The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1880-08-05
CAMDEN. S. c.. July 20.

orsble reputation that I have labored so
long EfasaS faithfully and 80 earnestly to
buildsrp in this community, Ia commu.
nifty where ! was born, was raised, and
have spent all Of my days. that the
sacred heritage of q nsme synonymous
with trdthiand honor transmitted to me
by father beloved and respected wher-
ever known, should at least receive at my
hands. .no detriment, but be by me trans.
mitteda Gnsullied toSHY schi ildre1 :as, a
sasted asgssS tqteack item what. may be
gained by the firm determination to do
and act right under ali circumstances.
This preface might. indicate that the
opinion of your correspondent was we'll
founded, since after my return I take
occasion to express myself 80 warmly and
so teelingly, but if the egratifed express.
ions Of opinion. .as my early return from
all classes IN this Community is any in
dication that no such public indignation
eser-existed, (hnt.tbat twas confned-to
thosepf my hitterest enemies whose pur-
pose was so 'evident-t to destroy me,) then
might content myself to let the matter
rest here, endorsing whatever my friend
. Col. Blair has said in my vindication du-
ring my absence, though have neither
read or heard, at this writing, his COM
munication.
Much, however, is. due to my friends
and those who have not been hasty in
their judgment, and to an impartial
public, that my connection with this en-
tire matter should be given, and with
this view aloneI publish it.
Il Robert G. .Ellerbe made confession of
Judgement to Mrs. ALLEN E. Cash for the
: sum of S15, ,02O.25, sum sufficient to
cover all of his property, both real and
personal, under which, if his property
had been sold then, would have remained
nothing to satisfy . subsequent judgment
? recpyereG sgainst him by @. M. Wienges
for'the sim of $1,000. Upon the appli-
cation of our client, Mr.. G. M. Wienges,
Col. Shannon and myself, as his attor-
neys, concluded to institute proceedings
inthe Coqrtsr to setsaside this confession
of jndgms Mt. Fhis proceeding was in
stitutea by summons and complaint, and
issin ths handwriting Of Mrs. w. L..
DePass, s,-eEcept- the -signature-of Conrad
M. Wienges, our client, who .swears to
the truth thereof before me. AS . Notary
Public October %, s1979.S y utowas read
over BY me to Col. Shannon and ap-
proved OF by, him. ] then applied for
the injunction before his Honor T. j.
Mackey,, 10 Chester, Sc; who, upon the
sans November 1, 1879. The order was
signed in triplicate. This original sum-
mons and complaint was filed in the
Clerks Office November z, 1879, and has
never been taken out by either of the
attorneys since that day, except perhaps
when it was used upon the trial of the
case at the February term of the Court
1880, and it was then in the custody of
the CLERK of the Court. -
When the Injunction was granted and
signed BY Judge Mackey, as aforesaid,
there suas NO such clause either in the mar
gin.or the tody of tie complaint as the fol.
lowing: "7he plaintiff further alleges that
thc.said pretended! con ntession Of judgment
has been made by the said defendant, Rob-
ert g. ENsrbe, to- his o,un sister, 1oho, Is the
said 1llen E. Cash, and thus By a family
asTasgsnsnt thegsaid defendant intends to
dee& shd rscpse1y Of plaintiff = snor for
atkatfmattsf was it ever intended to be-,
but to the contrary was purposely aud
intentionally excluded therefrom for the
very reason Of. its possible construction
otherwise than it was intended to be, as
the sequel will most conclusively show.
When l first prepared the complaint I
drew up what all careful lawyers do in
cases of importance, more especially
those involving new and undecided legal
propositions, based upon facts which re-
quire careful and exact statements, what
may be termed rough or original draft.
This draft comprised the grounds of &C.
ton, the prayer for injunction and judg-
ment, with an affidavit of the truth Of
the allegations supposed to be signed by
Conrad N. Wienges, our client, before
me as Notary Public, with the names Of
w. NJ. Shannon and w. l.. DePass,
plaintiffs attorneys, covering which was
q summons addressed to the four defend.
ants. signed inside, and endorsed with
the. same names of plaintiffs attorneys,
aaii,markea - Original Summons" with
complaint annexed, all of which was in
my handwriting. As an after-thought
the marginal clause was placed on the last
sheet Of this rough draft, and at the time
inteaded. .to}refer, exclusively to the de-
fepdant Elicrbe, and to him only, in a
purely legal sense. So any lawyer would
consider, especially when taken in con-
nection with the prior allegations set
forth therein.
When, however, the original summons
and complaint was prepared, this margi-
nal clause being carefully examined was
found liable 10 construction different to
whats.I had at FIRST intended, believing
also that at the time this confession of
Judgment was made by Robert G. Ellerbe
to Mrs. Cash that she was ignorant of the
fact. I determined that.as no allusion had
been made to her in the prior allegations
of the rough draft, and that this might
be so nisconstrued despite my intention,
it should be excluded, and I therefore
Duroosely and Intentionally as aforesaid
tsti it 6uS e1gthe original summons and
co,aplaat.s That such was my intention
and belief the certificate of Judge
Mackey (which is herewith publishcd)
establishes beyond doubt:
WASHINGTON, D. c., July IL.
Metropolitan Hotel.
1 certify that 1 have read the COM
plaint in the case of Conrad NJ. Wienges,
plaintiff, against Robert G. Elerbe, AL
len E. Cash, John Dolby, as Sheriff of
Kcrshaw County, and John NJ. Tindal,
as sheriff of Sumter County. defendants ;
hat the complaint was in the hand
writing of lady, which Capt. DePass
;,I;,rIned me- was-his wife's that upon
the said complaint and for the reas j.
,herein stated I granted an injunction
restraining the said Sherifis and. other
defendaptslH lHrom selling the property,