The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1874-06-17
"McKellar" and "A Taxpayer

| notice in your last issue 'laDOred
effort by "a Taxpayer" to criticse IN,
communication of May the 9th. Al
though have no hope of satisfying -
Taxpayer" knowing the man so well
still, for the benefit of those who do no
know who "a Taxpayer" is, l will
beg you to allow me space for rejoind
er.
What does "a Taxpayer" mean b,
saying, eff Mcclellan is the conscien
tious, faithful public servant you would
have us believe he is, he would see to il
that neither he nor any Of his board
ever had anything for sale, beyond theil
private services, that the county should
ever want?" Does he mean that Coun.
ty Commissioners ought to be paupers
Or does he mean when County Com
missioner has anything that the Coun-
ty wants, he should give it to the coun-
ty, and not sell it? But perhaps he
means that County Commissioner has
no right to sell anything to the county
that it would be illegal to do so. His
assertion of what is law will hardly be
satisfactory to the thinking public"
We would rather be referred to the
Chapter, Page and Section. IA Tax
Payer" doesn't seem to know that the
law binds County Commissioner to
render not exceeding 100 days of public
service in any one year. AT any rate,
that is all he can claim pay for, even
should he work 800 days. But this will
be further explained in another place.
But the most unwarranted, reckless
chafge that "a Taxpayer" makes, is in
these words, "for however much l be-
lieve, or the public might feel, that he,
(NIckellar) and his erwGitc cOntfcreS
splurged entirely too extensively for
men Of their means and legitimate In
COME" &c. Now, I should like to know
by what "hocus poc,Ls" "a Taxpayer"
ascertained my Legitimate Iincome" in
the first place. And in the second
place, the charge that splurge extern
Sively, is false. There is not q citizen in
the Town of Abbeville that will sustain
the charge. repel it as slander.
Here is a specimen of the spirit of the
piece and the consistency of its author;
In one place he says, "As much as to
say, ali such small sums the county
should allow us to pocket" And in an
other place, he says: I" And in another
place, he says: II am free frotn charg-
ing criminality upon McKellar, or ac-
cusing him OF embezzlement OF public
funds"
The thinking public" is now pre-
pared to examine some of the criticisms
of "a Tax Payer" ! have taken up
his article in rather reverse order, be-
cause I wanted to show the animus and
object of the writer first. He has
shown some shrewdness in the "make
up" of his piece, by the manner in
which he has eudeavored to mask his
batteries.
1.-THE la5ored explanation and vindi-
'cation Of County Commissioner w. p.
Mcclellan" &c! Here is an effort to
deceive. There was never palmer,
simpler, more straightforward state
ment made of case, than my article of
the 9th of May exhibited. No unprej-
:G:5icc5 fair-minded man could call it a
Gabored effort. But "a Tax Payer"
would have his readers believe, in the
'outset, that had desperate case to dc
,fend: and it required time, talent and
'labor to make it appear plausible.
(which you attempted to acHte,vash,"
&c. ! Here is another effort to destroy
the influence of the EDITORS endorse
ment, and prejudice the minds of his
readers. "Who indxccd them to go?
Was it the expressed wish. Of the ,Coun-
ty?" For the information of "a lax
Payer" will state, that there was
much interest felt aud madifesteu here,
about the time referred to, as to what
disposition the Legislature would make
of the County debt. The :credtors of
the County were not few. Numbers
of them repeatedly consulted me upon
and urged me to go to Co
Sambia last Fall. l having failed to get
ali Act passed to pay the Indebtedness
ut the last collection, it was thought ad-
visab!e to secure the passage of an Act
TO levy Tax for that purpose at the
next collection. The Act was passed
after the return Of these Commissioners,
and they claim to have been instrument
tai in securing its passage. A large ma
.jority of the Legislature were men of
their color: and it is fair to presume that
they might have some Influence with
such body.
"Or was it the result of little caucus :
Of that trio, who verify believe that they, i
according to Mcllellar's views, are
amenable to q higher law than the
County Court or its pledge?" This is a
small effort at sarcasm, .unbecoming so
dignified and important parsonage rs
Simon pure "rax Payer" I deny
that hinted, insinuated,. or that it can
be fairly inferred from the general tenor
of my article, that the County Commits |
sioners "are amenable to higher
Court" Idon't think'"A Tax Payer" !
himself knows what he meant by "orl
its pledge" "One spent thifd more
money than the other" A sufficient
answer to this, is, the fact that one went
twice and the other once. Had them
and paid by Mcclellan" This
lis partly false. They were not paid by
Mcclellan, but by the Treasurer.
,".Judge Cooke said distinctly, that
these Commissioners have no right to
audit their own accounts. but Mckeliar
says they have" McKe]lar did not say
any such thing. The law distinctly says,
that the County Commissioners shall
audit all claims against theI county,
with few specified exceptions. phe
following is the specified exception in
this case:
Sec. 81. "Each member of the Board
of County Commissioners shall be al
lowed compensation for his services In
attending the meetings of the Board,
.and necessary time spent in discharging
other duties imposed by law, if any, at
the rate Of $500 per duy and five cents
per mile for necessary trovel: Provided,
That compensation shall not be eallowed
to any member of the Board of County
for exceeding 100 days in any one year.
The account shall be presented to the
County Treasurer who shall audit, and
if correct, pay the same" Page 141,
G. S. old edit n.
I did not say that the County Com
missioners had right to audit such
claims as this section Of the law de-
scribes. My position is, that the dispu-