Peninsula Enterprise, June 8, 1895


Laborers -- ForestForests -- Sawmills

William Cline had a hand cut off at mill of Gordy & Figgs at Woodberry a few days ago.


Watermen -- Personal injury

The man reported in a late issue of this paper as washed ashore and buried on Myrtle Island, a gentleman from Brooklyn writes us, was Samuel Brown, engineer of the ill fated stern wheeler, City of Haverhill, lost off Barnegat, last March, together with eleven others, all on board of her.


Infrastructure -- Commercial - Real estate

The real estate of S. J. Lewis, sold at public auction last Saturday, by Blackstone & White, trustees, was purchased by the following parties: storehouse and hotel at Parksley, by Henry Melson, at $3,500; livery stables and lot at Parksley, by T. H. Melson, at $450; two vacant lots at Parksley, by D. H. Johnson, at $175 and $206, respectively; storehouse at Leemont, by A. F. Mears, at $253; dwelling at Leemont, by A. L. Lewis, at $300; vacant lot at Leemont, by A. J. McCready, at $105 -- amounting in the aggregate to $4,989.


Forests -- Forest products - OtherForests -- Shipping : WaterTransportation -- Water - Marine railwaysSea -- Fish factoriesTourists and sportsmen -- Other recreation - Resorts


Steam-tug Frank A. Munn, of Philadelphia, left here this week for New York with a raft of 1,500 pilings bought of Mumford & Bro.

Steamer Absecom, belonging to J. W. Bunting & Son, arrived here this week from the Pocomoke railway. Several thousand dollars were spent in enlarging and repairing her.

Mr. B. F. Scott has been employed as keeper of Wallops Island Club House, this season.

S. W. Matthews purchased the house and lot of John Bowden sold at auction last week.

Our stores will close up their places of business at 8 o'clock until October and the proprietors of same have entered into a contract to that effect.


Sea -- Shellfish - Crabbing : BaysideLaborers -- FisheriesLaborers -- Wages

Marsh Market.

A man living on Sykes Island recently made five dollars in two days -- catching crabs.


Fields -- Crops - Strawberries

New Church.

Notwithstanding the comparatively low prices of berries and peas our merchants note quite an improvement in business.

Mr. James Johnson purchased from Messrs. W. T. Hook & Co., 150 Tennessee Prolific strawberry plants last year, from which he picked at one picking last Monday, 59 quarts of berries. He also states that the runners were all taken up last spring, which made the picking from the original plants.

The Reamy-Pilot Suit.

reprinted from Norfolk Public Ledger, June 3.Moral -- Other

In the Court of Law and Chancery this morning the famous Onancock (Reamy-Pilot) case was called for trial, it being the suit of Rev. A. J. Reamy, a Baptist minister of Onancock, Va., and his wife, against the Pilot Publishing Company, of Norfolk, Rev. Samuel W. Small, formerly managing editor of the Pilot, and Rev. W. C. Lindsay, late pastor of certain Presbyterian Churches on the Eastern Shore, to recover from the defendants $10,00 for the damages done to the character of Mrs. Reamy by the publication in the Pilot of the article written by Rev. Mr. Lindsay from Onancock, reflecting most grievously upon Mrs. Reamy.

Judge G. S. Kendall, of the Eastern Shore, appeared as counsel for the Pilot Company, Mr. Small as counsel for himself, and Mr. John Neely, of Norfolk, as counsel for the plaintiffs.

The following were the jurors: R. P. Davis, William Erxleben, A. G. Duncan, I. S. D. Saul, Sidney Anderson, A. M. Jones, Thomas Old, W. D. Simmons, W. T. Webb, W. D. Allard, W. C. Orr and A. B. Lee.

The trail of the case was preceded by statements to the jury of the lines to be followed in the trial, Judge Kendall insisting that the character of Mrs. Reamy had not been in the least injured, that she still stands as a lady of unquestioned character, and that not more than nominal damages should be allowed the plaintiff in this case.

Mr. Neely expressed great surprise that such a gallant, chivalrous man as Judge Kendall should have taken this position, and said be could only account for it by Judge K. being an unmarried man.

Mr. Small made a statement of the time and circumstances under which the Lindsay communication came into his (Small's) possession, and how it came to be published, viz: that Rev. Mr. Lindsay sent the article and vouched for its correctness, and that coming from the source it did, it went into print just as any other news item would, and without the least malice on his (Small's) part.

Rev. Mr. Reamy was the first witness put on the stand by the plaintiffs, and he was very closely questioned by Judge Kendall as to whether Mrs. Reamy's character had been injured by the publication of the article in question, and whether money damages could possible wipe out any stain that could have come to the character of Mrs. R. by said article.

Mr. Reamy replied that there had been no stain left on his wife, and that money could not purchase character, but that he was entitled to the protection of the law and had asked it, and left the rest to the jury.

Judge Kendall asked, and repeated with earnestness, whether he (Reamy) had admitted since said publication that Mrs. Reamy had not really been benefitted by it.

Mr. R. replied positively that he had not. When Judge K. repeated that question Mr. Reamy said that his (Reamy's) friends had said so and that all he (Reamy) said was, "Perhaps so," meaning by those words to show disdain at the suggestion that his wife had not been injured.

The next most interesting witness was Mr. Pierce Brent, of the Eastern Shore, who, while on the stand, was asked by Judge Kendall if there had not been a rumor on the Eastern Shore which, if another name had been substituted in the article for that of Mrs. Reamy, would have made the article entirely correct (the name of the other lady not being mentioned by Judge K. in his question.) -- Mr. B answered in the negative.

Rev. Mr. Small was the first witness for the defence. He testified as to the circumstances of the publication of the Onancock article, disclaiming any malice whatever, and he read the retractions published in the Pilot by himself and Rev. Mr. Lindsay. The witness said that the prima facie verification of the unfortunate article in question was better than is the case in nineteen out of every twenty news items that appear in newspapers, judging from his experience. He said that it would be impossible to publish a paper in these times if absolute verity had to be secured for all articles published. He said he would be willing for any editor in Norfolk to go on the stand and testify on this subject.

Mr. Neely asked if he (Small) would be willing for Mr. Murray, of the Landmark, and Mr. Glennan, of the Virginian, to testify on the subject.

Mr. Small replied in the affirmative, and Mr. Neely asked that those gentlemen be summoned.

While Mr. Small was on the stand, Mr. Neely asked him to produce the correspondence between himself (Small) and Mr. Lindsay in connection with the publication of the Onancock article.

Mr. Small had the correspondence in his pocket and produced it. He also showed Mr. Neely another communication, at which Mr. Neely took offence, and a sharp encounter of words took place between the two gentlemen. Exactly what was in the letter (at the showing of which to him, by Mr. Small, he, Neely, took offence) did not appear, but it was supposed by the newspaper men present that it contained the name of the person hinted at by Judge Kendall when he asked a witness (previously) if the Onancock article would have been correct if the name of someone other than Mrs. Reamy had been substituted for her name in the article. The gentlemen had an apparently amicable adjustment of the affair before it was left.

Mr. Neely asked Mr. Small who wrote the retraction signed by Rev. Mr. Lindsay.

Mr. Small replied that Mr. Lindsay was the author of the retraction.

Mr. Neely said he had not asked that question -- as to the authorship -- but his question was as to who wrote the article.

Mr. Small said that Mr. Lindsay brought a retraction to the Pilot office and that after reading it he (Small) dictated a retraction for Mr. Lindsay; that it was written by his (Small's) secretary and turned over to Mr. Lindsay.

Mr. Willis, of Exmore, on the Eastern Shore, testified that he heard the rumor as published in the Pilot, but he did not hear it at Onancock or from persons who came from Onancock, but from persons sixteen miles distant from that place.

Mr. Tankard, of Franktown, had also heard the report at Franktown and Bridgetown, but not from persons from Onancock (where the affair was reported to have occurred.)

Mr. Lankford, of Northampton, had heard the report. He also testified that he had said that the Pilot had done Rev. Mr. Reamy a favor in the Lindsay publication, (meaning that an opportunity to have the rumor fully and publicly contradicted was a benefit), and that Rev. Mr. Reamy who was present when he (Lankford) made said remark, said: "I agree with you, Brother Lankford." [Rev. Mr. Reamy denied this when he was on the stand.]

Sheriff Jarvis, of Northampton, had heard the report, and had not heard it contradicted up to the time of the publication; did not hear of it from people of the neighborhood where it was said to have occurred.

Mr. Lloyd Nottingham, of Northampton, had heard the report in his county and had not heard it contradicted up to the time of the publication, and from what he heard he was afraid it was so; did not hear it from Onancock people.

Mr. K. C. Murray, editor of the Norfolk Landmark, was then sworn, and after he read the Pilot Onancock article was asked if it could have appeared in his paper.

The question was objected to by the defense.

He was then asked if in his opinion it could have appeared in papers that are credited with decent journalism.

He replied "No."

He was then again asked if it could have appeared in his paper, to which he replied "No."

He was then asked as to the custom in verifying news items for publication, and his reply was satisfactory to the plaintiff's attorney.

Mr. Small, in cross examining Mr. Murray (as to the ethics of journalism), asked if he was connected with the Landmark at the time of certain publications -- among them the Breckinridge case -- and if they were published in the Landmark. Mr. Murray admitted that the Breckinridge matter was published in the press report of the Landmark. When asked if he thought it proper to publish matter of that kind he said "Yes, if properly edited." He was asked if newspapers are not frequently imposed upon, and he said, "Yes."

Judge Kendall asked Mr. Murray what he meant by reputable journalism -- if he would class the New
York World and the New York Herald as reputable journals. He replied that he would not class the World as reputable, but would class the Herald as such.

Mr. Glennan, editor of the Virginian, testified that reading matter like that in the Onancock case could not have been published in his paper unless it had come from a long distance, and then only when properly edited. He admitted that some reputable papers publish such matter as that in the Onancock affair, but one of these papers (which he named) he would not like to have in his own home; that there are two classes of journalism in the United States. He referred to having given instructions at his office as to certain classes of publications, but said that instructions are not always carried out. When asked about as to the Lindsay-Pilot article, Mr. Glennan said that if it had come to his office from a minister he would have sent it back to him and have asked him if he understood the religion of Jesus Christ.

While Mr. Glennan was on the stand there was quite a laugh when he said the Chicago papers (with one exception), refused to publish matter (Breckinridge) that was published in full in the New York papers.

Mr. F. P. Brent, of the Eastern Shore, was recalled and testified that properly conducted papers would not, in his opinion, have published the Onancock scandal.

Mr. Small asked the witness who sent the Richmond Dispatch the account of the "Chincoteague Island affair."

The witness replied that he (witness) did, but left out objectionable language.

Rev. Mr. Purnell, a Baptist minister of Eastville, Va., next testified. He heard the Reamy rumor, and heard it contradicted before the publication in the Pilot.

Rev. Mr. Reamy asked to be recalled, that he might make an explanation, but Judge Kendall, of counsel for defense, objected, and the Court sustained objection.

[If Rev. Mr. Reamy had been permitted to testify again he would have said that the apparent conflict of testimony between himself and Mr. Lankford was explainable by the fact that he, Reamy, had said that the publication of the account of the indignation meeting held in his wife's behalf on the Eastern Shore, after the Pilot publication, was a help to his wife. He would have still insisted that he never said that the publication of the scandal was a help to Mrs. R.]

At 3 p. m., the evidence all being in, the court adjourned till 4 p. m., when the instruction to the jury will be argued, after which the argument of the case will be commenced.

The jury rendered a verdict of $1,000 damages for Mrs. Reamy at 4:10 o'clock on Tuesday. It is said that a motion will be made for a new trial.

Later advices are to the effect, that Judge Martin, of the Court of Law and Chancery, having refused to set aside the verdict or to grant a new trial, the defense will appeal the case to the Supreme Court.

The Regatta.

Tourists and sportsmen -- Other recreation - Boat racingTourists and sportsmen -- Field sports - Lodges

The regular annual regatta of the Accomac Club took place at the club-house, Wachapreague Inlet, on Monday last. The day opened propitiously with a brisk north-west wind, but the breeze began to fail early on the ebb, and as the day wore on died down to a dead calm. The first race for 16 feet entries was contested by twelve boats, the course embracing a sail of about five miles. The first prize, a handsome tea set, was awarded to the A. S. Kellam, owned by Capt. C. V. Willis, and the second, a valuable marine glass, to the Josephine, owned by Capt. Tatem, of Cobb's Island. The Julia and Sweethearts were close contestants. The boats got away in good style, and in spite of the light air the racing was fine from the start to finish. Before it was time for calling the next race the light air had blown itself out and a dead calm, with intense heat, continued throughout the remainder of the day. The remaining contests were consequently postponed for a later date. There were probably over five hundred persons in attendance, a large portion of them being ladies. In spite of the excessive heat the occasion was in every way enjoyable, the members of Club exerting themselves to the utmost to contribute to the comfort of their guests. Clam-chowder and other substantials were abundantly served, and the ladies and children regaled on lemonade, ice cream, cake and confectioneries. Much credit is due the gentlemen serving on the committees for careful management of details, and untiring attention to guests. A number of well known gentlemen from different parts of the Shore were present among them Mr. Nicholas, Superintendent, and other prominent officials of the N. Y. P.& N. R. R.

To those who have attended these annual regattas from the beginning, the evident improvement in both boats and sails has been plainly conspicuous, and it may be said with excusable pride that the Eastern Shore has finest and fastest small boats, and the prettiest club -- sails in the world. The remaining contests will be sailed in July.


Weather -- Heat waveDevelopment -- Quality of life

The scorching weather from which we have been suffering of late, is a little ahead of any in this respect ever known so early in the season to the oldest inhabitant, and not far behind, if the length of the spell is taken into consideration, with that of any portion of the summer. The same intense heat is reported from all sections of the country, and together with it prostrations innumerable, many of which have resulted fatally. That our people have been able to pass through trying ordeals like the present in safety when so many fatalities are reported elsewhere, while due from exposure, wholesome diet, etc., may be better attributed, perhaps, to the general healthfulness of our county as a place of abode.

Peninsula Enterprise
Accomac Court House
June 8, 1895