The Union times. [volume] (Union, S.C.) 1894-1918, October 27, 1905, Image 4
THE UNION TIMES
PUBLISHED EVERY FRIDAY
....BY TH6....
UNION TIMES COMPANY
second floor times building
bell phone no. 1.
L. G. YOUNG, - - Manager
Registered at tin- Postoftice in Union
S. C. a-* jiocaml class mail matter.
Sl lJSl Kll'TlOS UATKS *
One year - $l.tO
Six months ... - .50
Three months ... .25
VnVKUTlSKMKMS :
One square, tirst insertion - $1.00
Every subsequent insertion - .50
Contracts for three months or longer
will he made at reduced rates.
Locals inserted sit K 1-3 cents a line.
Rejected manuscript will not he returned.
Obituaries and tributes of
respect will he charged for at half
rates.
UNION, S. C., OCTOBER 27, 11X5.
Vituperation is not refutation, so
Mr. Thomas I>ixon, Jr., was not
vanquished, hut on the contrary
maintained his position with becoming
dignity and came out on
top. If "The Clansman" had been
dramatized and put on the stage
and managed by Robert C. < >gden
assisted by Hooker T. Washington
doubtless the performance in Columbia
would have met with the
approval of some of those who arc
now censuring Dixon and condemning
tie play as a dangerous production,
calculated to do more harm
than good, and imputing to Dixon
selfish and unpatriotic motives.
A STOCK YARD.
Among the many real needs of
the city of Cnion is a stock yard,
in which all cattle, horses, hogs,
sheen and goats should he taken
and the owners notify the dealers
:ind have the dealers go to the yard
and inspect and trade. The practice
of bringing all sorts of stock,
mostly cows and calves, before the
doors of the different markets on
srfii" orf-ike streets,
tfic streets preventing persons from
either walking i?r driving sdong the
streets should be stoppe<l. ;ind the
only way to do so is for the city
council to require the sellers to put
their stock in a yard, away from
the street, then the market men can
go to the yard and select what they
want, smd not have si free public
exhibition of sill sorts of stock on
the streets of the city.
BLACKMAILING.
There is perhaps in the category
<>f crimes no more dangerous character
than the blackmailer. Blackmailing
is the practice of a fiend incarnate
who is more unscrupulous
than si burglar, highway robber or
mid night asssissin, because he
schemes and plans to extort money
from the innocent by threats, clothed
in uncertainty, which involves
scandal, of which most people are
afraid. The victims of the black mailer
are ever on the rack of uneasiness,
mental anguish smd dread
of some personal injury or private
vengeance. .Nothing is too low,
mean or degrading for such a person
to stoop to accomplish the end
in view. The very breath of suspicion
once whispered gathers strength
and is increased in proportion to its
facility for circulation. This is the
method resorted to by the blackmailer,
and often those affected by
it rather meet the demands of the
blackmailer than have the accusation
made by the blackmailer made
known, so that the blackmailer
accomplishes his purpose. The villain,
the dastard, the most dreaded
is the blackmailer, and the law regards
him as the most deadly enemy
to law, order, and decent society,
and the punishment is none too severe,
in fact, it is barely enough.
A recent attenint at. blackmailing
was made iti Union by a very young
person at the business, and we regard
it fortunate that the attempt
was detected, for it may he the
means of correcting the life of one
who doubtless hy success would
have been led to repeat the attempt
and thus bring this young person to
suffer as a criminal the rest of his
life, for frequently an unsuccessful
ctlort forever settles any further attempt
in the same direction.
6
V
BRICE LAW BEFORE JUDGE Di
PRITCHARD.
It would bo a swooping, far-reaching,
unprocodontod decision, a trans- __
spending of power, should Judge
Pritchard of the United States circuit co
court decide as attorney John- G.
Capers says he will in the case now *l(
before that court .in which Judge ^
Pritchard is asked to pass upon the j)(
constitutionality of the Price law, le
in so far as it conilicts with the P
Constitution of the United States, 111
in that it imposes an unequal tax ^
upon the citizens of South Carolina, w
that the Price bill as unconstitu- w
tional, therefore all of the elections
hold under this law arc null and fc
void, thereby re-establishing the
Several disnensaries and at the same ..
. is
time reinstating the dispensers. fc
.Judge l'ritehard can only decide
the question of the constitutionality rt
of the lirice law in so far as it conllicts
with and repugnant to the
Constitution of the United States,
the effect of which will he to relieve jc
the citizens of the imposition of an
unequal tax. Judge l'ritehard will
have absolutely no jurisdiction over
any other feature or provision in I,
the lirice law, and will not jeopard- ti
ize his reputation as a judge by go- fa
ing further than this in his decision
... a)
in this case.
Wind is cheap and if Mr. Capers ti
said what the papers have given
him credit for saying, he is only 01
talking to encourage and make the ^
clients feel good for the time being, ci
because it cannot and will not have c<
the effect to frighten or weaken the hi
other side in the contest.
If Judge l'ritehard decides as Mr. ^
Capers says, then the lawyers who f(
have been engaged in trying to have b
the elections on the dispensary w
question set aside and arc even now u
before the supreme court of this "
State for a decision, have fooled
away their time and caused their oi
clients to spend much useless money, c<
they should have gone before Judge C(
l'ritehard in the first instance and ^
by this time all would doubtless ()j
have been settled, according to lc
y < 'apers now savs. ig^arrnn^i
"-r n ^rm* twjri ~~" *
f DEVELOPING OKLAHOMATjg
C<
In anticipation of tlic National N
Congress admitting into the Union al
as a State the territories of Okla- ^
honia and Indian Territory at the w
next session, the Rock Island Itail- rt
way system is now trying to develop C
Oklahoma by selling town lots in es
the several small towns in the ter- j
ritory. Mr. John F. Bronson, for- ^
merly of Orangeburg, S. C., is an c<
agent for the Rock Island Company, C(
and has been in Union for the past
week selling lots located in the town 11
of Faxon, Oklahoma. The lots are ti
sjld by numbers and at reasonable d
rates; a free trip to tin; town is b
given to every purchaser of a lot or 0
lots, and the purchaser after visiting
and viewing the lots purchased, a
if not fully satisfied with his pur- a
chase will have his money refunded *
to him by the Rock Island Com- "
puny without a word. The town e
of Faxon is only two years old and l
has a population of five hundred. (1
The Rock Island railroad company 0
will complete their railroad to this 1
, H
town hy the last of December. The ^
projected route of this railroad will e
necessarily cross the Indian reserva- c
tion* this land will in December be v
leased l>y the United States govern- ^
ment to settlers for five years with v
the privilege of renewing the lease
for another five years. The Indian I
reservation contains 180,000 acres j
of very fine land. Oklahoma as ^
you know lxirdors on the Red river, \:
just across which river is the State u
of Texas, and those who are famil- o
iar with the lands on Red river in ^
Texas can form some idea of the j
character of the soil in Oklahoma. s
Several citizens of Union have purchased
lots in Faxon and will go c
with Mr. Bronson in December to '
see the lots and the surrounding (
country ana juage 01 me iuture *
proHpcctH of that country as an invostnicnt.
Notice to Creditors.
All parties who are indebted to the s.
Estate of Isaac Dogan, Deceased, are *1
hereby notified to make payment nt c
once to the undersigned; all parties who a
have claims against said Estate arc required
to tile same with the undersigned,
duly proved. S. Mkanh JB*atv, *
id-3t Administrator.
'
spensary Forces
Renew the Figh
(Continued from 1st page.)
Whatever maybe the legal ou
me of these proceedings, it is n
'ing to settle the dispensary qu(
>n. If the law is or is not cons
itional makes no particular diffc
ice in that respect. Wc do n
;lievc it will l>e settled for a
ngth of time until the people e
ress their views upon it in a p
iary election. That is the way
spears to us, and all these let
lanocuvrcs are merely skirmisl
hich may interest and concern
ill be deeided by the ballot.
The petition sets forth in part
tllows:
J. C?. Howell, relator, vs. 1?. ]
incher. W. I). Wilkins and El
Icily, as*the county lx>ard of cont
>r Union county, respondents.
The relator, J. G. Howell woi
jspcctfully show the court:
Section 1. That he is a l-es'uh
ad taxpayer of, and the owner
ath personal and real property
nion county, South Carolina, sv
set to taxation therein, and is t
ead of a family having children
hool age, who are duly at tend i
le public schools of said county.
Sec. 2. That the general asse
I., .! -i-A. ? i ? -
iy 01 huh ktate passed an act <
tied "An act to prohibit the mn
icture of intoxicating liquors us
overage within this State, cxc<
s herein provided, and appro\
ecember 24, 1892, and by
Tins taking effect July 4, 1890.
Sec. 8. That thereafter the gc
ral Assembly of the said Sti
assed an act, appproved March
utitlcd, "An act to provide for t
lection of the State board of cc
cmtrol, and to further regulate t
lie, use, consumption, transpor
on and disposition of intoxicati
nd alcoholic liquors or liquids
;atc and prescribe further penalt
>r the violation of the disp^nsi
iws, and to enforce the same
hieh was a general amendment
ay of substitution to the a be
icntioncd act of 1892, which a
s amended from time to time, v
icorporated into the criminal e<
F 1902 of said State, a print
:>py of the sections of which c<
mtaining the same is heretof*
nncxcd as Exhibit A, section 7.
ic act of 1890, being section o?
said criminal code, and is as i<
i\vs: (Here the dispensary law
arolina is divided into forty-o
mnties, among which are Unic
[arlhoro and Greenwood, Uni
ad Marlboro having been establU
.1 and organized as counties pr
> July 1, 1893, the date up
liich the dispensary law, hercaf
iferrcd to, went into effect, a
reenwood having been formed a
stablished as county in 1897.
Sec. <>. That prior to July
893, "the sale of alcholic liqu<
as prohibited" by law in 1
aunty of Marlboro, while in 1
aunty of Union prior to said di
he sale of alcoholic liquors was p
litted by law.
Sec. 7. That in the said coi
ics of Greenwood and Marlboro
ispensary for the sale of aleohc
iquors has ever been established
xisted under said dispensary 1
I Hive referred to.
Sec. 8. That by virtue of 1
uthority of the last aniendab
ct above quoted, commonly cal
he JJrioc bill, amending section
f the act of 189(5, above referi
o, and found as section 5(53, of 1
riminal code of Soqth Carolii
902, an election was on the ?
lay of , 1905, held in
ounty of Union, whereby was si
uitte.d the question of dispensary
10 dispensary to the qualified 61
ors of said county, and k>i
lection the majority of the 'ball
ast declared against the dispense
thereupon the dispensuricB alrco
stjddished and existing in si
ounty were closed, in accordai
rith the provisions of said Act.
Sec. 0. That the responded
t. M. Finchcr, W. I>. Wilkins a
Cl/io Kelly, prior to the tir
lereinafter mentioned wcro jJ
lected and qualified as the cou:
?oard cf control for Union coun
mder the dispensary law, and hi
ver since hecn and now are, si
ounty board of control, It.
'"incher being chairman, and
). Wilkins being secretary of
iiid iMiiird
Hoc. 10. That your petition
>n or about the 1 ?Stli day of Mar
005, was duly elected for the te
>f one year dispenser for the <
>ensary located within the towr
nion, in said county, taking p
ession of said ollice on or ab
ipril 1 of said year, his term tl
ginning, and received his ec
nission from thu governor of
tate for the said ollice on the 2'
lay of June, the said year, .i
on tinning to exercise the pow
ml duties and to receive the cmo
nents thereof until the? day of
906.
Sectiou U. That the respoi
its est> ^
in- gsa
ate gO
he H 'n con
m- arSS
he fcO
ta- gfiS
ng ?3*
in Hk9|
ies KS
iry Kg]
by |g
>ve ?S -?
et, g?2
;ae wTaJ
11 MUTUAL
of
if |g R. P.
pfSK
is gKgL
in,
on cuts, as such county board of conih
trol, acting solely under what they
ior considered to be their duty, and
on who as the result of said election,
ter under and by virtue of the said
nd Br ice bill, above referred to, and
nd by direction thereof, and without
any pretense of any charge of mis1,
conduct on the part of relator, did,
ors on the ? day of ? 190"), close the
;he said dispensary, located in the town
he of Union, dispossessed the relator
ate of his said oflice and the cmoluer
mcnts of the same, against his protest,
and notwithstanding the fact
in- that he was then ready and desirous
no of continuing possession of said
>lic office and performing the duties
or thereof, and he is now desirous and
aw willing so to do. That the salary
and emoluments of said oflice were
the fixed at eighty dollars ($80) per
jry month.
led ^ce: 12. That the relator rc7,
spectfully alleges and suggests to
:ed this honorable court that the said
he act of 1904, known as the Briee
la, bill, is unconstitutional, null and
? yoid, contravening article XIV,
the section 1, of the amendments to the
il>- constitution of the United States:
or First, In that it deprives the taxee
payers of Union county of their
i.ch property without due process of law.
ots (a.) Because the said act is not
ry, a valid law of the state, inasmuch
,dy as it levies a tax on all of the taxa.
, 11. 1. ?
vul ?ie property in certain counties lor
ice fhe enforcement of ft general state
law, and exempts from said levy
,ts, other counties placed in the same
,nd circumstances and under like conne8
ditions as to the dispensary law and
uly the enforcement tharcof. Thus*"
nty violating article X, section 1, of the
ty, constitution of the state of South
[ivc Carolina, wherein is proved "the
ich general assembly shall provide by
M. haw for a uniform and equal rate of
W. taxation."
the (b.) Because the said act is not
a valid law of the said state for the
ier, reason that it provides that any
ch, county voting out a dispensary shall
rin not thereafter receive any portion
lis- of the surplus funds that may rei
of main of the dispensary school funds,
k?s- after the deficiencies in the various
out county school funds have been made
len up, as provided by law, "but leavnii
ing the said surplus funds to be
the distributed among the counties re7th
j taining the dispensary, Marlboro
tnd | and Greenwood counties, in which
ers no dispensary has ever been estab lu
lished, which is in conflict with art.
?,1 xi, sec. 12, of the constitution of
South Carolina, which provides,
nd-1 inter alia, that such surplus shall
very Pei
:ason we can supply
with a shoe for e
e, no matter what
may bev, this is the
ply it. Best and ch
>ur shoes put your
nfortable circumsta
DRY GOO
HARRY, - - - MANAGI
mngKnvBSWHBnmamcBiMWMaiiM]
mj&j&o&j&jarjsrjafj&j
? This is the i
? COL
^ HOT E
? H E A T
5 They keep your
2 with a minimui
^ of coal. They s
^ your money an<
^ Investigate be1
6
? OETZEL HAR
be devoted to public school purposes, v
and "proportioned as the general w
assembly may determine." There p
being now in the hands of the state w
a large amount of such said surplus a:
funds, and which was there before h
voting out of the said dispensaries w
in said county, and in the surplus ?
funds the citizens and taxpayers of Sf
said county had a vested interest c<
and property right before the at- 01
.tempt wus made under the guise of tl
law to deprive them of the name. ai
2d. In that it denies to all per- c<
sons of Union county and of all tl
other counties that have or may ii
hereafter vote out the said dispen- ti
sary, thereunder the equal protec- ir
tion of the law: ti
(a.) Because of one mill upon
every dollar of the value of the tl
taxable property in said county, p
and in every other county voting ai
out the dispensaries for the enforce- tl
mcnt of the general state dispensary sc
law, which prohibits the sale in any ol
part of the state, of alcoholic liquors, hi
except in dispensaries, the state 1c
levies a special and continuous tax ft
on all property for defraying the c<
expenses of the enforcement of'the ai
dispensary in said county and pro- tecting
the persons therein from \
nsni *'
son! 1
?
ISS3 /
y the m
:very m
I o
your ^
store ?1
leap- B|
feet I
nces. |j
Hi ~
v H^jr
DS CO. I
ER. ||S
Reason for J
E'S 5
5 LAST |
" E R S |
house warm J
ti consumption ? ^
ave your coal, ^
i your temper, %
rore you buy. w
%
!DWARE CO. |
9r*r*r*r*r*r*ram
iolations of said dispensary law,
hcreas, under and by the general
rovisions of said law, the persons
ithin the counties of Greenwood
nd Marlboro, where no dispensaries
ave ever been established, and
here no alcoholic liquors are legally
>ld, are afforded the protection of
lid dispensary law, together wjM}
)unties having dispensaries, witnat
any special levy of taxes for
ic enforcement of the same, nor
re they burdened with any other
mditions for the enforcement of
ic same; thus denying to persons
1 Union county the equal protocol!
of the law afforded the persons
1 Marlboro and Greenwood counes,
although situated alike,
(c.) Because ?ni?l *??
_ wvv JJIUVIUUB
lftt "Any county voting out a disensary
shall not thereafter receive
ay portion of the surplus funds
lat may remain of the dispensary
:hool funds, after fho deficiences J
E the various county school funds
ave been made up, as provided by
iw, "But leaving the said surplus
mds to l>c distributed among the
mnties retaining the dispensary,
ad Marlboro and Greenwood couni
(Continued on 5th page.)