The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1876-01-27
Veto Of the Blackville.B .Barnwell Bill.
Hon. r. B. Elliott, Speaker House Of Rep
resentotipes: IL. ..L.l.l.-! .iA--..

- TESEntuI1USSs ii ~ t.'f fs' f.ItI' ''i
SIR return herewith, without ap-
proval, to the House of Representatives,
in which it originated, an act entitled
can act to locate and establish the coun-
ty seat of 'Barnwell County at Black
Vile" 49, 3.
This act is the latest of a long series of
proceedings in the General Assembly, as
we'll as in the courts Of the State, having
for their object the transfer of the county
seat OF Barnwell County from the Village
ofBarnwell to the Village of Blackville.
These efforts began in the session Of the
General Assembly for 1S6S-69, and it
may be said that they have been contin-
ued without interruption to the present
time. -. ~ H.
At the last session of the General AS
sembly an act was passed directing an
election to be held by the people of Barn.
we'll County, for the purpose of determin-
ing the location of the county seat. The
election was held on the 18th day of
May, 1875. The ballot boxes, with the
other evidences of this election, were de-
posted in the Office of the clerk of the
court at Barnwell Village, but before the
canvass of the election was made by the
commissioners of election, the ballot
boxes were taken from their place of de-
posit, and the ballots and other evidences
Of the election were destroyed, T. The
commissioners of the election being de-
priyed of the means of canvassing or de-
claring the election, declined to take any
further action as a board, and at sub
sequent period the board of State. can
vassers, acting upon certain fragmentary
evidence in the form of sfidaYits of some
of the managers of the election, declared
that majority of the votes at said cleo
ton had been cast in favor of the Village
of Blackville as the county seat. Thore-
upon some of the county officers removed
their Office from Barnwell to Blackville,
and writ of mandamus to compel their
return to Barnwell Village was asked for
before Hon. j. J. Maher,. the judge of
that circuit. Judge Maher granted the
writ, holding in substance that the action
of the board of State canvassers was un-
authorized and void, and could give no.
validity to the election. An appeal was
thereupon taken by the defeated party to
the Supreme Court of the State. No
Judgment in this case has yet been filed
in that court, though the, furtherants of.
both sides of the controversy have ex-
pressed to me their conviction that the
decision must be dismissal of the ap.
peal. thus sustaining the decision of
Judge Maher. 49,. .=.i:.'fs. .t.'' ..
The next step has, however, been the
passage of the act which now return.
The case thus presented has many as.
poets inviting attention, but the most
Conspicuous feature which it presents is
the abandonment of the courts where it
had been carried on, and the effort to at-
complish by summary legislation the re-
suit which had, been defeated by che
courts. Three points seem apparent !:
First, that it was one year ago regarded
by the present defeated party to this con-
troversy proper and necessary to submit
the controversy to che decision of the
people of the county at popular e.ec-
ton. Second, that new, not satisfied with
the results of the election and the deciss-
ion of the ablest courts of this State, it is
regarded as necessary to success by the
same party to abandon the election, dis.
regard the decisions of the courts, and
summarily take by legislation what
neither the election nor the courts nor
the existing laws have given them
Third, that the present defeated party
have full remedy for any wrongs suf-
fered by them under the existing laws
and in the courts.
I am unable to discover how justice or
equity or fair dealing can be held to sup
port The passage of the present act. lfa
popular election one year ago was the
fair mode of controversy, it is the fair
mode now. While / should regret the
necessity of any further act of legislation
touching this question, could certainly
give my consent to an act ordering an
other election far more readily than to
any other mode of settling the controver-
sy. If the party whose interests this act
promoted have been robbed of their
rights under the last election, as Is al
legged, is that valid reason why the
General Assembly should undertake to
settle the question by summary legisla-
ton? Is this the only election at which
wrongs have been done? If such view
is to prevail, then all local elections
might by the same test be transferred to
the General Assembly. If one party 10
any s municipal election should feel itself
aggrieved at the result, it might ask the
General Assembly to intervene and de-
clare one party elected. All such legis-
latiye action is almost universally consid-
cred unwise, partisan and exceedingly
dangerous as precedent. 1t really
strikes a blow at the very princi-
plies Of popular elections and the sover-
eighty of the people, in their primary
capacity, to settle their ownlocal contro-
versi'ss. A few years ago a style of leg.
islation was in vogue which consisted in
transferring the powers Of local officers
to be elected by the people to the central
control of the Legislature. I only state
what is the verdict Of nearly all men
now, that such Legislation is pernicious