Franklin County: W. D. McKinstry to George Brewer,
April 2, 1869
Summary:
A letter regarding an issue up for debate at a town council meeting.
April 2nd 1869
Mercersburg
Geo W. Brewer Esq,
Dear Sir
Enclosed you an article reflecting on the late Town Council signed "Radical" on calling out the Editer of the "Journal" + demanding the writer he [unclear: gived] a Wm R Stine a clothing man of this placed located here some 12 [unclear: Moo] or [unclear: Mase] he was a candidate for Alderman [unclear: hones] + he + his party were defeated by as he says a combination of the old [unclear: Coon] and the old [unclear: Nap],
I write + enclosed you the article at the request of J W Brewer [illeg.]
Weidlich Hugh [unclear: McCounll] led Mr S Rilchy.
JM Hoke, I was the [unclear: Burgess] for
ten [unclear: Yeas] previous to March 15" And we are Yet the Acting
Council as the late Council has not been sworn in, theer Might have been some
things done by former councils during the War, [unclear: not] exactly
according to [unclear: Gunter], but we the present council had nothing
to do with it. On first reading the Article we thought we would reply to it +
stated we would do so in the paper comeing out (here) on friday but on the Council Meeting together we
appointed a Committe to waite on Stine asking him
to make a public retraction or we wd institute a
suite vs him
[page 2]
if he did not retract, he
refused to make any retraction, we now write to advise with you what is best to
be done [unclear: Chereford] would like to have your opinion to morrow
night that we might make some appology for not
answering him as we had stated in the paper of last week we should prefer to
punish him at [unclear: Saw] if we can sustain action vs him for libel,
or a private conversation wd might
[unclear: ventilate] the subject more fully We desire your [deleted: ] to read the article + have your opinion as to what we could do
with him in a prosecution
Yours Respectfully
W. D. McKinstry
