The Pickens sentinel. [volume] (Pickens, S.C.) 1871-1903, 1891-04-16
/ y. POPE,
ttOrnou (Nanorol
~, :. y VII SRVE)
State Of SOnth Carolina 1,

state OIL South Carolina"
Mr. rope, after some Introductory
remarks OF personal nature. said that
IN tho argument Of opposing counsel
ne mad detected two errors, one Of leg
islatlye history and one Of State and
judicial history. 1t was news to the
State OF South Coralina that the Coo
saw Company first saw the light in
1876. 1t was the child of an Act of the
2oth of March, 1870, he said, and, CON
tlnulng, he gave what he claimed was
the history of the provisions of that
Act.
MIR. Pope's style is impassioned and
earnest, and he referred at some length
to the action of the Coosaw Company
in, as he expressed 1t, ungratefully dis. q.
aYoWing the State, its mother, and quo
ted Shakespeare and several other au-
thorlties to sustain his position on this
point. He asserted with much warmth
the determination of the State to give
ana 10 claim what was right, and asked
what tbs State had done that the de-
fendant could come here with such
loud complaints. His remarks In thi 8
part OF his argument smacked strongly
OF what might be termed sarcasm, and
MS references to opposing counsel as
these young men" caused some amuse-
ment to those gentlemen. The State.
he said, had bowed her sovereign head
to come into a Court of justice, and the
people OF South Carolina felt 1t ACUTE
ly that this mining company was not
satisfied with the righteous conduct of
the State and sought to inject delay in
the proceedings, and thereby induce q
compromise. lie wanted to disabuse
counsePs mind Of the idea that tho
State would consent to anything like
This. South Carolina was neither poor.
nor wanting in spirit, and no concaten-
atlon OF events could procure a COM
promise. The State had been ihsulted,
ana her laws shall be vindicated, and
this creature of hers the Coosaw Com
pany) made to respect her. No mower
save that of the United States Courts
could stay her right to make this crea.
ture DOW In submission to her righte-
Gus Will lie here paid a lengthy trib-
ute TO South Carolina, tho United States
AMI Chief Justice Marshall, and tho
Federal Counts. ~ >'''
The filing of Il petition and bond does
not constitute transfer Of a case. he
said. 1t is tho duty cf a suitor who
wishes transfer to appear in the State
Court and settle the matter there, and
any other course indicated lack Of
courtesy toward the State Court. On
Illc pOlnI OIL llle y nllcd States 1urlSQlC-
tion being purely statutory, he read the
Act Of Congress of 1887 amendaUory to
the Act of 1915, which latter Act, he
said, was fraught with great mischief
and arrogance to the States. Every
case cited, he said, by the opposing
counsel had been decided under the old
mischievous Act, and not one under
the new Act OF 1887. Under the law of
1887 tho Court WAS compelled to con-
line itself in such cases to the com.
plant filed in the State Court. This
was not true under the old law, and it
was there that the difference between
Inc Acts of 1876 and 1887 appeared.
me petition to this Court states no
iacts which raises a Federal question.
From the beginning of this case the
great, cry on the part Of the defendants
mad been the great amount of money
mat they had paid to the State, but
they said nothing about the money thev
had made out of the Coosaw River
The amount they paid to the State was
only part of the value Of the States
property. ''' y
lie asserted that the State could NOT
grant in perpetulty to a few persons
the exercise of rights which belonged To
all her citizens. Any such Act Of the