The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1881-12-15
EDITORIAL CORRESPONDENCE.

lOur editorial letter from Columbis
came to hand too late for publication il
our iast issue, but as the following sec
ton OF it relates TO matter still before
the Legislature, we consider it of suffi.
c:sas interest Tor publication
The Election Bill, as reported by the
Commission, with the exception of the
ices Tor registration, passed the Senate
last week by vote of 20 to 10, but in
the House it has elected considerable
opposition from sources which were ex.
pected to be friendly to it. order tc
prevent the indiscreet talk likely to be
INDUCED in on discussion in the House
conference of the Democrats of the
General Assembly was called and sat for
Two nights, and although its proceedings
nave not been made public, it is very
well known that the resu, vas favorable
to the passage of the Bill. When it was
called up in the House on last Friday,
mir. Murray, in accordance with the
sense OF the members generally, moved
70 strike out the fees for registration,
which was adopted. Then the fight on
the Bill, led by Mr. Parker, of Abbeville,
began. He moved to amend Section 10
oy giving the elector the privilege of reg
lstering in any precinct, provided there
IS no election precinct in his township.
The Section as it stands in the Bill pro-
vides that in the event of there being no
precinct the supervisor shall designate
the precinct at which such elector shall
vote. He said he was afraid it might
prove an engine of fraud in improper
hands.
Mr. Simpson said to adopt that amend
ment would be to strike at the very foun-
dation of the whole scheme of til Bill.
He moved to table the amendment.
Mr.. Murray said the purpose of the
Bill was to prevent the massing of votes
at one precinct, which invariably led to
riots and violence. This provision was
Intended to promote free and fair elec-
ton, becar,e it prevented the massing of
voters in some particular spot and voting
them in squads aud companies at the in.
stance of one man. Mr.. Parker's amend
ment was voted down.
Mr.. Parker moved to ut, out the
section requiring voter to get a new
certificate upon changing his residence
from one part of precinct to another.
Mr. McCrady said that wss one of the
important and, in his opinion, one of the
least Objectionable provisions of the Bill.
In the cities it was absolutely necessary
to ensure the purity of elections. The
State had right to know where every
individual who offered to vote resided i;
the community has right to know that
It's electors have residence.
Mr.. Murray could not see either hard
ship or humiliation in q man reporting
to the supervisor when be changed his
residence. 1t was simply duty. He
moved to table the motion to strike out
the section. On this the yeas and nays
we're taken and resulted 5. yeas to 43
nays. So the section stands.
Mr.. Parker then moved to strike out
the entire chapter, and took the opportu-
nifty to put himself on record as opposing
the whole sheme of registration. 1t was
not, he said, the imperative duty of thu
General Assembly to provide for regis
tration. The gentlemen who made the
state constitution were not novices in the
art of concealing their true purposes.
They had left the registration clause in
such shape, and the Legislature might
or might not enact registration law.
This bill was not intended to provide O
registration from time to time as required
by the Constitution. He objected to it
too, on the ground that in passing it we
would publish to the world that under
the present laws we have never had and
cannot have fair election in this State
This was not 80. He saw more in this
registration law to give rise to fraud then
in the present laws. Another ground
for his opposition is that this shifts the
fraud from the masses to the shoulders
of individuals. If there was to be fraud
it was to be put upon the shoulders of
the supervisors. The registration law
while it held out promises to the eye
broke them TO the hope in every section.
The subject of registration was born in
iniquity and bred into manhood in those
lands of the ''great moral ideas" whence
all modern civilization was supposed to
emanate. He also opposed the Bill be.
cause it created multitude of new Off
GERS and entailed unnecessary expense
upon the State. lie believed too that
the law would result in the resurrection,
reviving and resolidifying the Republi-
can party in South Carolina. He con-
cluded by saying that he only made the
motion in order to place his views before
the House, and only insisted upon a vote
in order to enable those who agreed with
him to place themselves on record.
Mr.. Prince, of Anderson, said he was
opposed to the Bill because, in his opin.
ion, it not only invited the reorganization
of the Republican party, but also inter
ference by the Federal authorities. The
trainers of the Bill seemed to base theiI
calculations on the supposed stupidity OF
the Republican party.
Mr.. Dendy, of Oconee, also desired to