The Horry herald. (Conway, S.C.) 1886-1923, August 31, 1905, Image 4
CROMER IN REPLY.
A Rejoinder to 8enator Tillman's
refenco of the Dispensary.
The Doctor Discusses His Differences
With the Senator In a Calm,
Dispassionate Manner*
Hon. B. R. Tillman.
Dear Sir; It was not to be cxpeoted
that you would adopt my view of the
prlucipleH underlying the dispensary
law, but 1 desire to assure you that 1
appreciate the spirit of your letter
published in the papers this morning.
A tinal word in reply is required by
one or two passages in your letter.
While my own conduct is of small
moment and 1 have no desire to bring
my personality into the discussion, let
me assure you, in passing, that my
moral support has been given to the
enforcement of the dispensary law.
When Gov. Heyward expressed a determination
to enforce the law in
Charleston, I wrote him a letter of
mo i*nn ??n/\ 1
irm uu vAfujuiDiiuatiui), IH'U ucucvum; t
was in sympathy with the dispensary
law, but because I am opposed to lawlessness
and in favor of fosteriug respect
for duly constituted authority.
But 1 think you miss both the spirit
and the letter of Pope's well known
couplet. He did not say:
"About form of law let fools contc
t.
That law which is best administered
is best."
Ho was not speaking of legislative
enactments tkt of governments and
creeds as theM.fleot human welfare,
and he said: V
"For forms s'?rnracnt let fools
contestj, '? '
Wbate'er is* uest administered is
best.',
If there is inherent vice in the law
Itself, etlicient administration of the
law cannot cure it.
Referring to the decision of the
supreme court, which you say 1
"quote with great unction," you say,
"The prohibitionists in general and
you, my dear doctor, are thoroughly
Imbued with the belief that liquor
drinking is dangerous to the morals,
good order, health and safety of the
people," etc. 1 am not a fanatic on
the subject, though you put me in a
class with the "unco guid and rigid |
righteous" who think it a sin to drink
liquor. As you say that you have not
that decision before you, I take the
liberty of supplying a full quotation
in order that it may be seen that I
have argued the matter not as a fanatic
but from the point of viow of
the supreme court.
You will recall that at the November
term, 18(J3, the supreme court
deoided that the dispensary law was
unconstitutional. Mr. Justice McGowan
concurring with Mr. Chief
Justice Mclver in the decision, and
Mr. Justice Pope dissenting. The
next year, 1894, Mr. Justice Gary
having succeeded Mr. Justice MoGowan
on the supreme bench, the
court decided that the law was constitutional,
Mr. Justice Pope and Mr.
Justice Gary concurring, and Mr.
Chief Justioe Mclver dissenting. 1
am frank enough to say that if I were
hunting something that I could
"quote with unction," I could iiud It
in the dissenting opinion.
The following paragraph, found in
State vs. Aiken, 42 S. (3., page 231,
contains the ground work of the decision
upholding the constitutionality
of the law:
"before proceeding to a consideration
of the specific objections urged
against the constitutionality of the
act (of 1893) we deBire to state at the
outset that, in our opinion, the following
proposition^ embody the prin
ciples governing tuls cas?:
"(1) That liquor, in its nature, is
dangerous to the morals, good order,
health and safety of the people, and
is not to be placed on the same foot
ing with the or/inary commodities of
life, such as coin, wheat, cotton, tobacco,
potatoe/, etc.
"(2) ThaOthe State, under its police
power, /In itself assume entire
control ancf management of those
subjects, su6h as liquor, that are dau
gerou* to the peace, good order, health
morals a?d welfare of the people,
even wli|n trade is one of the inol
aents or eucn entire control and managennenyon
the part of the State.
"(8) /That the act of 1898 Is a police
niyasure. We are frank to say
that if we are wroag as to either of
theseyproposl lions, the act should be
deoiyrod unconstitutional. We will
novycitt' authorities to sustain these
propositions."
iNote, then, that the language in
Wilch you define the attitude of the
rirohibitionists is exactly the language
jn which the supreme court defines
Zhe attitude of the law on the subjeot.
/that decision fixes the point of view
/ from which the State is hound to rp/
gard the question; and from that
f point of view the State may take con
/ trol of the trafllc to police it but not
to profit by it. And if the view of
llugh Farley, chivalrous spirit, and
others who were opposed to the protit
feature had b?.eu adopted, the result
might have been different. I admit
that it is wise to "hobble the devil,"
whom you ar i powerless effectually to
chain; but having hobbled the devil, I
protest that it is not right to make
him yoke fellow with the spirit of
progress In our schools and open the
way for our children to embrace him
aa an angel of light.
Returning to njy historical parallel,
I am not incline^ to press the lessons
of the prohlbltiph vote of 1892 unduly.
After reminding me that 82,000 did
not vote in thaf election, which you
denominate a Vside show," you say
i
J
ii I
that "this Is a government of majorities."
True, but It Is a government
of majorities that vote, and not of
majorities that stay away from the
polls. At that election, prohibition
received In this county more than
1,000 votes, a majority of the total
vote oast. But when they came to
fasten the dispensary upon Newberry
county that vote of more than 1,000
was nullified by a petition of 79 freeholders
In the town of Newberry, 34
of whom were negroes.
The attitude of public sentiment
towards the dispensary law In this
oounty has assumed three distinct
phases in suocesclon. In its earlier
stages the law did not have a fair
test. For reasons that need not be
enumerated public sentiment was resentful,
and the law against Illicit
tralllo In liquor was not enforced.
But violations of the law became so
scandalously open and unrebuked that
a revulsion took place in the sentiment
of the oommunlty, and for years
the law has been enforced. We have
now arrived at the third phase, In
which the sentiment of the community
seems to be crystallizing In opposition
to the whole scheme, owing
largely, I think, to the fact that the
moral sense of the people Is offended
by the constant effort to justify the
law by appealing to Its revenue feature;
but owing also to corruption in
the administration of the law.
It was not my original purpose and
I now make no attempt to refute
statistics or to argue the question In
riAULil. IInlo.HU rhAfl/mSit.lfvna r\t ,
Stated are exactly similar It is hard to
arrive at a Just* conclusion >-y contrasting
statistics of crime. Hut we
might quote stmMatics until the people
are dizzy and at'!) 11 1 believe that a
large number c/f our counties will be
satistied with nothing short of actual
experiment after the example of Marlboro,
Greenwood a"d Cherokee,
We reach the parting oy our ways
at the conclqding clause eft your letter
I quote tfy paragraph: /
"I will not say that pour vision is
clouded by fanaticism but if "it be
true that 'he who makes two blades
of grass grow where only one grew
before is a public benefactor,' then is
it not equally true that he who conceived
a BCbeme by which drunkenness
was reduced, temperance encouraged
and decency and good order increased
and withal made the demon
whiskey contribute to the education
of the ignorant masses, need he be
ashamed of his work?"
I do not admit that the dispensary
soheme lias reduced drunkenness, en
couraged temperance and decency and
Increased good order. Mark you, 1
speak of the effect and not of the motive.
Hut it has ''made the demon
whiskey contribute to the education
of the ignorant masses." And many
ef the advocates of the scheme vehemeutly
urge this as a justifying fact.
The "ignorant masses" love their
schoolB but do not draw nice moral
distinctions. The supreme court said
stitle this vampire and threaten the
health and life of the community; but
the profit feature gives "the ignorant
masses" ground to infer that what the
supreme court mistook for a vampire
is in reality the goose that lays the
golden egg. And I repeat, any re
striotive scheme that tends to make
an immoral traftlc reputable and
popular is a vicious and dangerous
scheme.
"Do men gather grapes of thorns or
figs of thistle^?"
Geo. B. Cromer.
Newberry, S. 0., Aug. 10, 1905.
lightning Dots Damage.
A dispatch from Atlanta says an
electric storm of remarkable severity,
accompanied by a high wind; visited
that city Wednesday. One young man,
James McDaniel, 18 years old, was
killed by lightning near the centre of
the city. The Kimball House and the
State capltol were each struck twOe
by lightning, but no serious damage
was caused to ei her building. Fully
1,000 telephones are reported burnt d
out, a score of eleotric street cars
were burned out, windows were blown
In, awnings carried away and numbers
of cellars were Hooded. Seven tenths
of an inch of rain fell in ten minutes.
The damage will amount to soveral
thousand dollars.
OraHhuct Into Trolley.
At Cincinnati, Ohio, three men
were killed and ten were injured Wed
nesday night when a fast through ex
press from New York to Oincln ati
on the Baltimore and Ohio So i'hwestern
crashed Into a Winton Piace
trolley,car In Winton Piace a suburb.
All the killed lived In Winton Place.
According to some witnc ses of the
wreck John Drlsooll, gate tender,
had let the gate down to allow a
freight to pass. The locomotive of the
frelghtemltted heavy oloudsof smoak,
preventing the tender from seeing the
passenger train bearing down at high
speed and he raised the gates, it is
said. The locomotive struck the
back part of the street car and it
was tossed to pieces In all directions.
A i*ot of Gold Pound.
A pot of gold, supposed to have been
burled by Gapt. Kid, has been dug up
011 Sullivan's island. The Gh?ri?&Gvn
Boat says "the gold was found near
the chimney of the Buckley house on
Saturday night, belli# turned up by
one of the laborers who was raisin#
the house to make room for the extension
of the barracks of the army
post. The laborer who laid claim and
made off with the money could not be
learned, but he was not a souvenir
hunter, being content to take the
gold and leave the rusted metal pot,
including a number of old Spanish
doubloons, valued at $16 each, pistols.
Louis and .other coins, and the excitement
which the find has made
among the native islanders has assumed
no small proportions."
I >
THE CALM REPLY
Of Senator Tillman to the Last
Letter of Dr. Cromer.
MAKES A STATEMENT
In Reference to Charges on the Supreme
Court and Says He Had Nothing
Whatever to Do With the Matter,
and Gives His Opin- .
ion of Present Pight.
Hon. Geo. IT. Cromer.
Dear Sir: I was absent from the
State a few days after the Anderson
meeting, and since my return home
Sunday I have been quite unwell,
hence delay In auswering your "reJ
)luder," which appeared In the newspapers
of the 18th.
1 have read what you Ray carefully,
and with all due respect It seems to
me you are begging the question. I
quoted Pope's couplet from memory
and it is lucky that I mifquoted it,
else you would have had 11 tt>ie to reply
to, but I cannot agree with you that
"1 mi-wed" either the "sense or the
spirit."
1 charged existing conditions In dis
pensary matters to mal-adixiinlstratlon
and to legislation in changing the law
and depended upon the last line of
the quotation to sustain my contention:
"That law which is best administered
is best."
Of course your quotation must be
verbatim and it is even stronger in
sustaining my argument than my own
recollection of the words, for if "whatever
form of government," an autocracy,
limited monorchy or a republic
is better than any other when It is
"best administered" it seems to me
that you must be wrong in olaiming 'if
there is inherent vice in the law Itself,
efficient administration of the
law cannot cure it."
Wo are not discussing that phase
at all. You class the dispensary system
as inherently vicious as oontra
distinguished with the licensed sale of
liquor, and the prohibition of its sale
at all. According to Pope, as you
quote him, "whatever" form the law
might take as among these three
would be best if it is "administered
best." That is all I have ever contended.
I believe the dispensary system
can be better administered than
can prohibition, and 1 am opposed to
any form of license, high or low, because
it has the inherent vice" of
money making by the individual, and
fhln 4^ i 1 * - At ' * "*
inii? tu my iiiiuu is trie most deadly
poison arising out of the whiskey
tralllc. I hardly think you will deny
' that the dispensary law fearlessly and
honesty administered as it was originally
framed would be belter than prohibition
not enforced.
However, it was not this part of
your rejoinder which gave mc any concern,
because it almost answered itself
and I only mention it incidentally
as 1 am answering you.
The point which I wish to press on
your attention and that of those who
may be interested in our discussion of
this question is the ''lame and impotent
conclusion" at which you arrive
in your discussion of the dispensary
from a legal standpoint. You are a
lawyer and an able one, while 1 am
only a layman, but your reading must
have been limited or your reasoning
powers at fault to rest your case as
you appear to do on the claim that the
prohibitionists are sustained throughout
in their views by the decisions of
the supreme court. You quote the decision
in the case of the State vs.
Aiken, 42nd S. 0., p. 231.
"That liquor in its nature is dangerous
to the morals, good order,
health pnd safety of the people, etc.,
and then you say "Note then the language
in which you deti.ie the attitude
of the prohibitionists is exactly the
language iu which the supreme court
defines tbe attitude of the law on the
subject. That decision lixes the point
of view from which the State is bound
to regard the question; and from thai
point of view the State may take con
trol of the tradio to police it but not
to prolit by it."
You give vour own interpretation
to the language used by the court
but to me it is altogether without any
warrant, except as your individual
opinion and in direct opposition to
the entire line of thought and reasoning
of the judge who wrote the opinion
in the State vs. Aiken, I quote
from the same decision, page 239-.
"The act shows that the legislature
had in view the protection of the
"morals, good health, and safety of
the State' in dealing with this question.
Many safeguards are thrown
around the sale of liquor. The commissioner
is to be an abstainer from
Intoxicants. The liquor is to be tested
by the chemist and declared to be
pure. The liquor is to be sold only by
the package, which cannot be opened
nor drunk where sold. The sales can
only be made in day time. Persons
cannot be appointed on the county
V.rvfi vri r\t ? 1 -11 - 1 A '
i/v/uiu ui uuiitiui WIIU ddUlClOU tC
the use of intoxicating liquors. He
person can be appointed a county dispenser
who has over been adjugded
guilty of violating the law relating to
intoxicating liquors, nor who is keep
er of a restaurant or a place of public
amusement, nor who is addicted to
the use of intoxicating liquors as a
beverage.
"The county dispenser shall execute
r a bond In the turn of 93,000, upon
which suit for damage** may be brought
for a violation of the provisions of tbe
act by wife, child, parent, guardian,
employer, or other person. A majority
of the voters In a township may pre1
vent the establishment of a dispensary.
The oounty dispenser shall take
an oath therein prescribed. A printed
or written request must be presented
for permission to purohase. The sale
shall not be made to a minor, a person
\ Intoxicated, a person In the habit of
drinking to excess por to a person unless
known to the aispenser. It prevents
the establishment of club rooms,
where liquors are used. One of the
i beneficial results of the law Is brought
about by selling only for cash."
In the faoe of this language how
can you declare that "the State may
take control of the traffic to police it,
but not to profit by it?"
On page 240 we find this:
"The Judiciary," said Mr. Justice
McCiOwan in the case of Town Council
vs. Pressley, 33rd S. C., page 56,
"cannot run a race of oplnlous upon
points of right reason, and expediency
with the law making power."
fnt. r . .1.1? * it .
I mun air. justice uary anaea: "Trie
State has a right through its own
officers?In fact, it its primary duty?
to enforce its police regulations, which
right Inheres In government itself and
Is paramount to any right inherent in
citizenship. But referring to the
foregoing objection as matter of fact,
it wou'd not be as efficiently enforced
by private individuals, because there
would be the constant temptation to
make as large profit as possible."
But referring to the foregoing ob
j'Ction (that the same results could
be accomplished by allowing private
individuals to carry on the tratli") as
a matter of fact it would not be as
efficiently anforced by private individuals
"because there would be the
constant temptation to make as large
profits as p wsible." Further on Justice
Gary adds: "The dispensary aot
itself is an outgrowth of a dissatisfaction
on the part of the people with
the manner in which the police power
when delegated, was abused" (by permitting
those who obtained the licenses
to make as much money as possible.)
Again I desire to direct your attention
to the decision of the supreme
court of the United States in the case
of Vance vs., W. A. Vandercook Co.,
170 U. S., p. 447, in which the constitutionality
of the dispensary law
was upheld by our court of last resort:
"It is argued as the State law here
in question does not forbid but on the
Contrary authorizes the sale of intoxin>m
fc.Q wlhhln Old fifo ko honno If Jo I
wv, .? wa a? uuv MVUUV) I iVJUVU 1U 13
not a police law, therefore not enacted
In the exercise of the police power of
the State and consequently does not
operate upon the sale of original pack
ages within the State. But the premise
upon which these argument rest
is puroly arbitrary and imaginary.
From the fact that the State law per
mits the sale of liquor subject to par
ticular restrictions and only upon enumsrated
conditions it does not follow
that the law is not a manifestation
of the police power of the State.
The plain purpose of the act of oougress
having been to allow State regulations
to operate upon the sale of
original packages of Intoxicants com
ing from other States, it would destroy
its obvious meaning to construe
it as permitting the State laws to attach
to and control the sale only in
case the States absolutely forbade sales
of liquor and not to apply in case the
State determined to restrict or regu
late the same."
How then, my dear sir, oan you
seriously contend that "the State may
take control of the tralllo to police it
but not to pre fit by It." Our own
court in the strongest language maintains
the contrary; the supreme court
of the United States with the law be
fore it sustained it, notwithstanding
this feature, yet merely because you
feel that the proiit feature is an inherent
vice of the dispensary law
which destroys its usefulness and Its
legality, i must ask, now can you
seriously aTgue such a point, and how
can you lend your great inlluence and
intellect to mislead those who are
Ignorant?
You brush aside as wholly unworthy
of consideration the statistics which
I advanced to show that prohibition
does not prohibit, and that drunkenness
is not as great in Charleston with
all its blind tigers as it is in prohibition
cities of like stz3. You dismiss
therewith a wave of the hand, because
they may make the people dizzy and
then assert most positively that the
supreme court said, "Stifle this vampire
that threatens the health and life
of the community." While it is an
Indisputable proposition that the supreme
court has never said anything
of the kind and only used the language
which you quoted as the Justification
of the legislature for enacting the dispensary
law, to better control and
minimize the evils inseparable from
linnnr T fr. u/au marnlu a
?.v| v?w? aw ?? v*m U4U1 vij u OUIUUK i jr
worded declaration that the law was
an exercise of the police power.
Suppose the dispensary law was ro
administered that it eliminated the
profit feature entirely, is it not evident
that a dollar would buy a great
deal more liquor than it does now and
it would therefore encourage consumpi
tion and therefore drunkenness?
It seems to me that you have
reached the conclusion In your own
i mind that the dispensary law must be
i "damned if it does and be damned if
' it don't," and your attitude towards
> it is made perfectly clear when you
> say, "1 do not admit that the dispensary
scheme has reduced drunkenness,
encouraged temperance and decency
i and increased good order." This in
view of the facts that have been time
and again printed, in view of the opin?
ion of wellnlgh every close observer in
, and outside of the State, that the dispensary
is a long ways ahead of the
\ license system as a temperance meas
TAUGUS
Bookkeeping, Shorthand, Ty
guaranteed course 20 weeks. Sir
hand, 8 mos. 12 calls for graduate
mand. Write.
Machinery Supply
WE SELL
Headquarters for EVERYTHING
All kinds of Injectors, Lubricator
Supplies for Saw Mills, Oil Mills a
Large stock of Well Pumps and C
COLUMBIA
Columbia, <=* CV The r
I
\ The Gutnard
COlvUMl
II Manufacturers Brick, Fire Proc
O Flue linings and Drain Tile. F
oi; millions.
Wtnbke I Morphine i Cigaret
Habit, | Habit | Habit
fCured by Keeley
1329 Lady St. (or P. O. Box 76f Oo
o
ure solely is the most remarkable
utterance I have ever heard fall from
the lips of a man who stands so high,
and deservedly, in the estimation of
every good man and woman in the
State. If you are content to stand
by that utterance I certainly am willing
to leavo you occupying that attitude.
One word more and I am through.
In the Columbia State of August 22 I
find quoted from the Charlotte observer
the following: "The dispensary
discussion in South Carolina, complex
even at its simplest, is much befuddled
just now bv the fact that two
Popes seem to have played prominent
parts in dispensary affairs. One is the
Honorable Y. J. Pope, at present the
the chief justice of the State, who
once handed down a dissenting opln
ion as to the constitutionality of the
dispensary law. He was all alone un
til the legislature upon the orders of
Gov. Ben Tillman put Mr. Justice
McGowan off the supreme bench because
he cMd not favor the dispensary
law and put on Mr. Justice E B.
Gary because he did favor it. Then
the dispensary law was declared constitutional,
Pope and Gary concur
ring, Mclver dissenting." This lie
was first sent broadcast over this
State by those leading newspapers
whioh are now clamoring for the de
struotlon of the dispensary and which
are the main reliance of the prohibitionists,
although they boldly declare
that they do not believe in it any
more than I do. This outrageous
falsehood thus revamped and copied
from a North Carolina paper is again
set in circulation and I deem it nothing
but my duty, aud it is certainly a
pleasure, to do justice to Mr. Just'c^
Gary, while the very records of the
facts will show the falsity and venom
of the infamous story.
The dispensary law was declared unconstitutional
in April, 1S94, by Justices
Mclver and McGowan, Justice
Pope; dissenting. The opinion was
wholly unexpected to the people of
the State and to the best lawyers In
it. I know because I had talked with
many of them on the subject. Judge
McGowan retired from the bench the
July following and Justice Gary took
his place. Mr. McGowan had not, as
I recollect, oiT red for re-election the
preceding December and when Judge
Gary was elected no one dreamed that
the issue would be presented In that
light. While it was fashionable In
those days to say Gov. Hen Tillman
' 'gave orders to the general assembly,"
T horn flonlo?o nn "n" 1 L ? ?
jl tiv^iv> uuuiui v> uu ru jr ^ULIttl Ii<)[10r
that I had nothing whatever to do
with that election, and that Justice
Gary's opinion as to the constitution,
ality of the dispensary law was well
understood by all who conferred with
him, and that he was as little expectant
of the decree whicn was promulgated
in April following as any other
man in South Carolina.
It may be that the reopening of
these old wounds and the continued
attacks that are being made on me
may revive factionalism in South
Carolina and I call for all fair minded
meu to bear witrass that this agitation
about the dispensary and abuse
of all who have had anything to do
with it from beginning to end is not
being pressed by me or ray friends,
that it is the other side that is urging
the fight, and I again repeat that if
there shall again be a revival of bit
tern ess In the coming campaign the
blame can not Justly be laid at my
door. I have never been meek or disposed
to "turn the other cheek" when
I have been smitten and while I deprecate
this style of warfare, I am
prepared to meet onslaughts of this
or any other kind, let them come
from whence they may.
b. R. Tillman.
Trenton, S. C., Aug. 23d.
;ta;iga.;
pe-writing, English branches, Full
iglo course of either Business or Short- I
? in about 20 days. Can't supply de.
House for the State.
EVERYBODY. v '
I In MACHINFRY SUPPLIES,
s, Pipe, Valves, Fittings,
nd any one in Machinery business,
yilnders. Get our price.
SUPPLY 00..
fiachinerv Supply house nf the 9tat*
Brick Works,
3IAf O.
f Terra (3otta Bulldincr Block ,for
'repared to till orders for thou ands
( a*
| Ail Drutfttud fooaooi;
i I Habits.
Institute, of C
lumbia, 8. G. Confidential oorrospotv
WEAK MEN, l CAN RESTORE
YOU TO PERFECT
MANHOOD.
I Have Been HucLb*-fully Treating
Diseases of Men tor ?Years ami
My Method of Troatiuent Assures
You a Positive, Permanent
Cure.
I can po??itivoly rostor woak men their lost
viuuuy ana ail i want is an opportunity to
convince you tlmt I ca If you are in a
weak, dejected condition, discouraged and
broken in health, ait right down and writ? int>
a letter and let mo toll you in my answer why
my treatment Will positively and permanently
restoro to you the vim and
vitality you once possessed. 1 have given
this condition special study for over
twontv-flve years and I know, audit has been
proven by the largo number of people whom [
have cured, that 1 am capable of thoroughly
ui'doratanding every possible treatment accordingly.
My wide experience has taught me
that there are hardly two ? use of this natwhs
exactly alike, and hence each must ho reul?
different ly it a cure is ever brought about8 s
prepare the proper treatment in my o ui
laboratory to mmt the demands of ovorv
individual case, after I have given a thorough
examination. My method of treaemomt is theresa
It ol' all these years ofai'ose suialy and it
is to-day recognized by the medical profession
as the most thorough and sciont ifio treatment
for men.
I have had groat success in curing the
afflicdod at a distance. By the aii of a complete
system of self-examination blanks lean
diagnose a caseata distance and if you are in
this condition, or if you suffer 'rum any other
disease of a chronic nature, write me. I) n>t
look for a cure in the many widely advertised
"ready-made'' medicines, free treatments from
fako medical companies, etc., ot\, t'or will not
only never ho cured hut y<>u will become worse,,
in addition to losing the money you have
spent. Mv charges are very reasonable, and no
man should hesitate writing mo on this account.
I have been established in Atlanta for
many years and iny ropuiation as a skillful
specialist is kno vn to all. Bo sure to \r.tome
for my hook for men, entitled "M;uilinoss,
Vigo-- and Health" it is absolutely free
for the asking. Address
J.Newton Hathaway, M. I.)., 88 In man Bldg.,
^Ja.
Pianos
3 o
Orjran s ir
^ You want the iiest. We have ?
: exactly what you want. Don't e
wait to feel exactly ready. We
? an make you able. Our prices {
* are LOW?our termsare EASY. &
W rite us at once for catalogues, JJ
5 prices and terms. Address 2
| MALONE'S MUSIC HOUSE. g 1
5 COLUMBIA, S. C. $ J
LEARN TBLEORAPHY
And R. R, AGENCY?We Mao train you for I
The U. B. B1GNAI. COt'jE'h School eatab- \
listed 17 years. Chcae tm 0#l, low tuition, >
and Our Plan INSURES btf^ion. Catalogue
free. GA. TELEGRAPH COLLEGE.
Benoia, Ga.