Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1902-06-14
Rebate PICKINGS.
Sensational Story Backed
by AffidavitS.

by Affidavits.
SERIOUS JOB FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL.
Some Reasons Why q Position on the
State Board Of Control at 81 a Day
Is More Desirable Than q Seat In
Congress.
Greenville News. Wednesday:
In the course of an editorial publish
ed in the Greenville Daily News, April
29th. last, the following paragraph ap-
peared:
For instance we know beyond per-
adventure that in July last year ago,
one Sprinkle, living at Reidsville, N. c.,
wholesale liquor dealer, announced In
the presence Of several persons, includ-
ing two reputable citizens Of Green
vile, s. c.. that 1t was his custom to
give the board Of control Of the South
Carolina dispensary from 81 to 81 a
barrel rebate on every barrel sold to the
state dispensary, and that only recent
ly he had paid over to one A. F. H.
Dukes, a member Of the said board OF
control, 81 per barrel on an order Sc
cured through him amounting to 1920
on 1000 barrels. The name Of A. F. II.
N. c., at the time specified, showing
that he went there to get the money
personally and avoid the inconven-
iences Of a check. Mr.. Dukes was re-
Gently reelected member Of the board
Of control, doubtless for eminent and
conspicuous public services"
On May End, 1902, we received the fol-
lowing letter from Mr. B. F. Sprinkle,
wholesale liquor dealer Of Reidsville,
N. c., which we reproduce verbatim,
spelling and punctuation unchanged.
"REIDsv1LLE, N. c., May 1st, 1902.
ITO the Editor Of the Greenville
News, Greenville. S. c.:
my Dear Sir:
II have read with great deal Of re-
gret and surprise an article published
in your paper Of recent date, connecting
me with the South Carolina State
board of Control which is In part un-
true. So far as my dealings with GER
tain members Of the Board Of CONTROL
are concerned. Since reading the arti-
ing in conversation with two gentlemen
some time ago whom I do not know,
and they began the conversation In re-
gard to the South Carolina Dispensary
and I may have said that Chou
heard 1t was a custom to pay rebates
in whiskey, but never told them paid
any rebate. have never meet Mr..
Dukes in Greensboro, N. c., and have
not sold the 'Dispensary more than
about one hundred bbls Of whisky since
he has been on the board. hope you
will publish this in justice to myself
and the members Of the board Of Con-
troll. I shall send a similar letter to
The News and Courier Of Charleston.
S. C. Yours truly,
"B. F. SPRINKLE"
Upon the receipt Of this letter from
Mr.. Sprinkle We wrote him as follows:
"GREENvILLE, S. c., May 2, 1902.
"B. F. Sprinkle. ESQ.,.
proprietor Reidsville Liquor Co.,
"Reidsville, N. c.
my Dear Sir:
1--WE have your letter of the first in
stant and write to say that we shall be
glad to publish 1t as you request. Be-
fore doing so, however, we think 1t only
fair to you to say that we shall publish
along with 1t the sworn statements of
two highly respected citizens Of Green
Vile that you did in their presence and
in the presence Of several others make
the statement substantially as publish
ed in our issue of April 29th ult., and
that you further said that you had
been compelled to cease doing business
with the South Carolina dispensary be-
cause you were compelled to submit to
this ruinous system Of blackmail by the
members Of the board Of control. AS
to the number of barrels Of whisky
sold by you to the South Carolina dis
pensary during Mr.. Dukes term Of Of
flee we shall publish certified extract
from the books showing the exact num-
ber Of barrels purchased from you dur
ing the period mentioned.
1--WE have no desire to do you or any
one else an injustice in this matter and
would suggest that II you are still de-
sirous that we shall publish your letter
under the conditions we have named
you should send us a simple affidavit
sworn to before an officer of the law
that you not only did not make the
statement substantially as we publish
ed 1t, but that you have never paid to
Mr.. Dukes or any member of the. board
of control Of the South Carolina dis
pensary any money whatsoever In the
way of a rebate or reward to secure
the sale of liquor to the South Carolina
dispensary.
1--WE will say further, that on two oc-
casions since the information we pub
lished came into our possession we ad-
dressed you letters stating the facts as
we had received them and asking you
to give us a statement Of the whole
matter for publication, or denial OF
your own story. We have never receiv-
ed a word of reply from you and our
letters have not been returned to us.
We naturally assume that you cannot
deny the truth Of the story and do not
care to mix yourself up further with an
unpleasant experience.
Let us hear from you promptly and
we shall take pleasure in publishing
your letter, together with all the other
information on the subject which we
now have or may be able to secure.
yours respectfully,
J. K. BLAcKMAN,
Editor Greenville News"
At the same time we wrote our Co.
lumbia correspondent and asked him to
obtain from the books Of the state dis
pensary a statement Of the purchases
made by the board of control from B.
F. Sprinkle with special reference to
the purchases made during the term of
A. F. H. Dukes. We simply wanted to
get at the truth and stated so plainly,
intending to publish the figures from
the books of the dlspensary whatever
they might be.
We waited until May 18th. 1902, when
we received the following telegram from
our Columbia correspondent:
COLUMBIA, S. c., May Is, 1902.
u. K. Blackman, Greenville, S. c.
"Chairman Williams does not care to
give information to paper attacking as
sociate; but will do as Dukes prefers.
Dukes willing to give Information as to