Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1902-01-04
The Free Pana Law.

The Free Pass Law.
The bill passed at the last session Of
the general assembly for the repeal of
the anti-free pass law Is still in the
hands of the governor, who has not yet
seen proper to either approve or veto
1t.
Unless the governor shall veto this
bill, 1t will become law within three
days after the next meeting Of the gen.
eral assembly without his approval.
There is much interest in the state as
to what he will do with the matter.
1t is not so much on account of the real
Importance Of the measure under con-
sideration, as on account Of the pecu-
liar surrounding circumstances.
The history Of the anti-free pass bill
is familiar to most people who have a
recollection Of the political events of
the past fifteen years. AS private
citizen, Benjamin r. Tillman SANDER
ed and abused everybody who was at
that time holding public office, accus-
ing them, among other things Of being
bamboozled and debauched by the rail-
roads with free passes. He represent
ed that practically every public official
under the state government was riding
on a free pass, and very properly rep
resented that no honest man could get
the consent of his conscience to do such
thing. Within a short time after his
Inauguration as governor it developed
that Mr.. Tillman himself held pass No.
1, of the Richmond and Danville rail-
road, and with a view to taking advan-
tage of the political capital offered by
the circumstances, member Of the
conservative" or opposite faction, in
troduced the famous anti-pass bill.
Whether honest or not, the Reform
majority realized that it represented an
honest constituency. and promptly en-
acted the bill into law.
When the matter was under consid-
Grafton by the general assembly last
that public interest did not require the
repeal Of the law, and later we thought
it the duty of the governor to veto 1t;
but in the light of long and mature
consideration, we have reached an en-
tirely different conclusion. Whatever
may have been the motive Of the legis-
lature in seeking to repeal the law, we
are now satisfied that the law should
be repealed. and that If the governor
should veto the pending bill, he would
make a mistake that would operate
against the best interest Of the public.
Governor Tillman was correct when
he said that no honest public official
would accept free pass from a rail-
road. The proposition Is too simple to
require elaboration. Anybody. can see
that such passes are given in consider
alton Of services that really belong to
the public. There is a plainly implied
contract, and the pass-holder' must be
dishonest either to the railroad or his
constituency-to his constituency If he
reciprocates, and to the railroad If he
does not.
If 1t were possible to enforce an an
ti-pass law, it would be good thing;
but to enforce it is clearly out Of the
question. A man who would be dis
honest in one thing would be dishonest
in another, and there are few public Of
ficials who would accept pass in the
absence of a prohibitory law, who
would not as readily accept 1t in vio-
lation Of the law.
Under all the circumstances, we do
not see what Is to be gained by this
prohibitory law, for since public offlc-
ials still accept free passes even to as
great an extent as in the degenerate
times that were reformed by Mr.. Till
man, it would seem that the anti-free
pass law only gives the railroads that
much better hold on the holders of
passes. The value of a pass for brib-
cry purposes, If 1t is so used, is largely
increased, rather than diminihed, and
since men cannot be made honest by
legislation, it Is probably better to per-
init the repeal Of this law so as to
strengthen the claims Of the public TO
something more like a parity with that
Of the railroads on the services of pass
holding legislators.