The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1889-01-17
THE E.. CLEMsoN NJ BEQUEsT.
Senator Edwards Criticism OF Governor
Richardson.
Ne,ps,' and Courier.

49, Ne,us and Courier.
DARLINGTON, January 1.-THE grest
interest shown in the ultimate fate Of the
Clemson bequest induced your eorrespon-:
dent to solicit an interview with Col. B.
W.Eduards, the Senator from Darling
ton County, and the following was the
result:
ssDo you object to expressing your
views on the situation of the Clemson
College bill I"
+ have never suffered mysslf to be
interviewed on any subject s but it seems
to me there is much apprehension on
the subject which is strengthened by
the Governors action, that ought to be
corrected. -
Tn what does this misap prehension
consist" i5s
Passing over the objection made to the
will it is . misapp pprehension to suppose,
that the acceptance BY the State would be
prejudicial to the claims Of Mr.. Calhoun's
nddaughter, as sheis called. If the
State does not accept, the property goes
under the will, to the trustees appointed
sby Mr.. Clemson, and not to Miss Lee,
unless the will fails. Mr.. Clemson knew
that his granddaugh ter had already had
/ ashare of the Calhoun property, and he
also, knowing her circumstances, made
what he considered ample provision for
her in. this same will. Then he provides
that the balance of his estate shall be
taken by the State for the benefit Of q
large class of her citizens, expressing his
confidence that the Legislature will
supplement his donation and enlarge its
benefits. Is this really his will3 No
body can read the paper and doubt it,
and nobody can gainsay the fact that the
bulk Of the property willed to the State
in trust was acquired by hisoBn skill
and industry, .Was his own to dispose Of
as be. choose. And yet here is young
lady who is:a party provided for under
that!Hill, and well off already, who comes
| in to defeat the wishes Of the testator in
respect to bis own, and the opponents Of
the bill have. grayely insisted that the
State should commit quest breach Of
trust and help her to defeat the will. To
|be sure there is no technical breach of 9
trust, never accepted, but I think we
should consi. = bad faith in an individ.
NAL otdeclin, toaccept a trust committed
to- him bya confding friend forthe purpose
ofhelping another to defeat the wishes
| of his friend. And yet the State Of South
Carolina is passionately plead with to do
just that thing.
But are you not putting the case
rather strongly !? Is Miss Lee contesting
the will: at all r
No she is mot attacking the will direct.
|ly, but is moving on it Indirectly, and
her, allies are asking the State to stand
atlll ana mask 1ae movement un'.l !. =
accomplished. inis ls san g more uD)us.ln.
able policy Tor the est. state tnan III tne osnel.
bas miss Lee e9s'ls Is oniy sung ~. .ne
Fort Hill property on the ground that it
did not belong 70 Ms. clemson SOM s
Only that, / believe. with rents and
profits: But what will be the effect OF 9
recovery There are eighty thousand
dollars outside Of the the Fort Hill prop
Eerty, which, under the will, is for the
endowment of q college upon the Fort
Hill property. Now the State has three
years within which. to accept or reject
the offer before the trustees appointed BY
n Mr.. Clemson on. can take. Y Mess the state
accepts or refuses TO accept, therefore,
nothing passes TO elther party unaer tne
will. suppose then MISS Lee, WITHIN
that time, gains the Fort Hill property,
the legacy Of the other property
may lapse, because the trust coupled Win
~ ia in that caaa imn0aa}h h}n 0f execution.