Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1881-08-04

no law SnOulQ De eLldCItu GldI Woulu oPPie'"
him. honor man who by his own exertlons
conuuers the adversties of life and rejoice in
his prosperity would not favor any meass
ure that would retard the mercantile business
for we owe no little to the enterprising mer-
chants of South Carolina.
But will repeal of the lien law detrlment
any of the classes referred to The man VINO
owns no land could become tenant as easily
as now, the only difference being thathe would
look to the land owner for advances instead or
the merchant. He would secure just asfavor-
able terms from the proprietor of the land,
and whatever profits he earned for the land
owner would go to the improvement OF the
land, and he is certainly interested in that
and would be benefited by it. The man who
has no means for running farm would, it
pears to me- be more likely to prosper, II he
first accumulated sufficient to stock a farm by
working for wages, which would be sure in.
come.
The prosperity Of the merchants depends en-
tirely upon the permanent success OF the agrl-
culturists. A repeal of the lien law might
reduce their profits for while, but it would
ultimately be returned by the improved finan-
cial condition of the farmer. The narnber OF
persons to whom advances would be made
might be less, but the amount would not be
materially reduced, because the advances would
be larger to those who would be more able to
pay. The great difference would be that the
land owner and the laborer in working togeth-
er. could realize better returns for their work,
would have more money to pay loans with,
would constantly improve the land, and would
gradually work out Of debt.
Ihave thrown out these crude thoughts to
provoke discussion, believing that out OF 1t
much good will come. Let us give the matter
careful attention, and discover if possible the
cause of our troubles. There must be some
thing radically wrong with us, if we are grow
ing poorer every year, living as we do in land
that should be flowing with milk and honey.
If it is in our system Of agriculture, let US i'm
prove it if we lack laborers let us bring in i'm
migrants if it is the lien law, let it be stricken
from the statute book of the State; and if it
is the homestead law, let it be abolished.
Dr. j. B. Jennings, of Marlboro, after
hearing the remarks of Col. Butler, introduced
the following resolution
Resolued, That it is the deliberate Judgment OF
this body that in the interest of the agricutursts
of our State, the lien law ought to be speedily,
finally and forever abolished.
The Rev. David Butler, of Georgia, favored
the resolution. He had never himself been
personally injured by the use of the lien law,
because he had never had lien on his crop
in his life, but those men that did have them
on their crops, in his opinion, were afflicted
with q leprosy more fearful than the leprosy
of Egypt, and unless the farmers of the South
soon succeeded in throwing off this terrible
| incubus they would shortly he driven out OF
| the society of successful men. 1t had been
said that the sun set upon Georgia every night
| finding her poorer than in the morning. he
had been shocked at this declaration at first,
but he had come to the conclusion that 1t was
melancholy truth. No man. could live and
pay so per cent. for the use Of themoney neces-
sary to carry on his farm. Each year the far
mer found himself poorer than the year before:
He thought all the trouble could be traced
directly to the lien law. A man in Georgia
the other day had startled his neighbors by
telling them that he was one year ahead when
all OF them had gone behind. When asked
to explain, he said, "Well I am eating this
year what / ought to eat next year." There
was but one remedy, he thought, and that was
to raise more provisions and less cotton, ana
for the first year to come down to hard pan
and live on ash cake and potatoes. Once
ahead he could keep ahead.
| Gen. A. G. Darlington said that while he
might admit the sorry condition OF me 1ai-
mers he could not see the force OF his friends
arguments upon the lien law. The law was
not compulsory. No man was compelled to
give lien if he didn't want to. If the gentle
man would tell the farmers how, with nothing
| but their land they could carry on their farm
ing without giving a lien, he would settle the
whole problem. :,
Mr.. Livingston, of Georgia, said his old
friend had forgotten one Of the most striking
lines in the Lords Prayer LEAD us not IN
to temptation" Georgia had gone through
the trouble of the lien law. Since it's abolition
there was much to be thankful for. The far
mers got all the money they wanted on reason
able terms The goods, instead Of going to
the tenants, mostly ignorant and extrayagant,
now 20 through the hands of the landowners,
whose interest is far closer to the tenant than
the merchant. The merchants would not be
hurt. They would be benefited, as had been
proved by practical experience in Georgia.
Mr.. T. Il. RUSSELL of Anderson, said that
the merchants in his section were opposed
to the law, and said they would give credit
to no man whom they had to take lien from.
| He favored the abolition Of the law.
! Mr. Edwards, Of Darlington, favored the
repeal of the lien law 1t was crushing out the
life of the agricultural people.
COL Harry Hammond said the lien law was
not a negative thing. It encouraged the inn
porters Of bacon and corn to do business in
this country. The farmer gave a lien on his
crop, taking crops raised in the West. Would
it not he better to leave the farms altogether
The abolition of the lien law, he thought, was
the entering wedge which would eventually
break mp the evils of monopolies and extor-
tion. as
Gen. Darlington said if the lien law was
abolished, one thousand ploughs would be stop
ped in Greenville county alone.
Col. Aiken favored the abolition of the law.
Gen. Darlington said all this talk about the
oppression of the capitalist was clap-trap and
demagoguism. The abolition of the law was
against the interest Of the poor man.
Mr. Humbert, of Laurens, held that as long
as the lien law was in existence, the farmers
would never become self-supporting, and it
was poor policy to tell the farmer to work and
starve under it.
Col. Rucker, of Anderson said that while
the lien law was not compulsory, it acted as
an evil by the temptation it offered OF making
the planter live extravagantly and kept him
forever in debt. The lien law tempted large
numbers of ignorant men, who were not capa.
BILE of running farms, to become tenants, and
instead of becoming well paid labOrers, they
eventually degenerated into poorly paid and
incOmpetent farmers. Lessen the number OF
incompetent tenants and the labor OF the coun-
try would be improved and the general agrlcul-
ture of the State would be elevated to high
er plane.
Mr.. Donaldson said that he would venture
to say that if there was one question upon
which the land owners of Greenville county
was more unanimous than another, it was upon
the abolition Of the lien law. What the people
wanted was lesson in self-denial.
The resolution was then adopted amid great
applause. ...
THE REVIVAL OF HOOPS.
Foreign papers report that in opposition to
tLo l;n,r Lamb ek;rt of tho aoathete the Paris.