Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1909-09-10
ABOUT THE cHAINeANe.
Interested citizensAsk. For some In
formation.

Editor of The York$hle Enquirer:
desire to request the use Of suffl-
Client space in your valuable columns
to develop information on a public
question that / do not exactly under
stand, and to say that have no other
purpose in trying to develop this 9TH
er than to try to secure equity and
justice for the whole county.
have reference to the manner In
which the law regulating the assign
ment Of the chaingang Is being OBJ
served at the present time.
Although not present on the occa-
sion, have heard 1t stated that Su-
pervisor Gordon recently told COM
mittee Of citizens in the court house
at Yorkville that the chaingang is
now engaged In working out a con-
tract with the city or Rock Hill,
whereby THE county Is undertaking to
give backafo Catawba township, LABOR
for a like amount of labor municipal
convicts sent from the city Of Rock
Hill had given to the county. AS ]
understood 1t, the supervisor said he
did not make rny such contract; but
was merely carrying out trade that
previous boarG made with the city
Of Rock Hill; Gut after paying back
these $500 days he would give Ca
tawba township in addition, her pro
rata share Of the two years division
to which she Is entitled by law.
Now, am not prepared to say that
this is an absolutely correct state
ment Of the situation, or that Super
visor Gordon has been correctly quot
ed by the different people from whom
get my information; but I am pre-
pared to say that II Supervisor Cor
don has been correctly quoted and
my statement is a fair representation
Of the situation, that, as l see 1t, the
whole thing is so unjust and ridicu-
lous as to make 1t seem amazing that
anybody could expect it to have the
sanction of fair-minded, intelligent
men.
AS I see 1t, under the law, Catawba
township Is entitled to the chaingang
in exactly the same proportion as the
other townships-no more and no
less, and If she has had her share of
the two years specified in the law,
tn IN the chaingang should be used
elsewhere.
What is the basis Of the alleged
trade between the city Of Rock Hill
and the county board Of commission
ers? Surely the county never agreed
to receive, feed, guard and doctor
every municipal convict that the city
was glad to get rid Of, and then, in
the course Of time, give in return for
such doubtful consideration, day for
day of the whole chaingang plant, in
Guiding superintendent, guards, doc
tors, mules, tools, and everything for
2,s0O days! OF course, I understand
that the $500 days mean that num-
hor Of Iouo for nnQ man hnf af what
rate Is the unguarded, unfed, undoc-
tored, unsupervised municipal convict
figured against the supervised, guard
ed, fed, doctored, power and machin-
cry provided convict Of the county?
According to my view and under
standing Of the case, the chaingang
Is a positive boon to every municipal
ity in the county in taking care Of
convicts who are unable or unwilling
to pay their fines, for without the
chaingang to fall back on, these
municipalities would have to pay out
all they receive in fines to support
those convicts who elect to work or
go to jail, and venture, as an esti-
mate, that the county chaingang
plant, counting convicts, mules, roll
ing stock and machinery, with the
supervision and guarding that goes
with 1t, could give back T.. a Month,
dollar for dollar, all .;:o net value 1t
has received from all the municipal
convicts it has had from the whole
ment Of the chaingang to the present
time.
l am aware that there Is an old law
that sanctions trades between coun-
ties and municipalities, under which
law the counties may make good to
the convict labor that
furnish to counties; but
however inspecific is this law In Its
provisions, l do not think 1t can be
fairly used to justify such a situation
as we have under consideration.
If it is a fact that some former
board of commissioners made
foolish trade like this, do not see
that such trade would be binding to
the present board. In the first place
there was no sense or reason In the
trade, and in the second place the law
governing the chaingang in this coun-
ty has been changed. In Section IL
we find: 1T (the chainsang) shall
by the county board of commission
ers, to work in each township in the
county during a period Of two years"
and in the same section: provided
further, The work Of the chaingang
shall be at all times under the exclu-
sive supervision and direction Of the
supervisor"
think that the law should be OBJ
served and that the chaingang should
be distributed around among the
giving each its pro rata Of
the two years, and that IL Catawba
has already gotten her share, she
should not have any more until her
time comes around again.
have no desire to be unfair or un-
just, and If anybody thinks they are
able to see where 1 have been unfair
or unjust, I am quite sure that The
Enquirer will give space for full
reply.
o. E. Wilkins.
Yorkville, s. c., September s.