [Special to The Times-Dispatch.] Petersburg. Vs., Septesnber 18.?One of the shrewdest forgery- schemes ever known In Petersburg and successful as far as heard from, came to light to? day. Under date of Lyncnburg. Sep? tember ?, a man addressed a letter to the pastor of the First Presbyterian Church. Petersburg, stating that he>; expected to be married In Petersburg on Saturday evening, September 16, ex? pressing the desire to have him, if possible, to perform the ceremony, and asking him if he were at liberty to do so. The Rev. Charles R. Strlbllng, la the pastor of the First Presbyterian Church, and "the letter was dollvered to and promptly answered by him. No person, uowever, came to bo married. On the "th of September, In ex? actly the same handwriting, dated at Lynchburg, another letter was ad? dressed to the superintendent of publlo schools and was In course of the mulls delivered to R. Randolph Jones, tho superintendent. In this letter the wrlt | er stated that ho was about to movo his family to Petersburg. He had three children of school ages, but had heard that the schools hero were some? what overcrowded. "If this be true." he writes, "and If you will bo in any way embarrassed by the addition of my flock, kindly advise me. and I will leave ono or two of them hero with their grandparents for the present." Mr. Jones answered the letter, stating there was room for tho children. Check Is Presented. On the 13th of September a chock for fT?. drawn by "E. R. Chambers to the or? der of H. C. Christie," on the Clifton Fori;? ? National Dank r.nri bearing the Indorse? ment of 11. C. Christie and the forced In I dnrtament of R. Randolph Jones. was cashed at one of the Petersburg banks mid I forwarded for collactlon to the Clifton i Forge bank. It was returned as "no good." ' and the name of R. Randolph Jonas as In dorser was here pronounoed to be a forg? ery. In the same handwriting as appeared In these letters and In the names on tho fraudulent check, but with a different hand signed to It, a letter from Lynch burg ntid addressed to "A Methodist Minister, Petersburg." was placed In tho hands of the Rev. J. T. Bosman, pastor of Market Street Church. It was of the same tenor aa that received by the Rev. Mr. Strib Ung. asking him If he eould marry tho writer. Mr. Bninwn answered the letter. The object of this swindler was evidently I to get the namgS and signatures of respon? sible citizens of Petersburg that he might, I as In tho case of R. Randolph Jones, usa ; them to his benefit on forged and fraudu j lent checks. The chief of police. In whose I hands the cade has been placed. Is expect \ !ng other checks of tho kind to turn up I with the names of the ministers and prob? ably others, whose signatures he has so shrewdly seelred. forced on them. Marriages In Washington. Dr. Joshua F. Speed, of 10 South Third Street, this city, and Miss Louise Lyle, also of Richmond, secured a, llcenso to marry In Washington yes? terday. Licenses were also 'asued to Elon A. Knupp, of Harrlsonburg, Vn., and Mar? garet Pheehan, of New York; Samuel M. Auerbach, of Hampton. V?., and I F.dythe Handler, of Baltimore. f MARGARET DELANO'S New Novel The IRON WOMAN ANY book by Mrs. . Deland would be.nois ble. But "ThelronWomsn" marks an event in American publishing. It is mpre than' a novel, as we have come to know the word. Mrs. De land pictures youth?detoy, virginal youth?in all Its tenderness and-passion', its foolish obstinacy, and gen? erous impulsiveness, with truthful idealism. H e r young people are wonder, fully attractive in their per feet naturalness. She por, trays the elders?people whom life has hardened ? with just as deep under, standing and sympathy. She has a way of penetrating the outward husk of habit and finding the living hear: underneath. Asior the siory itself?it is difficult to speak of Its beautv in terms of self-restraint. iiiiimiiisiimisj ,11? H AR PER & BROTHERS MR T C. CONI.ON will he at the Rlchtr.ond Hotel on WEDNES? DAY AND THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 30TH AND 31ST, where he will i'how the most oomplete line of Imported Woolens, Fancy Vestings and Trouserings ever displayed In your city. Our line of Riding Breeches goods Is more oomplcti than ever before. Mr. Cordon Will be slad to have his many fllends and customers call and see him. Yours to serve, T. C. CONLON & CO., Chnrlottesvlllo, Vs.