The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1907-12-04
FIGHT not ENDED.
Vigorous Protest Against the Dis
pensaIy at EIIoree
Opponents Of the Dispensary Allege
Unfair Methods and Assert That
Majority Don't Want 1t Reopened.

Unfair Methods and Assert That
Majority Don't Want 1t Reopened.
The fight over the reopening Of
the dispensary at Elloree still goes
on, and it is likely to go on until
the matter is settled accordingly to
the openly expressed wishes of the
people mostly interested. Last week
We published the fact that the dis
pensary would be reopened in which
article it was stated why the board
had taken that action. Below We pub
lish an article from Rev. Ino. a.
BTunson protesting against the ac-
ton of the board in regard to the
opening the dispensary, in which he
asserts that majority Of the peo-
pie of Elloree are opposed to the
dispensary being reestablished. Mr..
Mr. Brunson says:
There is much indignation felt by
many of the heaviest taxpayers and
the most substantial citizens of Ell
loree at the recent decision of the
Orangeburg Dispensary board to re-
open the Elloree dispersary. They
feel, and not without cause, that they
have been treated unfairly; that the
board, taking advantage of a loosely
worded law, has thrust an evil in
stitution upon them against their
earnest protests.
The board by it's published state
ments has failed to show that ma
jority of the Elloree citizens are in
favor of the dispensary. 1t claims as
the result Of Capt. Claffy's canvass
that 81 looked with favor upon the
dispensary's return, 20 were opposed
to it, II were Indifferent and four
were not interviewed. Thus it is
seen, according to Capt. Claffy's own
figures that only 27 out of 62 voters
expressed a willingness to have the
dispensary reopen and upon the
preference of this minority, and
against the strong opposition of a
number of the largest property own
ers and against the advice of their
legal counselors, they have decided
to reopen it. Is this fair?
IF majority Of the citizens in
opposition to the movement was re-
quired to keep the dispensary out,
then in fairness a majority of the
citizens favoring it ought to be re-
quired to put it in. But 81 out OF
So do not constitute majority, TN
less, perhaps. it is SO considered in
a dispensary caucus. What is sauce
for the prohibition gander ought to
be sauce for the dispensary goose.
Determinations are odious.
But this is not all. About one
month ago 81 Of our citizens, and
among the 81 are some Of the lead
ing merchants and the largest prop
erty owners of the town, signed with
their own hands petition begging
the board not to reopen the dispen-
sary. And yesterday another mer-
chant, who was absent when the pc.
tirion was being circulated, asked
to have his name affixed to the list
thereby increasing the number to
SO. Yet in the face of this expression
of the will Of the people the board
was not satisfied, and sent two OF
its members to Elloree to canvass
the town again-an act Of intrusion.
be it bserved, which lies beyond
their jurisdiction.
The law clearly defined the duties
of dispensary boards, and it does
not give them any authority to &C
to adjacent towns and personally
conduct canvasses in behalf of the
dispensary. But members of the
Orangeburg board came to Elloree
and the canvass was made with the
result stated above. And this can
vass is as unsatisfactory to the peo.
pie of Elloree as the petition Of tht
Elloree> citizens was to them. Th9
method they pursued in making the
canvass is clearly not above suspi-
cion. No petition was presented &C
any one nor was the signature Of
any one taken Capt Clafy Interview
ed each man privately, and he tolc
some, certainly, and perhaps al
whom he Interviewed, tha.- their
statements would be received in co..
fdence and that their preference
would not be made public. Secrecy
in such matter and under such
circumstances awakens in man:
minds an apprehension of unfairness.
"A disposition to be perfectly open
and fair with proper respect fol
the rights of the citizens of Elloree
would have at least have dictated the
making of a full report of their
work. disclosing each name for anG
against the measure. But no such
report has ever been made to US.
Our rights have been completely ig-
nored The only repot we received
was the announcement that the dis
"OulO UC OpCl4CC. I AO OooI "
says that 13 out of the 81 signers OF
our petition declared during the can
iass either that they favored the dis.
)ensary of were Indifferent We |
would like to see those names to-
yether with full report of theil
An indignant, self
people can not refuse to
omply with their demands.
As the matter now stands the
'oard and its liquor-advocating
riends have not only transgressed
he limits of courtesy and prudence,
ut they have offered insult to
rec and intelligent people. and have
ommitted grave offense against
ne principles of democracy. Their
reed for grog and gold has led them
30 far. What the final result viii!
e | can not foresee But I hope that
?e people of the State will be led to
ae the unwisdom Of a law that gives
, few men, called dispensary
oard the right .tO asta h1ich . die