Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1899-01-28
OFFENDED PHILANTHROPY.

ne pdTdSTdpH IOCOnOiy PuoSuSN
in THE ENQUIRER merely as an arti-
Gle of news, and setting forth the re-
markable growth of the tax rate in
Cherokee county, seems to have raised
quite storm. Though it only stated
a patent fact, it reused our esteemed
contemporary, the Gafney Ledger, to
a wonderful burst of what it nows
calls irony. This we took occasion to
answer fitly, and whether our reply
should be called "irony" or not, we are
pretty sure that we meant what we
said. Except, we are sorry we used
the expression "lying." For that we
apologize. 1t is not good taste to ap-
ply the epithet after having proved
the existence of a lie, and for one to
apply the epitbet without proving the
condition, is only to convict ones self.
Therefore, as remarked before, unask-
ed, we apologize.
But our castigation, or irony, or fun,
has excited more interest than we had
imagined. We had two letters from
Cherokee county last week calling our
especial attention to The Ledger's re-
markable outbreak, before the writers
of those letters had reason to know
that we had seen the article. One of
the writer's offered material assistance
in the way of facts and figures with
which to turn our noble contemporary
down but when he got THE ENoUIR-
Err by return mail he was evidently
satisfied, for he had nothing further to
say. And our own people have en-
joyed a little diversion. Several of
them have expressed desire to know
what The Ledger would say, and the
matter was talked until we ourselves
began to grow interested. Ordinarily
we do not have a great deal of time to
spare to The Ledger; but upon receipt
of the mail Thursday at noon, it was
one of the first papers we opened. 1t
did not give a great deal of'space TO
the subject under discussion. Here
is all it said
IN RE THE YoRKvILLE ENQUIRER.
The scurrilous article that appeared in
The YoRKvILLE ENQUIRER last Satur-
day, intended as reply to little irony
which appeared in The Ledger, needs no
attention at our hands except as to that
part which accuses this paper of hood
winking the people in our advocacy Of tho
new county for selfish purposes. That is
a lie pure and simple. Without compe-
tition we have done the county advertis-
ing at one-half the rate allowed by law,
done at lower rate than that charged
individuals. Does this look like selfish
ness ? Aside from the benefits to be de-
rived by the people in gensral from the
formation of the new county we had no
selfish purpose in view. At any rate we
have not been so selfish as TO charge full
rates for county advertising, and if we
ever have competitor we will not do the
work for nothing in order to crush it.
AS regards the statement which pre-
cipitated the controversy, | am not re-
sponsible and the author of it will doubt
less take the responsibility Of it on him
self. ED. H. DECAMP.
Whether or not any of our interested
readers are disappointed, of course,
we do not know. We hope they are
not disappointed. We confess, how
ever, that we are sorely so. 1t was
our hope that instead Of merely con-
tenting himself with calling us liar,
Editor de Camp would have reprodu-
ced what we said last Saturday in or
der that his readers might see how
badly we had slandered him. That,