The Lancaster ledger. [volume] (Lancaster, S.C.) 1852-1905, 1860-09-19
For the Lancaster Ledger.

For the Lancaster Ledger.
notice in The last issue of the Ledger
the "Opinion Of tho Spartanburg Bar, as TO
the proper construction of an act relating
to Itinerant Statesmen" As the acts Of our
Legislature are proper subjects of discus.
sion aud this particular net. has received
| different constructions, and only one side
| of the question has been heard through the
columns of the Ledger, and in view Of the
fact that our candidates have expressed diff.
ferent opinions in regard To the proper con
struction Of this act, | would ask ST."
space in the Ledger to make few re 81" ms
in relation to the effect Of this - ne
effect has been to raise the pr' VI "ou III
the Districts bordering on wv" '"'o''n''
and to place our citizens false position
in regard to the citiz's ana produce OF
sister State, at tie ""en VIC s'"u'u cu''
,ivo,e the fr;er ship of all the Southern
Stot.s in o..r to present united resis.
,,,oo - q. enemies of our institutions
,., effect Of this act is TO let loose
ho.. of Northern abolitionrsts disguised
pedlars) in our midst by reducing the
license to thirty dollars for State License
to peddIc dry goods, jewelry, watches, &c,
for one year, thereby creating lucrative
business for the emssares of abolition So
cicties 20 pursue, while engaged in their
hendish occupation of appealing to the bn.
sst passions OF our servilc population to in
cite them 10 acts of incendiursm, murder
and other crimes too diabolicu to mention.
Why was the license Ga few years ago) for
peddling raised TO sum amounting TO pro.
hibition? Was it not because of large
number of negroes being stolen from the
citizens of this state aud conveyed 10 North
ern states by pediars Why is the license
fifty dollars for District and only thirty
dollars for the State! Why is the discus.
sion of the effects of this act frownrd down?
Why is the opinion of fifteen Lawyers of
the Spartanburg Bar in relation to this act
published at this time! and who pays them
for their opinions! q believe it is customa
ry for them to charge for their legal opin.
ions) is it those interested in hayiLg their
construction in favor of the act Their
construction does not meet the objections
to the act, the greatest evil TO be npprchen'
ded is one entirely ignored in their con
struction ! viz: the reduction of the Iii.
cense for peddiing to the small sum Of
thirty dollars. The only opinion expressed
by them is in regard TO citizens of adjoining
States, whether they are required to obtain
a license before they can sell their produce
in our State and 10 answer to this they
say, after careful examination of the
Act, we are clearly of opinion that it can.
not be held to be applicable TO any cl ass of
traders other than the itincrant auctioneers
and travelling agents, and those who sell by
the exhibition of samples from the mercan.
tile establishments, having no permanent
and established place of business or stock
of goods within the State out Of which the
tax may be levied.
Why not answer the question fairly and
squarly, either that the license is regarded
or it is not f; or is this ambiguous answer
intended 10 bear different constructions in
order that these Lawyers may change their
opinions, when prudence or interest NAV
dictate. Has not the legal construction OF
this act been determined by the proper au.
thorlties granting licenses TO the class of
traders engaged in selling the produce Of a
sister State ? These Lawyers say. "The
intention Of the Act was TO put check
upon the horde of transient persons from
Northern cities who prowled through the
country on pretexts of business" Is there
any discrimination in the Act between per.
sons Of Northern and persons of Southern
cities Would n reduction of the license
from n large to q small amount be likely
TO check the hordes of transient persons
from Northern cities or, would it be most
likely to bring Such population in our
midst. These are questions to be decided
before determining the intentions of the
Act, but il is not constructions or intentions
that may be believed or advocated by inter
ested parties ii is the effec: of the Law on
the interest of the citizens when interrupt
ed and executed by the proper authorities
OF the State that most concerns u.s. When.
ever the principle is established that the
Legislator is not responsible 10 his consLit-
uents for his legislative acts, then farewell
to the elective franchise then our dearest
rights will be mockery aud our boasted