People's party paper. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1891-1898, 1893-02-24
GOVERNOR rILLMAN,s SIDE.
He Defines His Position la the south
Carolina Middle.

There is SO much Of niisinforma-
ton and injustice, based on false
hood, in your editorial Of Feb. 8, that
l ask space TO give plain statement
Of facts.
1t is nothing new for me to be
misrepresented in "diSpatches from
South Carolina" and I have never
thought it worth while to correct the
erroneous statements sent abroad by
my enemies in connection with local
affairs and my acts AS an officer or
al Individual. l only make an ex-
cepuon in the present instance be-
cause the matter is one involving the
rights Of every State in the Union,
and do not care to have people out
side Of the State draw differences
that are not true.
The facts in the railroad tax mud
die, now pending in the United
States Court in Charleston, are as
follows:
Under the Statutes of South Caro-
lima, railroads return their property
for assessment to the County Audi
tors. These returns are passed upon
by a State Board of Equalization
composed of the Secretary OF State,
Comptroller, General, Attorney-Gen-
eral and State Treasurer, empowered
to raise or lower the assessment to
conform to the value placed upon
other classes Of property by the
county boards.
In 1891 this State Board increased
the valuation of railroad property in
the State about $8,000,000 above
what the companies had themselves
returned their property. When time
for taxpaying came some of the
roads refused to pay more than was
due on their own assessments, and
the fight IN the courts, which began
in February, 1892, is for the differ
ence between the State assessment
and that made by the roads, the
amount in dispute Of State, county
and school taxes being about $780,
900 on all the roads.
Iniupctions were granted by the
Judge of the United States court,
restraining the county treasurers
from collecting their taxes, and after
argument the court claimed jurlsdic-
ton.
Appeal was taken by the State to
the United States Supreme court on
two cases, involving less than $4,000
and that court decided about three
weeks ago that the Circuit court was
in error in claiming Jurisdiction
where the amount was less than
$4,000.
In the meantime two railroads had
failed to pay or tender taxes for
1892 (the other cases are for I890),
and executions were placed in the
hands of the sheriffs, one of whom,
Nance, made a levy on the trains of
the Port Royal and Western Carolina
railroad.
A rule was issued by Judge Simon
ton against Nance to show cause why
he should not be held for contempt,
and, pending the decision, the Csc
cret circular" which so excites your
condemnation was issued by me.
when the time came for the hearing
the rule was dismissed by request of
the railroads attorney, and that road
paid in full, the explanation being
given that it was "bluf to gain
time.
Other sheriffs began at once to
levy for the taxes of 1892 which had
not heen paid, and which, not
amounting in any county to $4,000,
had Just been declared by the Sa-
preme Court IS not being under
Judge Simonton's jurisdiction. The
sheriffs have been ruled again for
contempt, and the cases will be heard
on the 9Th inst.
Now, please allow me to remind
you that our people have been so
prosecuted by Federal judges in the
Kuklux trials and the political trials,
growing out of the alleged infringe
ments OF the election laws, that they
regard q summons to the Federal
courts with terror.
When the sheriffs were ordered by
me that the executions must be
pressed, without regard to the United
States court at Charleston or its or
ders, as in the Nance case, and the
property held at all hazards, there
was no purpose to put the State
against the United States. | only
intended to reassure the sheriffs and
remove the temporary paralysis occa-
stoned by the 'bluff" in the Nance
case.
IL was not buster" but a fixed
determination to stand by the States
rights, as declared by the United
States Supreme Court, in spite Of
Judge Simmonton, who had lent him
self TO that disgracefu proceeding.
Again allo@ me to state:
First-That there has never been
a decision as to the legality or ilIe-
gality on the merits in any of these
railroad tax cases.
Second-The cases now pending
are for the taxes of 1892, and are fol
less than $4,000 each.
Third-The purpose appears to be