The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1901-03-06
Major Richardson Explains.
Editor The Manning Times:

Editor The Manning Times:
Pardon me for once more asking your
Indulgence, but Your referring to the
procuring an additional tax in my town
ship for school purrnse'; in your issue OF
The 9th ult., oblige:' me to request you
10 give me space for the purpose of re-
plying 10 the suggestion. e.
1t has always been my desire to pro-
cure this tax. and some years ago l took
upon myself the task of getting the
necessary signatures 10 effect its &C
complishment and sert them to the
Auditor, l think it vas, asking that an
election be ordered. Owing to ignor-
ance of the time such application should
be sent in. it arrived 100 late and we
lost the opportunity. Since then have
not been in position to actively en-
gage in pressing the matter as have
no children attending the common
schools. bat should be glad TO assist
by my aid q scheme in that direction at
the present time or in the future. and |
am sure most OF my relatives would
unite in the movement. We do not,
however. represent the entire commu-
nifty. and from those having children in
attendance on the common schools,
such an idea should emanate. But this
was a general measure under consider
alton and not local one, and if space
permitted l could mention many ways
an increase Of money could be used to
advantage in the various branches con-
nected with this institution. which to
my mind is only as yet in its infancy,
and must of necessity become in the
end equal to that in any other State OF
the Union. Not only does the educa-
tional department need caring for, but
the school houses, most of them in the
rural districts. require remodeling or
repairing or renewing 10 make them
more commodious and attractive. Any
expenditures made by the State for this
or any other purpose must fall heavier
on the greater taxpayer rather than on
the lesser, and in the school expendi-
lures is the only manner that I can see,
where the poor man gets any benefit
from taxation of the rich. I have never
vet advocated any measure that would
not cause the wealthier class to bear
the burden, and hope some day to see a
strict enforcement Of the income tax
which at present is so ineffective.
Notwithstanding the organized ef-
forts of the employers of the cotton
mills. representing the wealth of that
initial industry, supported the Child
Labor Bill" both in committee and in
the House, because l thought all chill
dren should receive instruction, even at
the cost of injury to existing institu-
tions, or the possible loss to capital in
vested.
1 never thought Your expression as
TO the motives OF members supporting
the appropriations was meant to apply
to me. as l understood it was used col
lectively, but that some others might
take different view was the only rea-
son which induced me to write the let
ter I did. I thoroughly agree that a
difference Of opinion should be indulged
in without the least cause for friction,
and my letter was not intended to criti-
else, but merely to make my motives
plain. Whether I was right or wrong,
was not what l tried to establish. which
can only be decided by time and devel-
opments in the future.
In conclusion let me add, that Wien I
said this was not propitious year for
making additional appropriations l
went on to state that l was induced to
take advantage of a liberal body OF
men, rather than risk the temper of
some future Legislature, which might
not only curtail what is desired, but
what is necessary. 1t sometimes occurs
that members act from information
which varies in accuracy. For instance,
in your case it was represented to you
that the tax levy would be raised two
millsif all appropriated had been given,
while in mine, one of the most promi-
nant members of the Ways and Means
Committee who l consulted, said that
from their calculation it would not re-
quire more than one mill levy. l am
not able 10 say who was correct.
II. B. RICHARDSON.
Fulton, S. c.. March 3, 1901.