The times and democrat. [volume] (Orangeburg, S.C.) 1881-current, 1908-02-11
(Appelt) had stated what was G


(Appelt) had stated what was 6
falsehood.
\ (" Senator Earle said that the infor'
|mation contained in that article was
false and insulting.
! Senator Applet declared that 9
tempest in a teapot" had been STIR
red up. He said that he wrote the
article referred to and was alone re.
sponsible for its publication. He
said that he based that article upon
information which he regarded as
lauthentic. No names were given tc
him by his informants, but he de.
clared that he was satisfied that the
statements contained in the article
in so far as they related = members
of the general assembly being attor'
neys for whiskey houses were abso'
lutely correct. He said that while he
was g member of the senate he was
also an editor Of newspaper and
felt priviledged to criticise persons
whenever he had information upon
| which to base such criticisms.
He said that if anybody was to be-
expelled from the senate it should
, be those senators who represent
whiskey houses and who would use
their official position to defeat the
ends of legislation seeking to give to
the attorney general funds with
which to prosecute the grafters.
He said to Senator Earle he had
no right to know from whom he got
his information, or what that 1nfor-
nation was in detail.
Represents Two Houses.
Senator Weston said that it is a
penalty that men in public life pay
to be misunderstood by some good
men and to be misrepresented by
some bad men. He had no apologies
to make to any member Of the senate
or to any nwspaper man or anybody
else for his professional conduct. He
had been honored by the people of
Richland county for many. years and
it is for them to say whether his con-
duct meets with their appreciation.
He stated that the law firm with
which he is connected, Weston & Ay-
cock. represents two Of the linnor
houses which have claims pending
before the dispensary commission,
but no man could say, he declared,
tha.. his vote or his actions in the
senate were Influenced by such rela-
tions. He said that one Of the houses
he represents placed their claims in
his hands bfore the commission was
established, the New York and Ken
lucky Distilling company.
Senator Christensen's Criticism.
Rising to question Of personal
privilege, Mr.. Christensen said:
II too, am an editor and during
the sessions of the legislature have
occasion to comment on events IN
the legislature. I have commented
in a general way on the situation
discussed by the senator from Claren-
don in his paper and the senator
from Richlsud, who has just taken
his seat.
ut Is my belief that the senator
from Richland has not acted in any
way inconsistent with his ideas of
what is right and proper. But
disagree with him and have said SO
and propose to condemn his course
again If l think proper. He repre-
sents some of these liquor houses
whose claims are being investigated
and some OF the ex-State dispensary
officials who are under indictment
and thinks it proper and right as
State senator to oppose in the senate
the bill to provide the attorney gen
eral with funds to prosecute his
clients. 1 disagree with him and
habe so stated elsewhere and wish
to put myself on record here
Snator kaysor's Statement.
Senator Raysor said that he re-
GREETED that it was necessary for him
to raise a question Of personal pcivi-
lege, but he felt compelled, under
the circumstances, TO enter his pro-
test against the charges contained in
the newspaper clipping which had
been read.
He said he voted against the Otis
resolution because he considered Il
unwise, but he had publicly proclaim
ed from the floor of the senate thai
he would vote to give to the attorne!
general any amount of money ne
needed in the prosecution of case:
arising from the investigation OF the
affairs Of the State dispensary.
He thought that the attorney gen
eral should be given all the assist
ance necessary in these matter"--ll
Justice to the State and to the mel
under Indictment the charges arisinE
from that Investigation should b'