The county record. [volume] (Kingstree, S.C.) 1885-1975, August 12, 1909, Image 3
first heard the report we took it|
as a joke, believing that no sen-1
sible person would credit so1
foolish a proposition.
But since Mr Starr says he
can prove it. we'll give him the
benefit of a little investigation
on our part. Mr Starr says:
Winter before last a proposi 1
tion came to the Legislative delegation
in Columbia to bond
Williamsburg county tor a swell J
court house. Oh. yes, boys, we'llj
prove it." A little further on lie
adds: "Supervisor Singletary,
was told by the county attorney |
to spend no more money on old
court house, wanted to build a
new one."
? 1- -..1
I.asi wees we buuumicu iu|
Messrs W D Bryan and W P!
Gause, who were members of
the House of Kepreseutatives at
the time specified, winter before
last, the following- inquiry (Mr
Kellahan being out of town): j
Hear Sirs:?Mr Stewart Starr,;
in bis last issue of the Rutledge I
. County News, dated August 6,!
asserts that winter before last a
/proposition came before the
Legislature to bond Williams-!
burg county ,4to build a swell
court house." Was any such
proposition made to your delegation
and where did it come
from? We know nothing of it
here."
We have signed statements!
from both Messrs Bryan and
fla .tea ctafincr that if anv KUC.h
U VUV, CVUVIU^ ? J ? ? ?
proposition was made they
knew nothing- about it.
A similar inquiry addressed to
Senator W L Bass last Thursday
remains unanswered up to
this time.
Lee & Askins, the county!
attorneys, reply as follows to1
the charge against them:
To the Editor of the County j
Record:
We take the following from
an article which appeared in a
supplement to a recent [issue of
"The ltutledge County News":
4 'Snnprvicnr Sinfletarv was
- o j
sold (told) by the county attorney
to spend no money on the
old court house, wanted to
build a new one. Oh, yes, he
was; ask him."
During Mr Singletary's term
of office as Supervisor of Williamsburg
county, we were
county attorneys, and we desire
to say in reply to the above
statement that we at no time
advised Mr Sinletary as therein
stated, and any statement from
whatever source to that effect is
absolutely false and untrue.
Very truly,
Lee & Askins. j
It is hardly necessary to say
any more on this subject, but
v we will add that should any
Jsuch bonding scheme come up in
the near future The Record will
j' fight it just as vigorously as
any other measure it believes to
be opposed to the Ultimate Rule
of Right: "The greatest good
to the greatest number."
We are not concerned as to
Mr Starr's statements affecting
Sandy Grove township. We are
not familiar with the conditions
there apd therefore cannot point
4-WA mAtly crvrvfo m iVllI no rf
UUl U1C v> can ili urni j/u> w
of that part of the "Address."
But if Mr Starr is as grossly inaccurate
as we have shown him
to be in what he says pertaining
to Williamsburg his dicta concerning
Sandy Grove, AldermcPb
et al should be taken with several
grains of salt. In fact in that
part of his article he becomes so
involved in his statistics and
scatters his arguments ovei so
much space that it would take a
Philadelphia lawyer to understand
what he is driving at. We
doubt very seriously whether
Mr Starr could explain it himself.
The New County VoteMr
Starr contends that ourj
* estimate of 1,088 votes in the
Williamsbarg portion of the
i Kutledge area "is too small."
The figures taken were based on
the primary election of 1908,one
year ago, when the largest vote
ever polled in the county of Wil.
liamsburg, as far back as the
files of The County Record extend,
was cast. We took this
primary election for a basis be
cause no general election returns
came within fifty per cent
of the number of votes cast at
any one of the polls referred to.
Mr Starr takes the registration
books and figures the vote at
1,(580. Then he arbitrarily deducts
from every precinct a certain
percentage of the maximum
vote, the rate per cent varying
at nearly every precinct, with
the maximum at Lake City of 98
percent, and the minimum at!
Muddy Creek of only 50 per;
cent. In this way he figures that
the new county is bound to win.
Now, we still believe that our
i o nanror rirrllt t Vi n n Mr
LO i-iliiu IV JO UVUi Vi u^ui biiu.u ? *?
Starr's and are willing" to back
our judgment. Therefore we offer
to put up SlO?not a "guarantee",
but cash?to be given to
any charitable cause he (Starr)
may name, if the number of
votes cast in the Williamsburg
part of Rutledge when tabulji^etj.
does not foot up nearer our
mate of 1,088 than his of 1._j0,
provided he will cover it with
the same amount to be given in
case he is wrong.
We thought it presumptuous
enongh for this stranger, who
the county treasurer tells us has
never paid a cent of tax in the
county, to come down here from
Yankeeland and dictate to us
how to run our elections, but he
goes further now and gives a
table telling how many of you
he expects to vote and counting
your votes in advance,depriving
450 of you of voting at all and
apportioning the rest as he sees
fit. Are you going to submit to
this self-constituted dictator,
who assumes such authority?
in claiming two representatives
in the Legi.-lature for the
new county, if formed, on his
showing of 178 more votes in the
new county area,leaving one for
old Williamsburg, Mr Starr displays
his ignorance of the subject
he is trying to discuss.
Doesn't he know that representation
in the Legislature is based
on the number of inhabitants,
white and black, men, women1
and children? Look at Beaufort
count}', for instance, with three
representatives and a voting
population of let* tluin 1,000.
Regardless of the relative voting
strength can anyone seriously
question the fact that the old
county contains more inhabitants
than the northern one-third
area?
Tbe Nigger in the Woodpile.
Jn holy horror and righteous
indignat'on Mr Starr deprecates
the idea of appealing to the negro
vote in this election. Mr
S tarr sees spooks; we have heard
of no such intention on either
side, but then it takes a Yankee
to discover a "nigger in the
woodpile."
White men in South Carolina
are accustomed to settling their
political differences without appealing
to the negro as a balance
of power, as they do in Indiana
and other border States.
Our election laws were framed
to disfranchise negro voters.
That is why they are so complicated.
Theframersof these laws
never contemplated that they
would be used as a weapon
against white Democratic voters,
and that is why the people
of the lower part of the county
feel that they have been done
a cruel wrong in having closed
upon them the books of registration
thirty-three days before
this election?when the law expressly
says they shall be closed
thirty days before a general election.
In this way a number of
voters. it is said. haveh?en dis
" 7 ? ? ? ? - ? 7 ?? *
franchised.
County Officers' Salaries.
Mr Starr tells us that the clerk
of court, of the probate judge,
"and so on down the line" are
supported by fees from their offices.
If Rutledge county can
get, good men to work for these
tees, she can do more than the
other counties can. Even in
the model county of Calhoun
the clerk is paid $1,000 direct
salary, according to Comptroller
General's report-p 192.
"This poor Rutledge business-J
we can't hardly get away fronK
that; that stings the people up
to this end to the quick," laments
Editor Starr. It does
look bad, for a fact, but we can't
get around the public records
and to have stated otherwise
would have been incorrect, as
any one will agree who does
not think >fr Starr knows more
about the auditor's books than
that official knows himself. Mr
Starr should remember that he
himself invited this exposure;
he it was who when the new
county was tirst agitated rushed
into print, stating that the
Northern one-third area had
$3,000,000 property valuation
against $2,000,000 in the other
two-thirds; that the northern
area paid two-thirds of the taxes
and was tiled of supporting the
lower "pauper" section. Has he
forgotten that? If we take the
official records and refute his
wild, reckless statements, are
we to blame in thus defending
nnr rvirf nf +}i/'mmfv*' Knrplv
VUI -J/U I V Vi bliv VVU11VJ I >iy>UI VlJ ]
it comes with poor grace for
Mr Starr to complain at the exposure
of his padded figures.
If he feels "stung" he brought
it on himself.
Rome People Slandered.
"One of the renting class of
the Rome section says that the
opposition of certain men is because
they don't want what The
Record called the 'wool hat' boys
to be coming to Lake City, where
goods are sold so much cheaper.
Good roads are not wanted, so
cotton may be hauled to this
market, but the desire is to keep
Johnson township bottled up
under the control of a few men
who are afraid thaL this new
county movement will uncork
things," Mr Starr says that he
doesn't know whether his inform
ant was right or not in his
charge. In justice to the men
referred to, than whom there
are no better to be found anywhere
in this county or State,
he should not have published so
damaging an accusation unless
he knew it to be founded on
fact. Yet we are warned to
pay no a'Mention to "the man
who rants ound making wild
statement!?' )
If Mr Starr is to be the Warwick
of the new county he
should post himself better on
the political history of the State.
"Wool hat 'boys' " was quoted
by The Record just as Mr Starr
quotes it. The expression was
made famous in the early 90's
by the Hon B R Tillman as a
term of affection bestowed upon
the down-trodden farmers who
rallied to his standard.
With the limited time at our
disposal in which to answer Mr
Starr we have necessarily overlooked
some small matters. Really
his article, covering a wide |
expanse of space, contains nothing
except appeals to prejudice,
idle speculations as to future
prospects based on impossible
conditions, and the product
of an overworked imagination.
Much ol it is not worth
noticing, having already been
absolutely refuted, but people
have short memories and we desire
as far as possible to place
the facts tresh before them in
order that they may be able to
cast their votes intelligently in
an election that affects their future
welfare for all time.
Remember this, it takes twothirds
majority to vote you into
Rntlpdrre. but once the county is
formed a bare majority is all
that is necessary to force any
measure upon you, and Mr Starr
already boasts that Lake City,
Scranton and McAllister's Mill
have l,016j-egistered voters out
of 1,G30 on the books.
Having done our best to give
the facts as we find them we
await the outcome of the elec- (
tion calmly and serenely. An
honest expression at the ballot!
box is all we ask for and wei
want every man to cast his ballot
free and untrammelled, according
tojthe dictates of his
conscience.
4
EDITOR STARR TAKEN 1
'BY
%
AUDITOR STANDS PAT ON FIGURES FUI
FULLY ANSWERED-MILLS HAP OF N
COMPARASON BETWEEN OLD AND
Editor County Record:?
Please allow me space sufficient in
your columns to reply to Mr Starr's
vicious, malicious and unscrupulous
attack made upon me in his supplement
to the Rntledge County News
of the 6th inst insomuch as it refers
to me, as well as Mr Wolfe and Mr
Lee. I will be as brief as possible
and will deal mainly with facts as
shown by the records.
ilir Oiai 1 Blilicu mat iiuiii vuv
Comptroller General's report Calhoun
and Bamberg counties will expend on
roads the present year $6,500 and
$0,700, respectively, and Williamsburg,
having more territory than
both of these combined, intends to
spend $8,000. The fact3 are that
Williamsburg will have to the credit
of road fund for the year the following:
From 1 mill road tai $5,013,
odd cents dropped: from commuta*
tion $5,126 and $8,000, the last item
as a supplement to first and second,
making a total for roads in Williamsburg
for year 1900 $18,139. The
1 mill and commutation road taxes
are paid in advance. The records of
couiity commissioners' and auditor's
offic will bear me out in this.
Mr Starr says Williamsburg contains
1,120 square miles and refers
to the old Mills map. How old is the
Mills man. Mr Starr? It aDDears to
me that Florence has taken a whack
or two from the old county since
that map of ancient date was made.
The auditor's duplicate of 1908
shows 657,556 acres, of which the
old territory, uot affected by Rutledge
line, has 389,028 acre3. In
this new territory not affected, 148,210
acres; and the three townships
when there is a division, 120,326
acres. Approximately in square miles
for old county not affected, 608
square miles; in new county, 231?
square miles; in those townships
through which the line passes, 188
square miles. Approximate division
of this 188 square miles: For old
county, 72 square miles; for new
county,116 square miles. Total for
old county 680 square miles, for
new county 348 square mile*. If
Williamsburg contains, a* Mr Siarr
says, 1,120 square miles, then there
are eyidently 59,244 acres of land in
the county not listed lor taxation.
Reflect for a moment. Practically
this is one-fourth as much area as
Mr Starr elaims Rutledge will
"swipe" from poor old Williamsburg.
What a pity Mr Starr could
not find this 90 square miles and
hitch it on to Rutledge, drop Sandy
Grove and relieve his much muddled
mind of many hours of anxious
thought.
Mr Starr says 1 would be inclined
to "root for the home team." In
this, as in everything else, he has
erred. He states that I got mixed in
my data and cites the Paroda railroad,
the same having been credited
to old territory. I have had no information
as vet, except from Mr
Starr,that this road is wholly within
new territory; and he told then that
the first survey left the road in the
old, but the last survey took it within
the new. He may be right as to this;
yet, granting that it is in the new,
the assessed value of the Paroda is
bat $1,000. He (Starr) says ne believes
there is more than one-fourth
of Mouzon township in new territory.
I don't believe any snch thing, and
I will endeavor to show you why:
The area cut of is one-half mile
wide at Cades and 21 miles at upper
end of township and 8 miles across,
making about 12 square miles. There
are 56 Bquare miles in township. Onefourth
of 5G equals 14. See? Mr
Starr says that part along the river
is not taxed very heavily. What
subterfuges this artful dodger uses!
There is no difference between the
assessment of the lands along the
river anil the rest of the township.
This can be verified by reference to
the auditor's duplicate.
Mr Starr expatiates upon my division
of express, telegraph, Pullman
Palace Car, etc, all of which 1
sent him a correct copy of returns
ro TASK
AUDITOR MONTGOMERY.
IN1SHED THE RECORD?EVERY CRITICISM
IUSTY DATE DISCREDITED?STRIKING
NEW AREA PROERTY INCREASE
for,aud said the "etc" happened to
be the insurance companies. True
the insurance companies were assess
ed at $53,044, the Kingstree Telephone
company at $1,500, nnd
both were included in the "etc." Mr
Starr forgot to mention the last item.
Why did he forget this little item?
Oh! I guess 'twas too small to mention,
notwithstanding the fact that
it is just $500 mors than the assessment
of the Paroda railroad, over
which he raised such a fnror. 1
listed the insurance companies as the
law provides, and as Starr well
know8,at their proper place, which is
the county seat; and as that has not
been moved, will continue to list
them at the same old stand. The
Kingstree Telephone company was
not charged in Kingstree township
from the fact that it was returned,as
the law requires, to the Comptroller
General, and passed upon by State
> -i i?. -m. '- i:i.J iu.i
ooaru,uui il is ortruueu lu turn wwu*
ship. The Lake City Telephone
company was not returned to the
Comptroller General but sent to me
i and listed in Lake City township
and included in the total property of
said township. See auditor's duplicate,
volume 2, page 112, line 5.
His (Starr's) deductions are all fal>
lacious.
"What becomes of Mr Wilson's
i railroad in this division?" I presume
the Salem Railroad company is the
! same. See auditor's duplicate, vol
ume 1, page 100, line 31, and you
will see for yourself. But for the information
of others I'll say that the
Salem Railroad company, like the
i Lake City Telephone company, has
never made - its return through the
regular channel, but made it direct
to this office, and it is listed in Sumter
township, all of which is in the
i new territory, with 50 pef cent penalty
added for uon-return. The penalty
for last year increased the
assessment $4,750, upon which the
company had to pay for nonreturn.
This sum, though credited to new
territory, amounts to four times the
assessed value of the Paroda railroad.
The new tenitory was also credited
with $4,830 that was abated by the
Comptroller General, $4,680 of same
on the Farmers and Merchants
Bank of Lake City, which reduces
Lake City's increase, shown below to
be $12,071, to $7,321. Amount abated
in old territory $106.
Right here 1 would like to ask
Mr Starr to specify when was it that
I ''rushed iuto print," for I am at a
loss to know. 1 have not written one
word either for or against the new
county movement,nor have I thrown
one straw in its progress, unless the
certificates of cold facts, taken from
the records, had their effect I am in
no wise responsible for the publication
of those certificates. Both Mr
Starr and Mr Wolfe called upon me
for data and I had no right to refuse
them. Had Mr Starr published the
data I gave him, it would net have
been necessary for Mr Wolfe to pub-,
lish his, for Starr admits that they
were practically the same. I deny
the charge that I voluntarily gave
out figures from this office, and am
willing to tell Mr Starr so to hie
teeth, in no uncertain words. Yes,
indeed, I will call attention to the
fact that Mr Starr was present when
I signed the official report for the
"New County Commission", and 1
will call attention to the fact that
Mr R B Smith was also present.
I would advise Mr Starr to keep
"mum" on constitutional questions
so far as the new county 13 concerned.
It was not through ignorance
that I sigDed the report, but because
I had no desire to delay the
election. I, too, am "tickled to
death" and don't care a "Billy"
about Starr's analysis of my figures,
for I, too, can sometimes 4 'hit the
grit" along that line. In getting up
the data for that report we had a
map to be governed by and Mr
Starr assisted me in the approximate
divisions of the townships and assented
to same. Mr Starr claims that he
"accepted them without a word."
Now, as a matter of fact I give be
low in 3ubfitaace what he did say - fl
and the same is verified by Mr Smitk. |H
The substance of what ha did say
is as follows: That I could give/.J
more correctly the approximate fig- J9
ures of the division of townships |fl
through which the proposed new jB
county line passes than have any one >B
else in the county, and confessed ;B
satisfaction at the approximate di>
Visions made by me, in every par- M
ticular; and finally added, volnn- Bj
lainy, mat uc ucucv^u tuat tuc ug' ,
urcs would prove as nearly correct ?*
as humanly possible, under the
circumstances, to make them: 1
I hereby certify that the above is 9
the sum and substance of the re- -'3
marks made by Mr Starr at the
meeting, the day Mr Starr and myself
got the certificate from the An- I
ditor relative to property within the ;mI
proposed territory?-for new county. 1
(Signed) RB Smith, I
Chairmauy Board of Commissioners
tor Kntledge Co. l
Can any fair and uabiased mind .
accuse Mr Smith of "rushing into " J
print''because he gave this certifi
cate? Mr Starr, the defamer, ac- S9
cused me of "rushing into print" 1
for no other reason that I am aware
of bat that I gave the editor of The
County Record certain data from ^
the records of auditor's office which 'tfm
he reqnired of me, and which I had
no right, legal or otherwise, to re- ^9
fuse, and which he, in his (Starr's)
defamatory article admitted was VJh
practically the same as I gave him, ,;,j
notwithstanding the fact that several
weeks had elapsed from the time 7 J
I gave him the one until I gave Mr. 'fflB
Wolfe the other, and I had kept no
I copy to be governed by. Doesn't it
prove, conclusively, that I was gov- $ j
erned entirely by the records? Especially
so when I had the propo-.^9
sition up to me of an approximate >9
division of three townships, besides J]
railroad and other properties? Why 31
did be not publish the data with my
certificate a part of same? Echo
answers why!
I have acted throughout this at[fair
strictly from a standpoint of
duty, honest and unbiased with the
lights before me; and with many dif. $]
ficult problems to solve, have "rendered
unto CaeBar the things that Ja
are Caesar's" without fear and prom- ^
ise of reward, Mr Starr's assertion ;Ji
to the contrary notwithstanding. |
Mr Starr claims that Rutledge ;|f
will have by January *1910, an as- JM
sessed valuation of $2,300,000. I
trust this will be true,for there isn't "ja
a town, community or farm in' the
on/1 Sf?fe that. T won Id not 1 .'.-a
UV/IIIll/J uuu VIMW WMIP. ?
like to see prospering. Yet the fig- Jj
ures for the past year are not very ^
enoouraging, the total increase fcr '
1908 being only $65,291 of which
Lake City township showed an increase
of $12,071 and Kingstree . . J
township $45,803 leaving but $7,417 , 'aj
as a total increase for balance of
county. None of the railroads, ex- |j
press, telegraph, Pulman Palace Car r |
and insurance companies are included ' "i
in this, (being listed separately) ex- j
cept the Salem railroad, which is
eluded in Sumter township, and ^
Kingstree Telephone Co, which is
inincluded in Kingstree township.
The assessment for the Northeastern
raiiroad was reduced < \*j
last year for the whole county r.
$66,620 in round numbers. In- ^
creases in other corporations, not fi
included above, will explain arjy ap- i|j
parent discrepancies that may ap- . ^
pear upon total abstracts for the two
years compared.
Mr otarr even nuaus iuw muoiu.
"Don't musical instruments, such
as these, in a county indicate the
wealth and refinement of the same?"
asked Mr Starr. Of course they do,
and I will show where they are |and
what they are assessed at.
In old territory there are 284 instruments,
assessed $15,750. In new
territory there are 232,assessed value
$8,964.Average value for old county,
$55, average value for new, $38, m
round numbers. In Lake Git} towni
ship there ar6 51,value $2,485,and in
Kingstree township 71, value |;6,860.
Now I pass into the next?as to
the $50,299 returned in cash. In the
new territory $600, in the old,
$49,699, $39,625 of this last amount
returned in Kingstree, the
balance in old territory. Of the
$39,625 all is returned by residents
nf Kinoctree excent $88 which is
returned by Judge of Probate. As to
the $1,000 contingent which Mr Starr
insinuates is "gobbled" by the
county officials, practically accusing
such men as the sheriff, clerk of
court, and all the officers, indeed,
as pilferers, the fallacy of his assertion
stands out in bold relief.
My country, oh, my country!
In reply to "M D N" will say
that as I understood, at that early
period, how the division would be
made I gaye them in all fairness
from the figures that I then had before
me, and taken from abstract of
1907. The assessment for N E R R
was reduced $1,802 in 1908 per mile
?the last and official figures were
taken from abstract of 1908.
All of which is respectfully submitted.
J J B Montgomery,
Kingstree, S C August 7.
' ?