The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1910-07-27
GONZALES ANSWER TO DUNCAN.
A Reply to Charges Against Editor
And Publisher.

is Freely Given 10 Him." the Column
bia State Wednesday morning in
thrce-column. double-leaded article
on the first page. published the fol-
lowing statement In reference to the
charges against that paper. it's edi-
tor and publisher. by John T. Duncan,
of Columbia. candidate for Governor.
The South Carolina political cam
paign Is about half over. In most of
tho counties visited. John T. Duncan,
an entry for the Gubernatorial nomi-
nation. has spoken. part of the bur
den OF his speech being an attack on
the State and Gonzales"
IL appears the attempt Is made, In
more or less incoherent utterances, to
connect Gonzales" with the Seminole
Company; to induce the public to be-
beve that Gonzales" advocated the
removal OF the Asylum from Colum-
bia 30 that he and associates might
buy the Asylum property, worth s2.-
ooo,eoo, for 100000. and alleging
with more or less directness that
Gonzales" proposed or planned 20
}. sell TO South Carolina for the use OF
the Asylum, his farm In Richland
County for $500 an acre when land
as good could be got by Duncan for
SIC. II Is alleged also that there were
meetings at night which were con-
spiracies for robbing the people, In
which Gonzales" took conspicuous
part
Neither the State nor Gonzales"
had anything to do with the disbar-
nont OF Duncan by the Supreme
Court Nor are they responsible for
the rules of the party governing en-
tries In the Democratic primary. Un-
derstanding Duncan's condition, and
assuming that II was known to the
people OF the state. these attacks
caused neither concern nor bitterness.
Even I'm this day. one may be "arm'd
80 strong In honesty" that such aIle-
cations from such sources pass by
"as the Idle wind" II was thought
that all respectable people would un-
dorstand.
But one reader Of the State, T. C.
Covington. OF Bennettsville, stands
forth In all South Carolina, asking
for proof OF the States integrity; he
thinks II due the States readers 10
know whether those who assume TO
lead can be vindicated. AS Mr.. Gov
inEton seems concerned ne shall not
be denied and those assaljed ,c.. o.
him
Neither the State nor Con
zales" had relations. near or remots
with the Seminole Company.
2. The State advocated the remov-
al OF the Asylum from the city limits
OF Columbia. suggesting a bond issue
90 pay for a new modern plant. and
holding that the judicious sale of the
Columbia property would furnish
money for retiring those bonds. It
was supposed by the State that this
property would be placed in the
hands OF the sinking fund commission
TO be sold gradually TO the best ad-
vantage Of the taxpayers. Neither
Gonzales" nor, so far as he is in
formed. any OF his associates" has
ever contemplated purchasing the
property or any part OF IT,
3. Neither the State nor Con
;ales' has any property in the vicln-
ity OF the Asylum to be benefited by
Is removal; on the contrary remov-
ing the Asylum from Columbia and
opening TO Improvement and settle
Inent several hundred acres OF land
githin and imedlately out of the city
s advocated by the State, would
AVE retarded for years every other
uburban development about Column
ia In several OF these suburban
developments the ov ners Of the State
re financially interested. The remov-
4 OF the Asylum which was urged
~ the State for the sake--as the
state saw it-of betterlng the condi-
Ion OF the unfortunate insane. and
improving large section Of the city.
would have caused direct financial
oss to the States owners. with no
financial return.
4. II 100000 or any other sum
vas offered for the Asylum property
point on which they have no in
ormation) neither the State nor
Gonzales he'd the most remote con-
q lection with. or interest In such Of
fer
5. Tie Gonzales" farm was not.
directly or indirectly. offered to. or
uggested by It's owner for. occupancy
y the Asylum. IL has never been on