Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1885-11-12
CIRCUIT COURT.

| CIRCUIT COUNT.
| The Court of Common Pleas adjourned
about II o'clock on Monday last, and Judge
| Kershaw departed for his home on the II O'Clock
train that day. a considerable amount Of bust
ness was despatched during the week the Com
mon Pleas Court was in session, nearly all the
suits being litigatons between private parties
and involving no special points of public in
terest.
| Two days were taken up with the case Of Ori.
anna Adkins, administrators, vs.. the Atlanta and
Charlotte Airline Railroad Company, the ac-
ton being for the recovery Of $4,000 damages
sustained by the plaintiff by the death Of her
husband, colored brakeman employed on the
road whose death was alleged to have been
caused by being thrown from a train while in the
service of the company. The jury was out for
several hours, and failing to agree upon ver-
Dict mistral was ordered. Wilson & Wilson
and Hamilton for plaintiff; Mr.. Duncan and Mr..
| Sanders, of the Spartanburg bar, for the defend
| ant
| The Merchants and Farmers Bank of Char
lotte and others VS.. Francis w. Williams, as
signee Of James NJ. Ivy and others. This suit
was instituted in the Circuit Court Of York
county by the plaintiffs in behalf Of themselves
and all other creditors Of James NJ. Ivy-tirst
to have receiver appointed; second, to have
| the mortgages of Williams, Black Il Co. reduced
| by excluding cotton futures transactions. The
suit being between citizens Of different States,
the defendant moved on that ground for remov-
al of the cause into the United States Court, and
| the Judge ordered the removal accordingly.
Wilson & Wilson, Spencer IL Waters and Hart
| e Hart for creditors; J. c. Haskell, Sim0nton
| Il Barker and NJ. Reynolds for the motion.
On Saturday two appeals from decisions the
Town Council of Yorkville were argued togcth-
er the cappelants being James NJ. Starr and John
May, Jr, druggists, who had been reported to
the Council for unlawfully selling spirituous
liquors without physicians prescription. In
each case the Council assessed a fine of fifty
dollars and in the case of May conditioned nom
payment ofthc fine upon ten days Imprisonment
in the guartl-housc. From these decisions the de-
PENDANTS appealed to the Circuit Court and in
their behalf Major Hart, of their counsel, argued
the following questions: |. Has the Lcgis-
lature the power under the Constitution, to con-
fer upon Town Council authority to pass this
ordinance? p If it had this power, did it actu-
allv confer upon Council the authority claimed
bvit? 3. If it conferred upon Council authority
to pass the ordinance can the Council try any
person under it? t. If it has power to try, has
it given reators a trial pursuant to law? Major
Hart argued that under the provisions OF the
charter of Eorkville the Town Council have not
the authority to collect Il fine of over $50 except
bv suit in the Court Of Common Pleas, and that
the condition Of the Imprisonment coupled with
the fine of May was unwarrantcd and unauthor-
lied. Mr.. Spencer, OH behalf of the Council,
took the affirmative of each of the questions
propounded above, and argued that though Il
fine above $50 could not be collected except by
suit as was claimed, there was nothing to pre-
vent the Council from levying fine of $50. The
Judge reserved his decision.