The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1886-02-03
Constitution itself was unconstitu-

HSAtN9 w eS-NS VAho WV 10 W. Ai'N
in the Senate Journal. Those votin
to strike out the enacting clause were
Up Country-Bieman Of Oconet
Black of York, Coker Of Darlington
Maxwell Of Abbeville, Moody c
! Marion, Munro Ct Union, Wallace G
Richland, Wingard Of Lexington
Woodward of Fairfeld-9.
Loar Country-Benbow Of Clarer
don. -Buist of Charleston, Byrd Q
Williamsburg, Howell of Colletor
Izlar Of Orangeburg, Moore Of Hamp
ton, Reynolds of Beaufort, Simmon
Of Berkeley, Smythe Of Charleston
Ycumans Of Barnwell-10.
For the motion: Up country, 9
low country, 10-aggregate 10.
Those opposed to striking out thu
enacting clause we're:
Up Co,ntry-Bell Of Aiken, Bobt
of Spartanburg, Clyburn of Lancas
ter, Field of Pickens, Leitner of Ker
shaw, Mccall of Marlboro, Mauldir
of Greenville, J. B. Moore Of Ander
son, Patterson of Chester, Redfearr
of Chesterfield, Sligh Of Newberry
Todd of Laurens, Talbert of Edge
feld--13.
Lo0 Country-Smith Of Horny:
Williams of Georgetown-2.
Against the motion to strike out
Up country, 13; low country, 2-ag'
gregate, 10.
Now, if up country and low coun.
try had anything to do with it, why
were nine up countrymen found vot-
ing to kill the bill? We see that
there was difference of only four il
the vote; and if even the three Pied
mont belt Senators, Biemann, Black
and Maxwell, had voted for the CEN
sus bill Of the House, the vote would
have stood: for the bill, IS; against,
l6. And if the nine up country Sen:
ators voting against the bill had
voted with the thirteen up country
men sustaining it, we see % votes
for the census bill to II against it,
even allowing all the low country
Senators to vote together. How vi
ciously absurd it is to talk, then,
about the defeat of the census bill
being the work Of the low country
when we sec that about half the vote
killing the bill was an up country
vote.
But when the House found their
bill defeated and no appropriation
had been made for the enumeration,
whilst some members thought it was
useless to contend further with the
coordinate body in opposition, there
were yet those who advocated taking
a recess and coming back to insist
on the legislation necessary for max
ing the enumeration.
We find that the vote in this behalf
stood: For the recess, 33; against it,
46. Let US see who these thirty
three men were who were willing to
come back in January, '85, aud fight
it out for the constitutional enumer-
alton. We call the names from the
Journal of the House as follows:
Upper COotnties-Messrs. AnseI of
Greenville, Clyburn Of Lancaster, |
Graydon of Abbeville, Mason of Spar
,anburg, Simpson Of Laurens, Smith |
Of Spartanburg, Thompson of Spar
Williams of Greenville,
Wilson of Spartanburg-9.
Midland Counties-Messrs. Aldrich |
IF Aiken, Brooker of Lexington,
Hardy Of Newberry, McIver of Dar-
ington, Mckissick of Union, McMas-
;er of Richland, Pettigrew of Oar
ington. Pope of Newberry, Ray of
Richland, Ready of Edgefeld, Rice
IF Union, L. F. Youmans Of Rich
,and-12.
Loa0 Country Counties-Messrs.
Baxter of Georgetown, Harvin of
Clarendon, Hutson of Hampton, Lee
# Sumter, Macusker of Georgetown,
Iaher of Barnwell, Mears Of Char
eston, Mitchell of Beaufort, Padgett,
# Colleton, Richardson of. Horny,
Robinson Of Beaufort, J. W. Sim
mons of Orangeburg-12.
Here, then, We see nine votes from
he upper counties, twelve from the
Midland, and twelve from the low
ountry counties, making up this for
orn hope for saving the enumeration
nd apportionment at any hazard.
With these facts of record, what shall
Te say of the INSCRIPTIONS cheek Of
hose who would now raise a cry
gainst the low country for the failure
f that which simply failed for the
'ant of up country votes. Pish!
This is Of = character with some
lore of the stuff which is now being
oided on the people Of the State
Columbia Register.