The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1880-08-05
SEllerbe, Novsiaber 4. 1879. I further
certify that when Z granted the order Of

as ibb Foli6wissz !: aThat further the
plainhK alleg that the pretended con-
fessions of judgment has been made by
the said defendant, Robert g. Ellerhe, to
his own sister, who is the said Allen T..
Cash, and thus by q faEEly hifangement,
the ssid defendant intends 10 defeat the
rep6NeTy pf tue piAi ntifl, :. SCI forth in she
said complaint, either in the body or
margin of eaid copzpl.iut!J ~ zi,o Sy
further certify Il, addition TO the alb.
sence OF sold clause from either in the
margin or body of saidr complaint, that
after / had signed said order of injunc-
tipn.. the same having, been signed in
itriplicates, tliht the following cSnyersa.
ton. occurred between w. L. DePass,
Esq, and myself: I asked the said W..
l.. DePass II Mrs. Cash was any relation
to the defendant Ellerbe. He replied
that sha was hisisisserH tieD remarked
yOu ought to have stated that fact in the
complaint with her knowledge OF the
confession of Judgment That said De-
Pass replied that he had set forth the
facts in the margin of the original draft
of the complaint, but believing that Mrs.
Cash .Yns ignorant of the fact ut the time
the confession of Judgment h.Nd been
made to her by. her brother, that while
he had put it there he had left it out of
the original complaint ns sworn to be-
cause It might lead 70 misconsirnction.
! J! then replied il be thought SO it was
r.. y. MAckE4, Circuit, Judge.
7 desire he%~.e-vaar- &c say here that
while I,did ,purposeiy and Intentionally
refrain sfEpSn insestilig this IIhRiginal
clause OF stlie draft :dfithe e,cnmpsStnE into
the original summons and complaint, yet
! do not acknowledge by 90 doing that
did not, have the clear professional right
TO do so, in the plain discharge of pro-
fessioDal duty to my client, without oues-
tion from any one. if bad(thought that
1t was a. family ItYiangen,saf,, 6ut as tie
truth ia + did not think II ,ras an arrange.
nient Nth t0hich lfrs. Cash had anwhino
to do. and furthermore as then believed,
and do, nov, thst she was ignorant of :iie
fact at the time af such confession of
Judgment having been nade TO her by
her brother, out Of the sincere and gem
uine respect that entertained for her rs
lady, and for that regard l felt for Che
feelings of q husband, / did refrain from
what would have been, with my belief. q
gratuitous insnlt.7 This was my motive
in excluding the clause, and no ,miscon.
struction by any man at my saying SO
will proven. :.le from expressing what is
the truth. It was for this reason that
Col. Shannon SO earnestly assured Gen.
Cash in his letter to him OF the 25th,
that he k',e,o and soas confident that I did
not sssy or intend 10 sap a,syfhiag that
scohid in,pute fraud 10 Jfrs. Cdsh in the
sense that he Gen. Cdsh) had applied it.
Both these papers, the rough draft and
the original complaint, are identical in
every particular, except the rough draft
is i1 my handwriting, has she marginal
clause ahd is not sworn to by MY client,
Conrad ri. Wienges, but appears to be
30 before me as Notary Public, and for
convenience was intended to be used to
copy from, leaving, out the marginal
clause, whereas tileoriginal complaint is
in the handwriting of Mrs. DePass, is
sworn to BY our client, Conrad NJ. Wien
5es, who signed the same before me az
Notary Public, and has not the marginal
clause MIR is the clanse In Che BODY
thereof. Both are covered BY sum.
monses identical in every particular, and
night here it was ibyl reason of this out.
ward similarity that most unfortunate
mistake was made s6y me soha salesday.
November 3, 1879, BY aefsinIgI on the
Sheriff this rough draft covered up in its
summons with the order of Injunction
instead of the original complaint with its
summons, the reason being that the
Sheriff, vino was entitled to copies, said
to me that Gen. Cash was In town and
wanted to see the papers upon which I
had obtained the Injunction, and th@ If
i would let him have the original sum.
mons gId complaint for day. or two
upon which I had obtgihed the injunc-
tion he would relieve me of making
copies, and as aforesaid through mistake,
INSTEAD of the original summons and
complaint upon which I had obtained
the iDjunction) served on him this rough
draft in its summons. These he handed
to Gen. Cash ,7ho, in tnrn, tool therl-to
bis attorneys, Leitner g. Dunlap. Thus
Gen, Cash sas this alarginal efaases aud
being in a{paper tllS Stimmons 90 EyhiEh
was marked Original. signed and a1pa.
rently sworn TO, he supposed to be such,
md sdonhtless his laYyegs thought like
wise. II (. - = ssss.j
This mistake Isdid not discover for
several days, and before did SO, even
Obtained the papers from Gen. GSsh's
attorneys, hid q copy snade az them,
serving ii upon The ,said attorneys. sali
that time never for ra moment Thinking
to examine Tho papers 30 seEpe6 by mis-
take, or oven the copy when mads; be-
calige not for one. e.momentfs fsii1ii EstidnhE
their correctness. After disc6yefing the
mistake, at once fled the Original suria3
mons aud complaint. eitiidrcw from Gen!
CASH Is attorneys the copy served aud aub-
stituted copy of tho original sumnlona
and complaint, iupoh which ii had sobJ
tanned the injunction, as the ceftificate of
Judge Aackey will show Was la the
handspring of Mn. Del PASS md did not
contain the nsdrgfiial clause refer sEasTl Td TO-
NOR Aany such e.gEee Ia the h0dys af THE
complaint. The certificate Of ihe Clerk
of the Court, the Sheriff and Messrs.
t.aiiner & Dunlap all prove what I have
here asserted, and I cannot hello from
expreeaiAg my thanks to these Tetitlen1er
For their publication; and ihsteRa of T.;
@. HIS assertion that they placed me in
an awkward position, 1 find that they are
absolutely necessary for my V;ldic1tion.
They all show that the paper aorved on
the Sheriff is not tho paper now on sile
in the Clerks office; they all show that
the paper served on The Sheriff wss In
my handwriting, and that there was On
tho - DArgin the 81 llIise g at the RintifE
further alleges that tao pretended con-
fession Of Judgment has been made by,
the said defendant, Robert g. ElIerbe, to
his own sister, who is the said Allen E,
Cash, isud thus by n family arrangement
the. .said defendant intends 10 defeat the
recovery of the plaimt;h,,n wharens the
papeg-now on Gle does not .cantain s1le
aforesaid clause either IL shs iadrgin or
body Thereof. Whereas the cert "a q eE
Jhagc Mackey does show thss ] y q o. :