The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1908-04-22
Call i'm and examine our line.

But, as far as we have noticed. no effort Is
being made toward making restitution 10
the wronged citizen to whom the State sold
the liquor ut an extensive price.
Instead ofdoing that, the State locked up
the $4,000, q large part OF which was due TO
dlstillers whose goods brought In the MONEY.
II is estimated hat $4,000 has already been
spent In effort OF the State to evade the full
payment Of It's debt. II South Chrolina has
any such right, we hope that II may be taken
away. The State OF course was q partner IN
any rascality OF b liquor business and after
reaping its share Of the stealing, IL should not
now be allow ed to profit by Its " wrong
doing.
Admitting that the g~rafters paid too much
for our liquor, It cannot be denied that the
State ratified the wrong by taking the IL
quor and then adding to the e1horbitant
price a profit on the rascality as We as upon
the reality. The State In not safeguarding
the interests Of the people. b came a seducer
and q partner In the crime. And we contend
that the strong partner has no right TO rob or
to punish a scape-2ost while filling Its "
pockets with the graft 1t has been said That
there Ia honesty among thieves.
The State OF South Carolina having ratified
the graft by which It made thou ands and
thousands OF dollars, has no sort OF right In
equity either to punish or TO rob It's partners.
In view of these facts I do net believe the
State can prove that II has been wronged, ex.
cent when IL more than made itself whole In
adding such prices as made the rascality
more profitable to the State than TO the indl-
.tI.1 AaA mo do MT hal1oua that twalya
hone st Jurors can be found to saddle the
blame on the citizen because OF crime for
which the State itself is primarily responsi-
BILE, and out OF which crime the State made
i'm mense sums OF money.
But the non.settlement Of the States debts
for liquor is not its worst act. Before the
| war, the State OF South CAROLINA undertook
the building ofa magnificent State house In
Columbia. Bonds were sold to raise the
money. The Legislature since 1876 repudiat-
cd fifty per cent OF the face value Of these
bonds and forced holders TO take new
| bonds in half the amount. Does anybody
believe that the State OF South Carolina had a
legal or q moral right to rob the widows and
orphans, or the ownero OF those bonds? II
certainly had no right. except the right which
conscenceless power gives.
Before the war the Legislature went sure
ty for the Sp%srtanburg and Union railroad
bonds. The State also went surety 70. Blue
Ridge railroad bonds.
The Legislature Issued "bills receivable"
and paid of or compromised her obligations
10 those bills. The Courts afterward declared
The bills uuconstltutional and worthless.
Such q course may be honest and honorable,
but no citizen has the right to repudiate his
note. The right OF might, Is the only right.
and we hope how Boon suoh right may be
TAX en- away from South Carolina.
The State OF South Carolina In Radical
times, through Its lawful officers. borrowed
from one Wesley In New York 100000. But
the State has refused to pay q cent OF IL. 1t
has even denied Wesley the right to 60 into
Court.
With these facts before US We are opposed
10 the States right to r%epudlate its debts.
We are opposed TO the States right to keep
a Citizen out OF Court when seeking justice.
We are opposed to dishonesty on the part
OF the State. even " II had been cheated In the
LIQUOR business, Instead OF making vast sums
by IL.
We are opposed 10 the states right TO
repudlate or refuse to pay borrowed money.
We are opposed 10 the right OF the State to
ipjure a citizens property. without making
proper accounting, or allowing the Citizen to
seek redress in the Courts.
And we hope that the government at
WASHINGTON may put a stop to the right OF
state to deny the right OF. the citizen to
be heard in the Courts.
Our immediate Representative IN Congress-.
Wyatt Aiken. ia working TO have The