The Reading Daily Eagle

Reading, PA., Wednesday, June 14, 1876

Mr. Curry’s Defense

A word in reference to the unfortunate accident of Monday morning on the premises of Mr. T.B. Curry, 132 s. 5th Street; and another in regard to the much persecuted Thomas B. Curry.

In the first place the public ought to know that the said T.B. Curry was the first to risk his life by going into the pit when the three, Thomas Elliott, John Edwards and George Dorsey, were lying on the top of one another in the bottom, fastening the rope around the body of George Dorsey, by which the latter was drawn up, and that he also tried to rescue his brother-in-law, when in this second effort he became exhausted and was compelled to desist. The jury of inquisition, by questioning and cross questioning witnesses, appeared to want to extort out of some of them that Mr. Curry had employed Mr. Elliott to tap the vault in order that they might place center of perhaps actual criminality on Mr. Curry.

When James Wall, brother-in-law of Mr. Curry, and his inveterate enemy, several years ago, was taken suddenly sick and died in the back part of the same premises, foul play was suspected. A post mortem examination was made on the body of James Wall, when four competent medical witnesses testified, that the said James Wall died of natural causes. In Wall’s case, Mr. Curry was charged with having neglected Mr. Wall in his illness. I here ask any honorable citizen acquainted with the circumstances, was it not wise, prudent and discretionary, on the part of Mr. Curry, to do just as he did in the case of Mr. Wall? And why were not a number of other neighbors who were cognizant of the illness of Mr. Wall, as well as Mr. Curry, censured with neglect? for they did no more for Mr. Wall’s relief, than did Mr. Curry’s family.

Mr. Thomas Elliott and John Edwards were both very good men, and for the limited acquaintance Mr. Curry had with Mr. Elliott he appreciated the good qualities of the latter as highly as any other person. I ask his accusers again why censure the unfortunate invalid, Mr. Curry, in this matter? Mr. Curry is and has been well known to many citizens of Reading for nearly or quite forty years, and that he always and still bears, not only a good, but a very good character for honesty and integrity. And it may be questioned whether his vilest accusers could sustain a single charge of dishonest or disreputable business transaction against him. Strange! doubly strange! that because a man has been unfortunate in business, and swindled out of nearly all he had within the past few years, that he should now be hunted down with blood hounds, execrated and despised, when it is clear in the minds of many that he is a better man and a better citizen than any one that dare charge him with crime. The language of the Saviour to the accusers of the woman in x-, is applicable to his accusers, and it my be predictable to them to read it.

W.Q.