The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1915-02-17

adoption of the budget in the Duma.
eral, then it has arisen during the
last 80 days and 1 can not but feel
that the governor himself was respon-
sible."
Mr.. Earr of Georgetown said that
none Of Gov. Manning's predecessors
since 1880 had had to have O special
appropriation for legal advice. He
cited the case Of Dominick VS.. Jones
and submitted that it would be illegal
to place the proposed sum for legal
advice in the governors hands.
Mr.. Searson of Barnwell voiced his
protest" against the item. He said
that it was illegal. He declared that
he had no partisan feeling in the mat
ter. He said that the attorney gem
eral was absolutely fair.
IF there was a man in South Caro-
lima who was anti -Blease, 1 was he"
declared Mr. Graydon of Abbeville.
who testified to his respect for Gov.
Manning. The attorney general.
whom I know slightly, has been elect
ed by the people. If he is incapable,
then the people can blame them
selves"
Mr.. Graydon said it would be a
mistake not to strike out the legal
advice" item Of the bill.
Mr.. Dick Of Sumter denied the al
legged rumor that Gov. Manning would
pay his campaign manager with the
appropriation.
The thing is too low and too far
beneath me to pay any attention to it
as l happened to be one of MIR. Man
ning's campaign managers" declared
Mr.. Dick.
He pointed out that a year ago he
had voted to give Gov. Blease $4,000
to spend without passing through the
comptroller generals office.
1T is political matter" declared
Mr.. Dick. I'VE can not compel Mr..
Manning to go to the partner of his
bitterest political enemy when he
wants legal advice. If We want law
and order in South Carolina, then we
must give Gov. Manning this appro-
priation, else he will have to go down
into his own pocket to pay for legal
advice on matters pertaining to legal
affairs"
Mr.. Lilies of Orangeburg defended
the proposed appropriation. He point
ed out no more had been appropriat-
ed this year than last year for spe-
cial litigation, but $4,000 for this pur-
pos had been placed in the gov
ernor's hands. He said that he had
been informed that the attorney gen.
eral had suggested that all of the
$4,000 for special litigation be placed
at the disposal Of Gov Manning.
IF l were to vote against this ap-
preparation, 1 would feel that 1 was
voting for Bleaseism and against law
and order" declared Mr.. Lilies.
Mr.. King of Georgetown said he
was friendly to Gov. Manning's ad-
ministration, but could not agree to
the appropriation of $4,000 for legal
advice.
Mr. Muldrow Of Florence said that
the appropriation of $4,000 for legal
advice should not be given to the
governor.
Mr.. Taylor of Fairfield said he was
opposed to passing the legal advice"
item.
why are we taking LG"t i'm q lit
tie quarrel that has sprung up be-
tween two State officials?" asked Mr.. |
Wingard, who said he believed both
the attorney general and the gov
ernor were both wrong. He declared |
further that the general assembly |
ought not to be called upon to make
an appropriation for legal advice.
BY a vote Of AZ to As the house re-
tanned the item of $4,000 for legal
advice for the governor.
cter deciding to allow tho "lep,l
advice item to remain in the sec
llon for the governors office. the
house proceeded to the consideration
Df other sections of the bill.