The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1881-07-28
OVERLY RIGHTEOUS.

OVERLY RIGHTEOUS.
Our interesting contemporary, the Alb
hevillc lE';nni is never happy unless il
can be continually uncarhing some
great swindlc which nowhere exists, ex-
cept in its own fertile and excessively
developed Imagination Last week it
has seen fit to deliver lomily on horse.
racing, and take il rs 4 convenient line
of approach for an assault upon the State
Fair Association, and particularly upon
the assistance which has been given to it
By the State. If our contemporary had
informed itself of the matter upon which
il undertook to cnightcn its readers, the
article in question would never have
been written, ior we arc sure that the
Jk,iium never Intentionally misrcprc.
scnts the facts Of anything concerning
which it peaks, and the article which
we publish elsewhere is full Of mis-
takes.
To begin with, the Medium is evident
ly ignorant Of the charter under which
the State Fair Association is organized.
1t is o joint stock association, but not one
for private gain. It's object is tho hold
ing of nh annual exhibition of the i'm
dustry and progress Of the State. aud it's
earnings cannot be divided, as the Ne
dunn states, among its IL bers They
must be spent in the interrsl and Tor the
benefit Of the exhibitions. The Medium
need not, therefore, concern itself, for if
tho earnings should reach one million
dollars year, neither B. i. Crayton nor
any other member could pocket the
money. 1t would have to 60 to the ini-
proycmcnt Of The exhibition. There is
no such thing rs dividends about it.
This, however, is not the only error Of
the article. The Society does not have
any racing, and pays mono of the prcmi-
ulns of the races. That is under the
management Of separate club. which
merely arranges to have The races at the
time Of the Fair, upon land owned by
them and adjoining the Fair Grounds.
So that no taxpayer, even if he be AS
pious rs the .Nedium, need feel any dread
that his money goes to sustain horse
racing. Those who do not wish TO see
the races need not do so, and those who
do wish to see them have to pay the club
who own the grounds and manage the
races for the privilege. 1t is entirely an
independent show, whose propriety,
though questioned by the Christian
world, cannot be controlled by them in n
free country, where people have the right
to go to races if they wish. That is
matter of morals, which must be regu-
lated by the conscience, and as long as
kept separate from the State Fair should
not be lugged into discussions concerning
it. This is our understanding of these
subjects, and if the Medium will look
into them we apprehcnd it will ascertain
them to be true.
Again, the Medium claims that it is
contrary to the principles of Jeilersonian
Democracy for State to mid any asso.
citation with money. The principles of
IelIersonian Democracy are published
elsewhere, and show that the Medium
docs not understand them They are
written entirely with reference to the
powers of the Federal Government, on
the theory that the States are the SOW
ereigns, and reserve to themselves nll of
the powers not expressly given to the
Federal Government in the Constitution.
The very clause quoted by the Medium
to prove its assertion proves our position,
if it had been quoted in full instead of
taking only part of it. The whole Sec
ton is as follows:
The money collected by taxation to be
expended only on the objects specified In
the Constitution. 1t may not bo distrib-
uted to favOrites in the form of bounties
or OF subsidies, nor given away i'm chari-
". He urged the State Of Virginia to be
liberal toward tho San Domingo suffer.
ers, but he denied the right OF Congress
TO grant them doi.ar.
He denied the right of Congress to
dispense charities, but claimed it for the
States, and urged the State of Virginia
to exercise the right by giving liberal
aid to the San Domingo sufferers. Thus
it is clearly shown that the donation of
money by State to keep M S..a.s
Fair is not contrary to the doctrines of
the JeHersonian Democracy, for if the
State has the right to give TO one set OF
objects it has the right 10 give to an
other. The question must. therefore, de-
pend upon the merits Of each particular
case, and cannot, under any theory OF
our Constitution, be made one OF inya.
Fiable application, as the Medium sug
gests, by refusing all applications iol