The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1874-08-29
S. G.
Saturday EoFnins. august %. 1874. 1874
1anglihS ana Inemciency Not Qualt-
Acatlons for High Omco.

The reform candidate for Governor
Aas been abundansly discussed as d
public sasn in South Carolina. A,
the very time the frauds OF the Land
Eommission- -ware ,perpetrated BY. the
LAND aGommissiQpe1, Leslie. they, we're
.as sdIly exbcssd tn' tks Ho,dasr7a Gua,rd.
sas ana FHGN1x ss II was possible to
do in d5aiing with 'meni who had con.
saurnate art and. the most ovnrpower.
Jog motives to cover up their tracks.
these rascalities were, at the time,
charged home upon his principals. the
advisory Board, without whose COZ
.1,arrence he could not have perpe-
-trGted them. Cardozo withdrew from
the Board; Governor Scott denounced
dts action TO be OF fraudulent oharao-
Ter. carried on in spite of his opposi.
.Aon. and consulted the legal firm of
Pope & Haskell M to whether lie could
make the members who had entered
into individually liable for the frauds
.'orTet; but Mr.. Chamberlain expressed
mo ecrupies, as he felt none. He stuck
ITO the Board. It leant upon him with
UerAdeoee as the law officer OF the
State. and went ahead, with it's Com
:, missioner, in the purchase of worth.
,:lees LANDS. the Schey and others. at
enornaus prices. These transactions
~ere slsaraefully fraudulent and revolt
ing, and worked double iniury-6rst
to the colored purchasers, and next to
Nthe State and people, whose money
russ thus 'purloined from them. In
that day, after severe oastigation, Mr..
chamberlain appeared in print with
defiance similar to the one put forth
,the other day, resting upon denials
'nand a. claim'for honesty OF purpose and
established good character. In any
naae,0f which lie had charge in the
confts, Mr.. Chamberlain would merci-
iessly and effectively riddle such evil
denee as he offers in his own behalf.
Neither he nor the writer's in the
Union Herald have touched with any
lfenee or effect the real questions in
Issue, nor have they removed any Of
the objections which have been brought
forward to him as suitable man FOR
Governor. The difficulties in the way
OF his representing real reform in the
State administration are simply insu-
I perable, and the arguments, facts and
reasonings which show this are un.
-answerable. The attempt has really
mot been made. the so-oalled replies to
:, the PHOENIX discussion in June and
July. and the Neus aud Courier discus
sionin August, all turning upon points
Shat. are only slightly applicable to the
roase. They are all cast in one mould
Of denial OF completely. OF assevera-
tions of good intentions, of parade Of
honest character, and of demand that
= he shall be considered innocent Of
grows immoralities in Office. The posi-
Aon thus taken by himself and advo.
Gates, II demonstrated to be absolutely
impregnable, would scarcely mend the
lmatter for him. He can only be
proved to have clean hands at the
expense Of his character for compe-
tteney and for the proper degree OF
>eoasoience and sense OF responsibility
suhich We look for in a public officer.
Assume that he is innocent OF some
things, and he is proved thereby to be
gnilty Of others. He was member OF
che Advisory Board of the Land Com.
asaission. he had certain responsible
duties in connection with it. He was
mot q mere figure head. Did he look
-narefully to the interests OF the people
in the purchases? When Leslie com.
1aeneed and continued to steal, did he
oppose him or expose him? When the
rogueries had been perpetrated, did
he, as Attorney. General, prosecute
aud convict him and have hin,
ponished? He was member OF the
Financial Board and it's legal adviser
In engaging the financial services OF
Rimpton for the State, did he do the
gerry best he could for it? Did he try
TO prevent the. rninous hypothecation
of it's bonds to raise money to be