The Lancaster ledger. [volume] (Lancaster, S.C.) 1852-1905, 1900-08-01
In Which a United States Sen
atOr Should Not Interfere,
Colonel Hoyt Brings up the Rec>
ord of 1890 and Quotes the
Senator's Own Language
Against HIM.
Special to Greenville News.

ILLS uhPalSu W ulscuss tne ltQuOr
issue, and while l did not question
his right to do SO, yet there is no
apparent need of his coming to the
rescue of the candidates who are
advocating the dispensary system,
as he has not added anything to
the discussion not already presents
ed. Has any one uttered the cry
Help me Cassius, or l sink, or
is it merely propensity to take a
hand because the fight is raging ?
Two lawyers have been engaged
from the outset in presenting the
benefits and advantages of the dis
pensary system and also in decid-
ing the cause of prohibition. Are
they not equal to the occasion
Are the signs of the times point
ing to the dissolution of the great
moral institution Has any one
become alarmed for the safety of
the dispensary or concluded that
it is necessary for Its reputed fa-
ther to rush into the imminent
deadly breach and rescue his child
from destruction ? Ten years ago
the senator was clamoring against
Wade Hampton's taking any part
in the memorable campaign of
80 and said vehemently that the
Democrats Of South Carolina were
having family quarrel which
Hampton ought not to interfere
with. Is not the condition today
almost identical Hampton was
the recognized leader of the De.
mocracy at that time, and Tillman
is the recognized leader today
True, Hampton was not then =
candidate for selection, but 1T
was only short time until he was
defeated and his defeat was com
passed because he did interfere in
the family quarrel. Such result
cannot befall Senator Tillman, as
there is no chance for opposition
to him this campaign, and there is
no desire to block his way to re-
election on the part of any consid.
cradle element in the party. He Is
freely accorded the right of way
by men OF every phase of Democ-
racy, and hence his course in this
campaign does not comport with
the generous treatment he has re-
ceived at the hand of his fellow
Democl ats. 1t is a mistake on his
part to act contrary to the require
ment laid down by him for the
proper conduct of a United States
senator under similar circumstans
ces, and unless he has the purpose
in view to declare a preference
among the dispensary candidates
for governor, which he disclaims
in emphatic terms, there is no
reasonable excuse for his lnterfer-
ence in family quarrel. He has
already expressed his views in re
gard to the liquor issue and all
the people of the State knows just
where he stands. He cannot add
anything to their conception of his
position in regard to the dispensa-
sary system. His talents ought
to be in requisition whore he might
engage in the discussion Of nation,
al issues before the people of piv.
otal States, where he could render
valuable service in the open field
to the cause of Democracy and aid
in the election of Bryan and Ste
venson, our national standard
bearers. Tillmcn's rescuing hand
seems to indicate he does not think
the three dispensary candidate.
who are out are competent to de
fend the dispensary, or why doe.
he como in He had no objec.