The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1893-11-28

tory proposed to be cut Off from Laurens
have little more at stake in the matter
than those who do 10 but THE AD-
vERTIsER believeds that they deserve
first to be consulted. In order to OBJ
tain for u readers some idea of the
progress of the movement in the Sa-
luda section Of Laurens, THE ADvER-
TIsER ten days ago mailed the follow
ing letter tn twenty four representa-
tive citizens whose residences are scat
tered from Vaughnsville to Maddox's
Bridge:
LAURENs, G. H., SC,
November 7th, 1893.
DEAR SIR:-THE ADVERTISER de-
sires to obtain the expression of the
sentiment OF leading men, in regard to
n proposed new county Of "Green-
wood". You will confer a favor by an
swering briefly on this sheet of paper,
the questions below. If you object to
answering the questions please return
them. Please mail your answers at
once. A copy Of the paper in which
they are printed will be sent you. A
stamped and addressed envelope is en-
closed for your reply.
LIST. Are you IN favor of the cutting
off of a part of Laurons county to help
form the new county of "Greenwood"?
I'd. Are the majority Of your neigh
bors, in your opinion, in favor of it?
Sd. If you do or do not favor it, state
why.
The following replies have been re-
ceived-
MI. S. H. Goggans, of vaughnsville,
answers:
LIST. [ am not.
I'd. The majority signed the petition.
3D.. Because Laurens is small enough
as she now stands. Because it would
great inconvenience in the re-
cords and LAND deeds. While Green
wood is u little nearer, Laurens is
easier to get to, having no rivers or
creeks to contend with. 1t will in
cur mOre taxes.
Mr.. r. A. Austin, of Cross Hill:
LIST. No.
I'd. / think not.
3D.. L do not favor it because in nv
opinion taxes will necessarily be higher
and also because it is more convenient
to go from this place to Laurens than
it would be to Greenwood. there be-
ing better a and no river to cross.
Ex-County Commissioner, B. Good
man, of Cross Hill:
lst. We are not.
I'd. They are not.
Sd. From the fact hat we have al
ways lived in Laurens and don't want
to be taken from old friends that we
would have to leave. [ have a petition
in my possession that many old and re-
liable citizens have signed: some had
signed the other, but have since signed
mine and say they are sorry they sign
ed the other. | I'm also opposed to any
more taxes. Laurens County has al
ready benefited Greenwood by q Rail
road Tax.
Mr.. W. p. Turner, of Cross Hill:
1st. Yes.
I'd. Yes.
Nh. David Burnside, of Cross Hill:
lst. No.
I'd. Do not know. A good many have
have signed the petition for it. Some
OF them, on reflection, have regretted
signing it.
Sd. l like Laurens County. In popu-
lation Laurens County stands 10th on
the list; That is to say. there are Is
counties in South Carolina with q lar
ger population than ours. Have not
sufficient data at land just now to say
where 1T stands in regard to area, but
know that she is one of the small coun-
ties. So that she has neither popula-
ton o area to spare. The expenses
true, the town of Greenwood proposes
to build the Court House, Jail, etc, but
only the town of Greenwood, as / re-
member lt-no one endorses the prom
Use. And even if it had been endorsed
by good men, there are no specifica-
tions as to buildings. Temporary af-
fairs might be put up, which would
carry out the promise, and in a few
years we would be called on to build
better ones. Besides there would be a
great deal of expense outside of those
buildings. Last, but not least, the
river. Much can be said in favor of
small counties. Hence many of them
have been made by taking some from
one county and some from another.
But of all counties thus formed, it
would be safe TO say there is not one
where u fractional part las small q part
as 1T is proposed to take from Laurens)
is cut off from the remainder of the |
counties by as large a stream as the
aluda Surely not n when q major
iity oil The inhabitants thus cut off were
In favor OF it. Some think that if we
were cut of from Laurens County we
would be relieved of the Railroad Tax.
lido not think that will hold. If so it
would be an injustice to the remainder
of the county. And we should be lust.
always and everywhere.
Hon. ID. w. Anderson, ex-member
OF the House of Representatives, of
Waterloo:
LIST, ----
I'd. They are not. [ think it would
be safe to say that four-ffths of them
are opposed to it.
Mr.. F. B. Wilcut, of Waterloo:
1st. No.
I'd. Emphatically no.
ID. l do not, Laurens County is small |
enough as 1t is. Saluda River is, and
should be the natural line. No bridges
but but n below junction of Reedy
and Saluda Rivers to Newberry line.
Greenwood County as lines are to be
run, would cause more bridges on Sa-
luda, which would be expensive. In
fact too much taxation anyway-times
too hard, money scarce, cotton too low,
too much ~cussedness going on anyhow.
Mr.. T. b. Anderson, of Waterloo:
lst. No.
I'd. No.
Sd. Laurens County has no land to
spare, her area being but little more
than the minimum prescribed by law.
We have a natural boundry in Sa.
luda River which will prevent disputes
as to boundary lines much better han
any other that might be established.
New county lines would necessarily |
divide the lands of parties living