The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1900-05-16
VIZ REPLY AND THEN WE'RE DONE.

Iatinp TO the election Of dele
oates to the county and State
conventions. which were publish
ed in another paper and as they
do not comport with our ideas OF
journalism we will not reply IN
kind. As 4 journalist with a
reputation. we must have a re-
gard for the public good and ig;-
more that which we believe can
only afford AMUSEMENT for a
s.sic-em- jack" element. 7 HI $
newspaper is not in the sore
healinS business, and will not
attempt to furnish ointments for
the soothing Of Scabs.
Not to take a casual notice Of
what has been said, however,
might be misunderstood, and
therefore we will make such
comments as we deem proper.
The results Of the recent cleo
tions have very evidently left a
bad taste in the mouth Of some
body. and they are seeking to
rid themselves of the effect, by
using the public as slop bucket,
as far as we are concerned, we
have nothing to complain OF, for
We are accustomed to taking our
medicine just as it was admins
tered on the occasions referred to.
The people of Clarendon un-
derstand that when political IS
sues are involved, and There IS
an issue" made plain and clear
cut, by the address OF State chair
man Jones of the Prohloltlon
Executive Committee, and the
public conferences of the local
Prohibitionists, the representa-
1ives of these issues will not sit
quietly and submit to the oppo-
sition having things their own
way: they will consult with
those entertaining similar views,
and when the test comes which
ever side has the majority, that
side wins. This is politics. ana
their is no use Disgusting the
fact, it has always been done,
and it will continue: it is utter
clap trap to intimate that white
men have been hoodwinked or
tricked into voting against their
wishes. such intimations leave
an impression Of soreness. In
the recent convention so wall
ingly complained OF, we assert
that we have no knowledge OF a
preliminary caucus, nor do we
believe there was any, nor 90 we
believe there was any prelimina-
~ meeting held at which ticket
for delegates was suggested or
agreed upon. IN the past, when
certain issues We're involved, eau
cuses have been held and those
participating were pledged to
support the ticket chosen by a
majority of said caucus, but tol
the recent convention there was
no such thing, and every dele,
gate hsd the right to vote fo1
whom he pleased. What was
done. was in broad open day with
out any dark lantern methods,
and with the endorsement and
consent of 50 out of 81 members
of that convention. There was
no dictation from any source, a
number of tickets were writ
ten and distributed. but that
leaves no room for the IN
timation that trickery was re-
sorted to: we have attended
nearly every political conven,
ton since 1876, and we have Yet
to attend one where tickets are
not written for the accOmmoda-
ton and convenience Of those
wishing to vote them. 1t IS a
common practice for delegates
to ask some one Who happens tc
have a pencil and paper conven-
lent to write ticket for them.
and we have no doubt. but that
the writer OF some or all OF the
articles referred to, has written
many a ticket to be voted by
others himself. There is Nc
trickery in this, no man woulo
dare prepare, and give to a de
cent white man in this county
ticket other than that he wishe:
10 vote. \ delegate often hasn'
:; pencil convenient, and he
either borrowS or turns to an