The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1886-03-31
The Press and Banner
Wednesday, March 81, 1886.
The Letter of MIR. Hodges.

The SchOOl commissioner IePilcs w
our article of last week. He takes issue
with good many Of our statements That is
q matter entirely for himself 1t is useless
for us to repeat what was then said. The
statement of facts to which we referred as
having been received from the School Com
missioner we printed as he stated them to
us. There can be no doubt on that point,
Without making any effort to explain his
act in denying the shool to a majority OF the
children of the neighborhood, WHO are unable
to pay, while he is paying tuition for few OF
the rich it would seem to us that he would di
vert attention to Irrelevant or personal mat
ters. What we want IS the school. We have
no personal quarrel with Mr.. Hodges.
Why Mr.. Hodges should attempt to brine
odium on by insinuating that we lmprop'
erly printed aletter. which he chooses TO des'
ienate as a "private" letter mayb as readily
seen by the reader as by ourselves. The orig
inal fact is that Mr.. Hodges said we should
not have any Of the papers for puolication
and cited President Cleveland as precedent
for Withholding official papers from the pub.
Tic eve. Afterward, Mr.. Hodges, for reasons
perhaps known to himself, but not to us,
concluded to surrender the papers, and so in.
formed US. He gave all the papers to the ed
itoro of the Press and Banner who told him en-
pressly that he would publish all Of them
Mr.. Hodges then said, GO ahead, I don't
care what you publish" Without seeing
him again, we received a letter from him on
Tuesday evening, as follows:
DoNALDs, =. c., March q, 1885,
Mr. EI1h Wilson, Ab6ertfte, ). c.:
po tn
Carwile to me. It is private and had nothing
to do with the action of the County Board IN
the White Hall matter. klugh did not Sc
much as read 1t, nor does he know what
was in it. 1t does not form q part of the re.
cord. Let me emphasize 1.-THE letter must mol
be published: lis strictly pr p1iTSatfai e aoners"
When the above letter was received on
Tuesday evening. over half our edition had
been printed. The reader will understand
that owing to the size of our paper. we can
print only two pages at time
The allegation that Capt Carwi!e's letter
was strictly private wiR not bear the test o
scrutiny was addressed to "Geo. c. Hodges
School Commissioner, A. c. Every Word IN
1T was in reply to our petition for school
and in fact it was the only objection, o.
which we had any knowledge, that had been
lodged in his office against us, until after the
school had been denied to the white trent
ers." The letter was signed u. r. Carwile
Chm B. T. w. H. T." II is not necessary fol
us to argue with any intelligent man as tt
whether the letter was "official'' or "private.'
Every man with intelligence enough to read
1t Will see at once that Mr.. Hodges has nc
more right in justice to claim that letter to be
-'private' than he had to refuse the white
-srenters' Of White Hall a school. AS mat
ter of fact Mr.. Hodges possesses no more abll
ity for discriminating between "otfictai' ano
.'private" letters than anybody else. But VIC
think it may be clear to any body that Mr.
Hodges might very we'll seek any pretext 1ol
.obicctng TO the publication Of facts concern
ing official dercictions.
But even, admit that Mr.. Hodges Is correct
in saying that the letter was ''private,' would
1T not show more inefficient management
.ot that office than we have ever charged
Does it not show that he would conceal nj:
Information from the white "renters" at {
time when he caused them to send copy O
their appeal to the Trustees? Fair play is {
jewel
Boiled down to simple facts: Mr.. Hodges
gave us the letter with the other official pa
pers. We suppose this fact will not be denied
Then why did he give it to us? and why die
he wait until after we had gone to press to in
form US that it was 'private letter."
From Mr.. Hodges statement, it wonld ap
pear that Capt Carwile's letter was monde
script: Being @ private letter on public
matter from one public officer to another
This would make proceeding rather toe
much Of the Star Chamber order.
The School Commissioners personal re
marks to us have nothing at all to do with the
question at issue, that is: the provision OF
school for the white 'renters" on the Eas,
side of Hard Labor. He can best defend him
self by giving substantial and good reasons
for his refusal to do SO, and we trust he will
leaving out all personalities, proceed at once
to show cause why he denies school privileges
to white "renters,' when ne extends such ad
vantages to the colorcd "renters" in the same
neighborhood.