Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1914-01-06
COURT HOUSE LOCATION.

"I wish you would tell the people
that am one Of the men behind that
petition that was referred to in The
ENQUIRER last week as being circulat-
ed in the hope of saving the present
court house building to the town and
the value of the site to the county,
| said DR.. R. A. Bratton Of Yorkville, to
The Enquirer this morning.
my reason for desiring this infor-
nation to go out" DR.. Bratton con-
tinued, "is that am hearing Of GER
tain rumors that have been put afloat
that are carrying false impressions as
to ulterior motives, ETC., and want 1t
distinctly understood not only that
am helping to circulate the petition;
but that in doing so, l feel that l am
discharging a public duty. >.
IAN effort is being made to have II
appear to people who do not know
any better that I am actuated by a
selfish desire to sell the county anoth-
er site in exchange for the prescI
site. If anybody wants to believe that
they are welcome; but it is not true.
1t is a fact that I have very good
l. oOe-
change for the present building and
site; but it is not a fact that am at
all anxious to make the sale or eX-
change. My only reason for making
the offer was to prevent, If possible,
what I conceive to be the fearful mis-
take the commission seems bent on
making.
"The present building and site are
worth $50 cash. There Is no ques-
ton of that for this amount has bee,
actually offered and refused. Rebuild
ing on the present site involves the
tearing down Of the present building
and the removal Of the public records
and offices while the new building is
going up. That means several thous-
and dollars additional expense
would say total of not less than s2O,-
OOO-it will cost the taxpayers to re-
build on the present site. others ng-
ure the cost still higher. They may be
correct: but l am reasonably certain
that my estimate is not too high.
"On the other hand, II we get ar J.
other site no matter where, at COST
of say $4,000, we will save at least
SIC, 900 to the county-probably more.
There will be no interruption OF the
present progress of public business
while the new building is going up,
the records on account Of the two re-
movals to which they will otherwise
be subject. Besides this, when the
present building and site pass into
private hands they will go on the tax
books at much higher prices than are
now assessed against any lot that Is
likely to be taken for the new site.
That will mean still another and per-
petual advantage to the county that is
not to be overlooked except from
very shortsighted viewpoint.
"As to whether the commission
takes my lot on the basis Of an offer l
made to it some time ago, positively
do not care two cents. 1t may take the
lot or let it alone AS have said, all
I want is to secure the location Of the
proposed new building on a new site.
and for the reasons I have given.
Those who have read the petition to
which I refer, and which Is now being
widely signed will see that there Is
absolutely nothing in 1t, that Is IN
tended to bind the commission to take
my lot or any particular lot. 1t merely
seeks to prohibit the use Of the present
site. I would be glad to withdraw
nv lot from all consideration except
that l prefer to have it at the disposal
of the commission in case 1t shall be
deemed most suitable. Infinitely l
prefer the acceptance and use OF the
lot donated bv Mr.. F. E. Smith rather
than rebuild on the present site at the
| tremendous expense the use or this
site will involve; but as I understand
this petition. and I am sure I under
stand it correctly, there is no inten-
ton or desire to compel the selection
of the Smith lot. The only object
sought is to compel the erection OF the
new building on some other than the
pracapt siten