The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1868-08-12
UNION c. u, S. C.. July %

UNION c. H., s. C.. July %
Gen. r. K. Scott, Assistant Commissioner,
Columbia, S. C.
DEAR SIR Your extraordinary COM
munication, of July 2lst, WAS handed to
me this afternoon, by an unknown negro.
In it you say that you have been In
! formed, ':that certain citizens of your
(my) County, are ejecting laborers from
their plantations, with loss of wages and
their crops To this I have no reply to
make, except that | have not heard OF
any such cases, and am persuaded that
you have boon misinformed.
You then go on to say, The principal
cause appears to be the refusal of these
colored men to join Democratic Clubs. "
This language implies an opinion derived
from an investigation. You do not say
that such has been your information; nor
that such has been the charge preferred,
but that it appears to be SO. Still lower
down, your language duplicates myself
and the landlords Of Union, in this out
rage" as you politely term it. There
fore, for myself and said landlords, in
dignantly repol the accusation.
After having expressed your decided
conviction by the word appears, You con.
cIude your letter as follows: 81 will send
an officer to investigate these cases in a
few days" Putting the two sentences
together, the language seems to admit Of
but one Interpretation and that is-that
you have formed an opinion, without
having had an investigation; and your
opinion thus formed, does great injustice
to the citizens of this District, and reflects
with great severity upon my official con-
duet.
AS civil officer, my contact and inter-
course with whites and blacks are of fro-
quent occurrence; and, while the people
of rcspcctability and property, following
the example of the radicals in power,
arc fast resolving to prefer political friends
to political enemies, | have yet to hear of
any attempt to violate existing contracts
because of political action. Negroes, gen.
orally do not Join Democratic Clubs; and
little efforts is mado by the whites to in
duce them to do so. Tho few who have
Joined, have been so much abused and
threatened by others of their own race,
| well armed with United States muskots
and other weapons, that the temptation to
roman away is very great. All this will
be- established to the satisfaction of the
officer, whom you purpose to send hither
to investigate these matters.
And now for simple statement. An
aged gentleman of great respectability
applied to me, under legal advice, for pro-
ceedng against tuo of his laborers, to
compel thom to leave his plantation. Hc
charged that they had repeatedly broken
their contract, and that he could stand it
no longer. The particulars Of the breach,
he stated TO DO, frequent abandonment
| of their work, against his express orders,
to attend drills and league meetings, once
or twice every week, during work hours.
He asked my opinion about the matter,
and refused to give it in advance of tho
trial. Flo applied to INC for the necessary
notice, prescribed in the "Act to amend
tho law in relation to tenacies," 13 Stat:
4lG,7 "whose duty" it became to issue it.
This act has been extended in its terms
by General Candy, and thus specially ap-
| proved of by him. Tho notice was issued
and served personally, July is, 1865. The
negroes sent word back, "1hat they would
90 TO Columbia, to see about it" They
went, or sent, presume, and have re-
ceived countonance and support from tho
Governor of the State, upon thoir &C parte
statements.
Now, ] conjecture that this case is the
solo foundation Of tho charge you prefer
against the landlords of Union District.
I am satisfied that you could have heard
of no other instance. An eioctment, for
the cause stated in your letter, could not
have taken place in this District, without
something being said about it, without its
reaching my cars.
Did not these freedmen, through their
attorney-for, if have been correctly in
formed, they remained at home and sent
one of their race from an adjoining plan
tstion-show the copy of thenotice served
upon them? If they did, you must have
seen that they wcro to show cause before
me, in ten days from the personal service
thereof, why IL warrant of ejcctment
should not be issued against them il you
did not then SEQ it, you must, or should
have known, thnt such was the require
mcnts Of the Act. Tho Information &c
ceived by you, must havo convinced you
that the trial had not yet takon place. In
fact. threats are always Intended rs pre-
vcntives; and, therefore, your threats
show that you were aware that the trial
was IN ffWO.
1t was under these circumstances that
your lcLtcr was writton, in which you say
that call such acts Of outrage will be care