The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1900-12-19
3 c7rLLETTo N ITS STOCKING.

VenelQeIt ScI1tS4, VIZ '9'11A
that the voluntary and unsollc-
tied interviewed" referred to IN
it's issue of 14th inst, was
manufactured for the pur-
pose of discrediting Senator Nc
Laurin With the people OF this
State. and until the Estate" dis
closes the name Of the author Of
that interview, we will continue
to believe it emanated from some
one connected with the State,
regardless Of epithets which the
estates" editor may choose to
hurl. The idea Of q newspaper
striking q public servant such a
blow as was done in that '.volun-
tary and unsolicited interview
without disclosing the name Of
the author is so unfair, that its
fouIness must be apparent to
every lover OF justice. The
State knows full well that there
is a deep-seated prejudice against
the name Republican" in this
State, and when it, even in the
guise Of a voluntary and unso-
Icited interview" seeks to
place Senator McLaurin as a
probable leader Of the Repubh-
can party. it must know that the
effect intended, is to prejudice
the people against the man.
The State wonders how The
TINES would manage to be re-
conciled with itself should its
darling Macs be rival candidates
in 1902" In case these two gen
tlemen referred too, should see
fit to oppose each other, condi-
tions may be such that we viii
be forced to make strong fight
against one or the other, and
perhaps both, but were the elec-
ton to come up today, or in two
years the conditions remain as
they now exist, we have no hes
itancy in saying that our choice
between these two personal
friends, would be in favor Of
McLaurin. We honestly believe
that John L. McLaurin is better
qualified to be Of service to his
State than any man who could
be sent there, and to displace
him because he had the manhood
to Go what he thought was best,
would only be taking step
backward
The estate" has not been at
all friendly towards Senator Nc
Laurin, and for some time it has
displayed its unfriendliness to-
wards him, we know not why.
Surely, it cannot be because
Senator McLaurin was convinc-
ed that under theconditions then
existing, it was for the country's
best interest to vote for the con
frmation Of the Paris treaty?
No it cannot be this, because,
the estate" was a strong advo-
cate for the denomination of
William Jennings, Bryan, and he
and Senator McLaurin held the
same views on this subject. The
Estates" antipathy to the Sena-
tor, cannot be On account Of his
not voting with a majority of the
Democratic Senator'S, because,
this would be inconsistent with
that papers record. We we'll
remember how the State" en-
deavored to tear the Democratic
party asunder by supporting
anything and everything in OPP
position to the nominees Of that
party; We have not forgotten
how it villifed and abused any
thing and everything the Demo
Gratis did, and the deviIment it
did when Pope and his gang
were attempting to uproot our
registration laws, yes, We well
remember the sudden popularity
Of the State among the negro's
when Pope and George Murray
were pumping hot wind all over
the country soliciting contribu-
tons to pay the expenses for
breaking up our franchise laws,
that the Republican party might
again come into powe2, in this
State. We remember these
things, and for that reason we
are satisfied that The States pre-
judlce does not come from Sena-
tor McLaurin's differing on one or
two issues with the majority Of
his Democratic colleagues.
Theremust be something which