The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1884-01-10

disappointment about the makeup OF
the Committees, the general sentiment is
that Mr. Carlisle has formed the COM
mittees impartially, and with view 10
efficient action upon the various subjects
COMMITTED to their charge.
80. Director Murray.
We are really pleased to see so much
good evidence that Director Murray, OF
the Columbia and Greenville Railroad is
not depraved or hardened man, and Re.
tains the sensitiyeness regarding his per.
sonsl and official character which char
acterizes every gentleman. The evidence
is furnished by the devotion Of all the
editorial space of the last issue of the
Anderson iNTELL1aENcER to the defence
of Director Murray, the editor of that
excellent newspaper, against the several
public criticisms of his action that have
appeared. The defences are also conclu.
sive evidence of the ability of the writer,
for every impartial reader of them will
coincide in the verdict that they mako
the best possible showing for very bad
case.
AS regards the NeDs, Director Murray
is decidedly in error. It is always the
natural inclination of a public man
whose action is attacked to attribute the
attack to some unworthy motive and per-
| suade himself that it is not caused by his
fault but by the malice or ayarice of the
person making it. Director Murray has
obeyed this impulse of human nature,
and is probably sincere in his belief that
he has acted the part of an upright and
wise statesman and that the adverse crit
icisms are the results of envy, hatred,
malice and all uncharitableness.
The truth is the Nc,os has only good
will for Mr.. E. B. Murray. Not very
long ago this newspaper led an energetic
and vigorous effort to make him Speaker
of the House of Representatives. But
ne have very decided dislike to the
proceedings of Editor Murray of the IN
TELLIaENCER and Representative Murray
of the County of Anderson, and to the
identity of Director Murray, of the
Greenville and Columbia Railroad, with
those two officials. In seeking a cause
for the malice ascribed to us aud for our
editorial course Editor Murray reaches a
conclusion which is very ridiculous. We
are described as hating him because he
declined to accept our advice, and as
desiring to maintain the power OF the
Commission because of the advertising it
would do. The only way to rebut the
first charge is to introduce evidence that
the editor of this newspaper is still al
lowed to go at large and to vote, having
not yet reached stage of idiocy demand
ing official notice and subjecting him to
challenge at the polls. The second
charge il eliminated from tho discussion
by the fact that if there is any more ad.
yertising to be done We do not know it,
and that if the new railroad Ian affects
the advertising matter one way or the
other we are profoundly ignorant of it.
All of this is aside from the real point
of the controversy, however. Mr.. Muir.
ray may squirm and throw mud as much
IS he likes, and may provo any amount
OF corruption and malice against the
News and everybody else who criticizes
him. He is in the dock and his incoher.
ent and foolish denunciations of the pros.
ecutors have no sting or force and will
not affect the verdict. Neither will his
declarations that others are as guilty as
he or that he has done wrong and fool.
ish thing by the advice of the business
men of Anderson relieve him. AS an
editor and representative of the people
he is supposed to have certain amount
of brains and independence. He is not
supposed to be the exclusive property
and special puppet of the merchants of
Anderson or anybody else.
If Editor Murray and Representative
Murray had within year reversed his
position on a very important public
question to which he had presumably
devoted much thought, ne would have
been justified in charging that his mind
is weak and vacillating and that he had
aided in committing what he now regards
as a crime against property and an
egregious folly, because he knew no bet
ter. If the creation of 1e Railroad
Commission and the bestoral of arbitra.
~ powers on it was as great and disas.
trous blunder as Mr.. Murray declares
it in his recent speeches to have been,
no man who voted for it is worthy of
public confidence if the railroads are
as dangerous and tyrannical and the
Commission is as much needed as was
declared in Mr.. Murray's several speech
es in December 1882, no man who voted
to interfere with the Commission or
against tho old railroad law III worthy of
public confidence. Mr.. Murray can
accept the horn of the dilemma that he
prefers. Either way he is convicted of
folly by his own evidence evidence de.
livered with the solemnity and publicity
that make its strength equal to that OF
an oath.
But when the fact is remembered that
Mr.. Murray favored the Railroad Com
mission and supported it for months,
that he was elected director of the
Columbia and Greenville railroad with
no visible or known functions or duties,
and that thereafter he began to oppose
the Railroad Commission with as much
force as he had supported it; when these
circumstances are considered they force
the conclusion that Mr.. Murray's action
requires some further explanation than
general allegation of imbecility in 1882
or imbecility in 1883. Until some sats-
factory explanation is made Mr.. Muir
ray must expect unfavorable criticism.
and abuse of his critics will not justify
him.-GreeauiNe Ncaes.