Keowee courier. [volume] (Pickens Court House, S.C.) 1849-current, 1902-03-12
Senator Herndon on the Public Printing Again.

Messrs. Editors Keowee Courier: In
your issue of the 18th ultimo was taken
to task for saying in the Senate, while
the bill to regulate the public printing
was under discussion, and in reply to
other Senators, that the public printing
in Oconee county was not now divided
among the county papers, you in your
editorial in that issue saying: "This ad-
vertising Is now awarded by the County
Commissioners to the two papers-The
Keowee Courier and Oconee News-for
the one price provided by law, and this
sum is divided equally between them"
You then say: ".All this information was
readily accessible to Mr.. Herndon, and
he should have informed himself on the
subject before making the statement on
the floor Of the Senate that in his (Oco-
nee) county one paper was monopolizing
the public pap"
In your issue of the 26th ultimo, in
answer to certain questions asked you by
me in my communication of the 18th
ultimo, you admit that your contract for
public printing does not include adver-
tisements of notices of sales and other
notices of the Sheriff; that it does not
include the publishing of notices and
other advertisements of public nature
issued by the Master, Clerk of Court and
Judge of Probate; and you further ad-
nit that the two papers (The Keowee
Courier and the Oconee News) did at one
time publish all such notices for one
price. SO 1t seems to me that by your
own admissions the statements made by
me in the debate in the Senate were the
exact facts.
You further say in your issue of the
goth ultimo, in answer to the question
asking why the papers do not now pub
lish these notices at one price as former
ly: because after a fair trial of two or
three years we found the experiment did
not pay; but you do not answer the
question why it is right to publish a
part of such notices and not all.
You further say: Eve were induced to
consent to this arrangement in order
that all the notices of these public officers
might have the greatest publicity posi-
BILE by appearing In both papers," I,
too, thought "that all tho notices of
these public officers should have the
In both papers," as had been the custom
for several years, and such was the gist
of my argument in support of the bill.
But you would attract attention from
the issue by attacking me personally by
saying that / charged q fee of $4,000 in
one case and little less than ten per
cent in another. 1t needs no proof to
show that these were reasonable and
proper fees in those cases; but IL such
both the cases selected at random" by
The Keowee Courier my fees were fixed
by the Court on testimony taken by the
Master. In addition to the other testi-
mony we have this from the record in the
Cox case.
''R. T. Jaynes, attorney, being sworn,
says: / am a practicing attorney and con-
cur, and think the fees asked for are
reasonable and proper.
"(Signedl r. T. Jaynes."
From the record in the King case we
have this testimony:
"R. IT. Jaynes, attorney, being sworn,
says: concur in the foregoing, and con-
slider the fees reasonable and proper.
"(Signed) II. L. Jaynes."
Surely The Keowee Courier will accept
such testimony as conclusive that my
fecs in those cases we're reasonable and
proper.
More than this. at all times since /
have been practicing, have practiced In
competition with a full bar of able law
yoTS and IL my clients were not satisfied
with my terms, there were other attor-
neys, i suppose, who would have been
glad to do the work.
will say further that while the issue
Is as to the public printing, and not be-
tween me and other attorneys, am per-
fectly willing to compare my record with
that of other attorneys at this bar, when
ever shall be convinced that the public
Is interested in that subject.
Very truly yours,
E. l.. Herndon.
Walhalla, s. c., March A, 1902.