The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1913-04-09

single thinking man. What he
wants to know, is this Mr.. Z.
Whaley's record: Why va S
it he wanted to require the
registration certificates in or
der to vote in the primary:
Did he have the view that if
the registration certificate Was
required IN the primary. the vot.
H. e strength in the country would
be cut down, and in the cities the
laboring people would also be de
prived of the unhampered right
to exercise their franchise: The
Columbia State for the past fe"
years has been urging that these
certificates be required in the
primaries, and the result of its
agitation is that in the city OF
Columbia where this is now the
requirement., it had the effect OF
practically disfranch sing abru'
one half Of the voters. Tnos,
who did not secure the regl>tra
ton certificates of course could
not vote, Il large proportion OF
them could not spare the time
from their work in the shops and
the factor ; t. seek the reylStra
tion officer e saw 1t IS not fair
to the peoe,l, who Want lnforma
ton to raise "a false cry to throw
them off from pubIic record If
this is Whaiey's record he should
be endorsed or repudlated by
those who have the ballot.
Did Mr.. Wha!ey have time to
refute this record? With his large
force Of workers in Charleston
aud in Sumter it seems to US, if
the statements made in that cir
cular are not true, it could haV''
been refuted before now. Our To-
formation is that he has friends
10 Sumter who are taking d Very
active interest in his race, Sum
ter has no vote in this district.
nevertheless, these Su I'm e +
friends are burning lots of gaso'
lene in the interest Of a man VINO
does not live IN the district that
Sumter is located in. Why is
this? Why should Sumter under
take to run the politics Of Clar
endon? Is it to repay the polt
ical debt for Whaley's support OF
a Sumter CITIZEN who was candl
date against a Clarendon citizan?
These are pertinent questions for
The people of Clarendon to pon
der over, and they should not be
misled by any beclouding Of the
facts.
With regard to the election Of
Judge Wilson we have reliable in
formation that Mr.. Whalev wired
20 him with reference 10 the st tie
meut in the circular retaLln- ts
MIR. Whaley's attitude towards
him, and asked that he Write
Whaley giving his opinion of
the matter, stating in the teie-
gram that be wanted the Judges
letter for publication. Judgr
Wilson in answer to the tele-
gram said the circular was got
ten up without his knowledge.
out the statement made therein
with reference to Whaley's con
duct towards him when he Was
i'll in the hospital and could not
get out to defend his interests,
is substantially the same as
was reported to him by his
f. lends at the time, and these
friends were Indignant at Mr..
Whaley's conduct. Judge Wilson
further stated in his letter to
Mr.. Whaley, that if his letter
was to be published, the Whole
aud not extracts must be puo
llshed. Up to the present
we have not seen where Mr..
Whaley has published Jud ge
Wilson's reply to him, nor do
we think that he will, notwith-
standing the fact, he asked for it
himself.
Mr.. Whaley had right to op-
pose Judge Wilson for Mr.. Fra;
sier, Of Sumter, no one would
be silly enough to dispute that,
but when he is asking the peo-
pie of Clarendon to support him,
they have q right to know his
record and Judge nm by it
Then again. the vote Mr.. Won
Kolnitz received Was after his
record had been exposed; in his
case, the people were asked by
Mr.. Whaley to consider Won
Kolnitz' record, then why should
not Whaley's record be consider
ed. and why should his friends
attempt to dlscredit the eX
posure of this record unless
tuey Can refute it by the record
Then too, did not Whaley dis
credit Peurifoy's record, and
make sighting references to the
career of Mr.. Padgett. Let all
be fair.