The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1899-03-15
INVESTIGATION OF COL. NEAL.

CnlnMhiu .Niuhc. .NN..ch ~.

ptHUbfU iNfNif. NNitH s'.
According 10 the testimony taken al
the prniIcntiary investigation ycstcr-
day, here is he >tuation:
In 1876 j. Is. Watson and Col. W: y.
Neal ni;i,iv Ii contract whereby liz lat
ter was to redeem or buy back his farm
in Anderson county. which he had
turned over to the former debt. The
price WAS to be S14 900, and this was to
he paid III installmcntS of S2,0tW Il year.
AT the same time and on the same day.
according to the testimony of Col.
| Neal, Mr.. Watson made Il contract with
! him as superintendent of the pcnitcn-
tiary for 30 convicts who were to work
this farm and another owned by him
| (Nran in liclicn> county. The super
| intendrncc of the Anderson county
farm work WAS to be under Is. Is. Rags
dale and he Pickcns farm under {. w.
Ra:,sdalc. BY this contract for con
vict hire j. l'. Watson was to be noni
nally responsible, while Neal in reality
WAS to get the benefit of the labor
This WAS done apparently to get around
the statute which prohibits the super
intendcnt of the pcnitcntialy from en-
| pOying cOnyictS to work for himself
Individually. This contract with Wat
son was not secured by bond as is gen
orally required because. Col. Neal con
Sidcrcd linn "a responsible man.
Under the instructions of the board
of directors Il note properly endorsed
may be accepted i'll payment for con
VictS.
In the year 1896 J. B. Watson got 30
cOnvicts who worked the two farms of
Col. Neal in Anderson and l'tkena
counties. These convicts worked those
farms during 1916, 81 and '!'S. In pay
mcnt for their work the first year b.
.l.,I IL. 80
endorsed by w. y. Neal as supGrnten-
dent. For their work in 1897 G.. w.
Ragsdalc gave his note for S2,012.45,
endorsed III the same way. The ac
count for 1898 is still open, though
under the head of assets. j. B. Wat
son is charged up with their hire.
These two Ragsdalc notes were placed
i'll the Carolina National Bank and the
money drawn ON them. The B. Il.
up by the payment OF Il check given by
j. lI. Watson. The check was made
payable i'll five days, but before that
| time had expired Mr.. Watson held ND
the payment. The bank now demands
from the pcnitcntiary he payment of
these two amounts, w. y. Neal as
superintendent having endorsed the
| two notes.
This puts the State virtually in the
position of endorsing notes in order to
get money and then having to pay he
| notes herself the maker of the notes
not having paid them.
Col. Neal testified yesterday that the
two Ragstlalcs who gave their notes in
payment for this convict hire for the
years had not derived il cents benefit
from the cOnvicts' work. 1t had been
the benefit of the work
The State will have to redeem these
two notes and by doing so loses the
| pay for 30 rOuvictS for the wears 1916
and 1851. This amount is in round
numbers S4,j00, to say nothing of the
past year, which will run the amount
up to about $4,000. All this labor Col.
| under the contract Mr. j. Is. HVnison is
the nominal lessee of the cOnvicts.
| Mr.. WatsOn'S testimony was impOr-
tant in that it told of the contracts
made brtwccr himself and Col Neal.
| He gave his reasons for refusing to pay
the cheek taxing up the B. j. R;,ysdalc
notes and then went on to say that I'M
der their personal agreement he had
sold the cotton crop from the two farms
the proceeds the first payment on the
| farm to himself, he turned over to Col.
Neal Sl,iG5.S:J. for Which Col Neal
rccciptcd as superintendent and which
llc understood VAS to go opay the con
vict hire Tor that wear. 1t had not
been So credited ANA the records gave
no evidence oi i, ilaving been paid. In
1872 he had ais" paid il draft Of S5oo to
Col. Neal. but. rs was afterwards
! shown. hc WAS lI;t credited with his in
| any way.
Col. Neal. III reference to the $500
draft. said he had used il for travelling
expenses. About the l.iGa.e5 paid by
| Mr.. Watson, he claimed that it had
been paid out to hands and for the cX-
penses of maxim" the, crop in 1896.
Mr. Stevenson asked the pointed
stated that he had paid S.2,7O0 in 1896
and 1897 TO Mr.. Watson, i'll payment on
the farm as per private contract. it the
payment of these installmentS were
not virtually using money due the
State to pay private debts.
Mr. Burriss testified to several irregu-
larities involving several hundred dol
lars and showed where only part of
a draft would be credited to mans
account, while the remainder was
! Neal.
| TIE TESTIMONY
of the witnesses best tells the story of
the developments in the inquiry.
| When the examination of witnesses
| was renewed at 1880 o'clock Yesterday
morning Mr.. j. 5. Fowler was recalled
to the stand. He testified that in De-
cember, 1898, he advanced $500 for the
services of cOnvicts. This was paid by
| draft to w. A. Neal individually and
the receipt was signed by him as super
intendent. lie was not credited with
this money. The pcnitcntialy report
showed no credit for him at this time.
The payment of this $500 was made at
the Bank Of Anderson. The date of
| the draft was Dec. 8, 1895, and the re-
| ceipt was not dated but read: "Rcccived
of j. S. Fowler, five hundred dollars
on account hire for the year 1876.
Amount $500. w. A. Neal, Supcrin-
tendent."
The draft was paid Dec. 20, 1886. Re
lative to the check of Feb. "a, 1897, for
$500, Mr.. Fowler said he was credited