The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1912-03-16
SUMTER s. G., SATURDAY, MARCH 1e 1912

facilities. The specific purpose for
which this appropriation is intended isI
to assist the city Of Sumter in pro-
viding rights of way and terminals for
South Carolina Western railway (Sea-
boardD. The city Of Sumter has al
ready appropriated and made avail
able $4,000 for this purpose and the
$4,000 appropriation by the county
Is to supplement this fund so that
the entire cost Of the rights Of way
and terminals will not fall upon the
property owners Of the city. The
building Of the railroad will increase
the taxable property Of the county
fifty TO hundred thousand dollars
and the amount appropriated by the
county will be repaid In taxes in a
few years. AS was to be expected op-
position has developed to the appro-
priation OF county funds for this pur-
pose. and the county grand jury has
been called to meet in special session
tomorrow (Friday) to consider the
matter and take action. although 1t is
a question for argument whether or
not the grand jury has any authority
in the premises. except In a general
advisory capacity. Under the wording
Of the act the sole authority to pay
over this money Is vested in the
Board Of County Commissioners, and
II they see mt to pay over $4,000, as
the act authorizes them to do, the
grand jury cannot stop them, save
by legal proceedings. remedy open
to eny citizen, who believes this ap-
preparation is illegal.
The matter Is further complicated
by vital discrepancy in the wording
of the Act as ratified and filed with
the Secretary OF State and the origin
al Act as II was actually passed, after
being amended in the Senate and in
the committee of free conference.
AS will be seen by reference to the
ratified Act the county officials are
authorized" to pay over $4,000,
while in the original bill they are
authorized and directed" to do SO.
A careful and painstaking examination
has been made Of the journals Of the
House and Senate and nowhere does
Ii appear that the words "and direct
ed" were stricken cut Of the supply
bin by amendment in the Senate, by a
committee or by the committee of free
conference. When, by whom or by
what authority the bill was changed
In this important particular does not
appear In any Of the journals, and the
logical conclusion that II was the re-
suit Of clerical error in the engross-
ing department after the bill left the
hands of the committee of free con-
frence. What the law actually is, Is
question for the lawyers to deter
mine-whether 1t Is as agreed upon
by the House and Senate or as emas-
culated by some clerk in the engross-
ing department who carelessly omit
ted important words when copying
the amended bill for ratification.
The point Of the whole matter is:
The Act as written and passed by
House and Senate made a direct ap-
preparation Of $4,000 and directed
the county officials to Immediately
pay IL over to the Treasurer Of the
city OF Sumter; the act as amended
by the engrossing department, au-
thorizes. but does not order the coun-
ty officials to pay over the money.
In one case they are commanded to
do certain thing, in the other the
doing of this thing is left optional with
the county officials.
For the information of the public
and for comparison with the copy OF
the act obtained from the Secretary
OF State. the original bill and the
several amendments are reproduced
below. from the House and Senate
journals. 1t will be seen that the
words "and directed" where referring
to the $1,000 appropriation were
never stricken from the bill by Sem
ate. House or free conference COM
| mittee. and should. therefore, appear
I'm the ratified Act as in the original
bill: