The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1909-02-03

A00 sumter Watchman was found
- o. 1sss and the True southron In
nooo. The watchman and southron
ooe has Ne combined circulation and
on0asNce of both OF the old papers,
- = snanifestiy the best advertising
uDD11un n Sumter.
PuUtbeat Roosevelt In his Outlook
ure1cl>. deunnciatory of the predatory
- aad unscrupuious end ruthless
u~~sr- seeking omce-hoiders. uncon-
oresussy draws a remarkably accurate
ons>rait OF himself when he describes
- sar-marks OF the Statesman who
2Rueroys his country In seeking SELF
oeeandisement. Roosevelt Is all aud
1870 than he says the people should
n1Ar IN . statesman.
Aldermen Kaebn offered a lresoiu-
onsa d council meeting that our rep
u>nsneatives In the legislature be re-
Nnpksd 20 use their influence to have
~uscts1 Law requiring property
ouuses - pay ons-hajf the cost of
1ofDwnIk and street paving .rhis IL
~AnDA <ee strong dose OF public
4peevensat TO be endured by the
Uuul,snt propsrty-ownsr. and we trust
60 Sumter County Representatives
v9n - slow Ia acting on the ugges-
on,a- a law of this character would
noose IN lntoierabls burden upon
u1oo prepssty-owners while others
vt~Hn ssoAps. except for the small
ugeoeveioa Of the one-half the cost o..
1nv1ng that would be paid out Of tho
~ treasury. what justice would
<hevo - In forcing the property own
- - Maln street to pay one-half ths
~ % concrete sidewalks and vitri-
- brick street paving. which are
uendsred nscessary by the fact that
lEsin s<rest happens to be this chief
Uhoroughfars Of the town and there
~ used BY every citizen. Taxpayer
- non-tax-payer? There would be
e,@s reason IN requiring property
"~vnsr to psy fair proportion of the
- Of . sidewalk. but to make him
~ for strest paving would be going
~ fer. street paving--like sewer
~ and . wsaer supply---should be
~AesrtHkea snd paid for by the munic-
Nn1iey e. . whole. the buvdeh being
eg.ally and fairly distributed by tax
aoea. We have been informed by
Aswyer--one VINO Il credited with
esme knowiedgs OF the Iaw-that an
ace alsns the lines suggested by Az
<wman LAgon could not be enforced
Since H. would be In conflict with the
sne<itattoa Of the state and to legal
~ zach IN act Il would be necessary
~ sneud Ne constitution.
rThe oltys Of Sumter has a city hall
rlvat cost within few dollars OF Sss.-
~ whom material and labor were far
utw>r IN price than at present: this
ssa6 and imposing building stands
- enc Of the most desirable and valu-
asnas aots In the city. worth not less
tAsA S1J.0eo "a $4,000. II valued at
th&' same rate per front foot as other
lad In the same locality. hence tho
<xny hall property represents an In
,so1kmsut of not less than S53, 900. The
tsa6 excas for the expenditure OF S3s.-
tseo for the erection of a building on a
iise worth $4,000 was that the city
- sumter must have city hail. the
'sDera house and store rooms iucorp-
'G~hd therein being OF secondary con-
'e1deratson and merely to bring In some
hcome- Now. however. the city coun-
e1> has decided to abandon the city
&n,l fer public uses and erect another
eouding. Tho rentals now received
frsm the opera house and store rooms
IN the building aggregate $3.50 year
and n ID, estimated that when the city
vacAtes the ofsices now used for inu-
u1cipai purposes the rents can be In
ereased 10 approximately $4,000 a year
Ian income Of less than per cent
- the value OF the property. IL the
Inn 10 erect combination fire de-
uartment. city prison and city Office
eslsdinE In carried out. the next step
nAooid be to unload the city hall white
esephant which seems to be absolute
~ vslseiess for the purpose for which
= was erected. for the city of Sumter
cannot afford to carry a $4,000 in