ITO the Editor of the Union: Sir: The
{"newspaper_name": "The daily union.", "edition": "01", "page": "p2", "byline": "June 81."}
{"character_count": 1075, "word_count": 184, "ccnet_language_score": [0.894599974155426], "ccnet_perplexity": [1147.699951171875], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
TNO the Editor of the Union: SIR: The
Il assertion contained in the Sectional Dock
Company's publication of last evening, that | am
"ineresed in the balance Dock" is utterly untrue.
have not now, never have had, and never expect
intend to have, an interest, personal or pecunary,
to the amount Of single cent either in the balance
or any other species of dock The assertion,
therefore, that am "now interested" if intended
to convey any other meaning than that regard the
balance dock necessary for the interests Of Phil
adelphia is base and shameless fabricat on. Of
the same character is the innuendo of Dakn in the
letter to me published in your paper Of this morn
ing, wherein he speaks of "your own dock-the
balance or box dock"


Wherever am known, and my motives of ac-
ton can be appreciated, am perfectly that no
denial of assertions SO unfounded and base will be
thought necessary; where the authors Of the cal
umny are known, contradiction will, l am equally
confident, he wholly superfoous.


Very respectfully, yours,


WALTER X. JOHNSON.
Washington, June 26-lt.