The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1911-08-23
REPLY FROM MIR. DIAL.

| The following communication was
clipped ou. of the last issue of "The
Herald":
Editors of The Herald.
We noticed in last weeks Adver-
tiser some remarks in reference to the
city councils not Immediately order
Ing the election to vote on the ques-
tion of issuing bonds to aid In build
my railway. / am glad that The Ad-
Yertiser agitated this question, and
think 1t might profitably agitate q
| good many more questions. However,
am sorry the editor did not post
nself more fully as to the facts of
the case. | was too busy last week
TO dot down these remarks. but feel
that the property owners and voters
OF our city have a perfect right to
NV overy action of city council and
the reason therefor. l fully realize
that we are the agents. servants and
employees OF the tax payers and yot
ers, and am always ready to give an
account of my stewardship. Briefly,
the facts are these:
DR.. Aiken came before city council.
at special meeting, and read an Act
of the legislature.-Act 527 of the
Session 1910, page 992. This Act au-
thorizes and directs the city council
to order an election to vote on bonds
whenever majority Of the free hold
ers of the city petition for the same.
In the Act it states, Ito aid in build
ing railroad to or through the city
of Laurens." We happen to know that
sometime since a survey was made for
a proposed road from Greenville to
Clinton via the eastern edge of our
| city. Some of us know that this is a
| ridge road, and would be much more
| easily built than a road that would
cross the river and on through the
town. etc. The city council was unan-
imously in favor of this proposed road,
or any other road. to come through our
city. A few of us, however.-and we
| happened to he in majority. at this
meeting,-desired that the question be
postponed until we could become fur
ther posted and receive some assur-
ance, first, as to the General direction
and location of the roads terminus,
etc. Calling to mind Sullivan town
ship, where bonds were paid and de-
livered and which are still taking
! taxes to pay, we thought it was the
better part of prudence to go little
| slower and let our people be better
posted 1t is true, said Act says the
proceeds of said bonds are to be paid
out by the council as the work pro-
greses. We do not deem this, howev
er, as of sufficient protection. The
road might be built to the edge of
town, completed and then call for the
bonds. am not prepared to say wheth-
er authorizing said road to come to
or through the town would mean to
the square. to the depot, or possibly
to, and just within, the corporate linn
| pnccihla
the requirements Of the Act, If such
is the case, and if the road should be
built just on the edge of our town, /
am not prepared to say that it would
be to the interest OF our tax payers.
merchants and business people, gen
orally to vote bonds for this purpose.
They thereby would possibly build
up another town to come in competi-
tion with them.
/ have no hesitancy in saying that
was not familiar with the Act my
self, and ] am satisfied that not one
signer in ten ever read it or famil
iarized himself with the requirements
thereof. We, therefore, thought. while
we are heartily in favor of building
up our town and of encouraging any
and all industries, within our power
to come here. yet, perhaps, 1t was a
part of caution to let the property
owners and voters consider this ques-
ton little more in detail. There was
no intention whatever, on the part Of
the council who took this stand, to
disregard the interests Of the people;
on the other hand. we thought 1t was
our duty, since the matter had been
called to our attention. to let each and
every one be better posted, for it might
be too late, to their great injury.
Il
Gil. it has been called to my atten-
tion that there is another Act of the
legislature, passed at the same ses-
sion, on page 1904. which requires four
miles OF railway within the incorpor~
ate limits. This Act was not called
to our attention, and. to be perfect
ly candid with you, | had never heard
Of it, or IL SO, had forgotten 1t. It
was approved, however. on the 23d
day Of February, 1910. when the 9TH
er Act was approved on the 2Sth day
Of February, 1910. Whether tie lat
ter Act repeals the former. / am rot
prepared at the moment 10 answer.
trust our citizens will examine both
OF these Acts and consider the petit
tion aud see whether or not the couD-
Gil would have a right to place any
conditions or restrictions upon vot-
, ing the bonds. In the absence of any
, proposed company Offering to come
here, would it be wise to vote bonds
and have them hanging over us? If
any one desires to build n road here
would they not come and state to us
upon what terms and conditions. etc.
they would do SO? 1 have just writ
ten enough for the interested parties
to consider these various questions
and ] assure them that one member
of the council. at least, would be glad
to have any light opinion or com
ments the tax payers may desire to