The weekly Union times. [volume] (Union C.H., South Carolina) 1871-1894, 1892-02-05
THE OFFICIAL BOYCOTT.

censed Mt some recent publications in The
Stdfe relative to his sale of cows to the luoa-
tic asylum, his expenditures out Of the con-
tingent fund for the governors mansion, or
his return of his property for taxation. One
or all Of these publicat ons has put his
Excellency in a rage in consequence If
which he "hss religiously made mp his
mnd to hereafter cut The State off from
receiving any news from himself
But be does not stop there. lie seems to
bave issued orders to his fol overs to do
likewise. Else why did Speaker Jones with
hold from The State n coly of the proceed
inSs OF the subcommittee of The State Fxccr-
tive committee? The Danuer of the speak
ere refusal is as discr editab'e to him as the
act itself-purpose deceiving the reporter
in reference to the matter.
II was very small piece Of spi every
smsll-on Speaker Jones part especially.
~" krcw, by reason of an investigation by
;!,e body over which he presided. that the
rules for the primary would reach three
times more Democrats through The State
than through tho Register; so that withhold
ing them from The State was withholding
them from Toe States readers, who were
entitled to them and to whom an bipartisan
committee would have been anxious to con-
vey them. But because of personal Iique
or because Of orders from headquarters, au
attempt was made TO keep the rules of the
primary out Of the hands of o large AID
respectable portion of the party for whom
the rules were intended. "Public offic, is a
privat, SNAP" is the latest phase Of poliri-
cal philosophy. 1t is to use official positions
for personal ends.
Whether Senator Irby and DR.. Pope, the
other members Of the subcommittee, were
concerned in this piece of small business,
we do not know; in the absence tf any fnfor-
nation, we presume not.
Now ss to Gov. 1ilman's indignation.
Was there any just cause for it? What the
State s1id in this connection is copiei on
the first page Of this issue, and the reader
may see and judge for himself whe'h her there
was anything to get mad about
Was It because the public was i"formed
that he had sold twelve cows to The lunatic
asylum for $442.30? II was .ruc and the
people had . right to know it and to form
their own opinions about is property. The
ObSsrrer does not hesitate to ray that, in its
opinior while it does not believe there was
any job in the sale. it was not a proper
transaction, in view If the fact that the Gov
ern1f has the absolute and un, estricted
POKE" 10 appoint aud remove at pleasure
every "fficer connected with the asylum
frcm the superintendent to the humb'cst
meuih'. They nll hold their places at his
viii
Was il because the pubic was informed as
10 h ; purchases. with plblic funds, fnr the
executive mansion? 1t uld hardly be
that for the Governor himself furnished the
item. to the comptro Ter gcn.rll to be pub
lishc in his annual report. from VIII ch The
State copied them. The Governor said in
his speech at Ncwberry in 1890 that he in.
tended to recommend that the legislature
have ten thousand copies of the comptrollers
tod for .rih a.,
people, So that they could see where Their
money went. lie did not RECOMMEND it i,
true, and it was IT done: but surely there
can be no valid objection t. newspapers
publishing extsaets from That rep IT. And
did not Capt. Tillman, in 1888, publicly cr.ii-
else -.on the stump and through the press
the expenditures male for the executive
mansion by Gov. Thomsoa and Gov. Richard
son? How then can he object to crit cisins
OF Gov. Tllman's cxpend lures.
Was it because his return Of property
taxnton was published? lie has no right
to chjcct TO that. Tax returns are public
records, which any citizen may examine or
any newspaper may publish. We are
inc incl to believe it would be goo1 plan
to publish oil tax returns, and thus let the
people SEQ who arc shifting their share of
the public burden.
Is itbecause the publication Of his tax
returns reveals the fact that the Governor is
no poor farmer" but the owner of 800
broad acres?
Is it because the public is informed that
while the Governor was Withholding his
signature to the late extension bill, in order
10 tighten tax payers into paying By the
10Th of December, 80 far rs to raise as much
money as possible for the January interest
OH the State bonds. he himself did not pay
his axes? That ought TO have been known.
The Observer speaks Fl ON personal knowledge
when it says that some taxpayers were put
to great trouble and inconvenience to raise
the money TO say their taxes then, whiic the
Governor. with SO 800 salary, could easily
have paid his and contributed his portion TO
the Interest fund.
There is nothing in the publications made
by The State that concerns the Governors
private eafairs-nothing he has any right to
object to-nothing that justifes hiI conduc,
towaad The eState.-Ne,Obery Observer.