Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1905-03-07
The Federal Court Bill.


whatever to become mixed up In the
controversy over the South Carolina
Federal court bill, which failed to be-
come a law, 1t Is evident from the
communication in another column that
,be whole question Is heavily loaded,
s.ad those who would keep out OF the
sauabble must sing low.
We have not been particularly In
terested in this Federal court bill. nor
have we felt a great deal Of concern as
to which towns should be selected as
places for holding courts; but we are
free to admit that the contest has
been one very we'll calculated to excite
no little curiosity, and that Is about
all the excuse we have to offer for
summary Of the situation as we saw
II, which was published last Friday.
Our statement that Senator Latimer
had managed to get Chester interest
ed was based solely on differences from
certain situations described by diner
ent correspondents, and from various
DEVELOPMENTS in the controversy. In
other words there seemed to be strong
grounds for suspicion that such was
the case, and If we were mistaken, as
Mr.. Caldwell assures us we were, we
beg Mr.. Latimer's pardon.
But we notice that in exonerating
Mr.. Latimer Mr.. Caldwell seems dis
posed to blame Mr.. Finley, and 1t
seems to us that If 1t is to become a
matter Of doing justice, 1t Is just as
we'll to do justice all around. Mr..
Caldwell deals very kindly with Mr..
Latimer and rather harshly with Mr.
Finley, and 1t might not be improper
to inquire whether the explanation OF
this does not lie in the fact that Mr..
Finley was on the opposite side OF this
question and Mr.. Caldwell believes
that Mr.. Latimer was on his side.
AS we understand the history and
career of this Federal court bill, 1t had
it's origin with Messrs. Johnson and
Finley, who have been working on 1t
for several years. Mr.. Caldwell says
Chester took no interest In 1t until
there seemed to be possibility OF Its
passage. Messrs. johnson and Finley
were in different position, however. 1t
was because Of them that the passage
of the bill ever became possible. Mr..
Finley was interested originally at the
instance of the Rock Hill people. If
he Chester people had gone to hi
first, he would no doubt have been on
their side instead. When 1t comes to
the question Of which town has the
advantage in geographical position, a
petit jury would be unable to agree,
and to suggest that Mr.. Finley should
have abandoned Rock Hill in the in
terest of Chester, or even remained
neutral after Chester's entrance seems
to US very unfair.
Just what Mr.. Latimer did or did
not do, we do not know; but 1t Is a
matter Of fact that in a final effort
to get the bill through, the house con-
ferees agreed to include Spartanburg,
Greenwood, Rock Hill and Chester all.
This, we understand, was done at the
instance Of Messrs. johnson and Fin
ley. The senate conferees refused to
have anything Of the kind. Just why
we do not know; but If he has as much
influence in the senate as Johnson and
Finley seem to have in the house, we
would be inclined to charge it up to
Mr.. Latimer.
But whoever brought the Chester
people into the squabble. and We con-
cede that they had a. perfect right to
come in If they wanted to, it is our
deliberate judgment that the death of
the bill was due to their entrance. AS
matters stood there was never a rea-
sonable chance for them to secure the
designation Of their town as a place
for the holding Of the court, and If Mr..
Caldwell happens to be one Of those
who would rather see no bill at all
than Chester left out, he has his de-
sire.