The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1895-05-08
BEFORE JUDGE G0FF.
THE HEARING IN The GASES ON THE
REGISTRATION LAW.

THE HEARING IN TIE CASES ON TIE
REGISTRATION LAW.
The Showing Behalf of the State Au-
nied--FIaborate Arguments by the Law
yers on Each Side.
COLUMBIA, S. c.. May SPECIAL:
The scene in the United States court
room on Thursday was as lively one
as has been witnessed there in many a
year-including even the times when
we used to have political trials in
South Carolina. There was a crowd
there. Every seat was occupied, and
the available standing room" was
likewise utilized Among the auditors
were several prominent citizens. IN
cluding several members of the local
bar, with a few from other places.
Leading Republican-such as En-
Judge Melton, his son Mr.. L. D. Mel
ton, DR.. Webster, Dr. Clayton, Mr..
Brayton and some others less note
worthy, were interested spectators.
The lawyers engaged in the litiga-
ton were Mr.. G. a. Douglass, form
erly of this city, but now of Washing
ton; Mr.. J. F. J. Caldwell and DIR.
Sampson Pope of Newberry-these
three appearing for the complainants
in the two cases brought to set aside
the registration law. Attorney Gen
eral Barber, Gen. Edward McCrady
of Charleston, and Mr.. George S.
Mower of Newberry-these represent
ing the State officials and the Rich
land Supervisor of Registration.
1t was few minutes after - o'clock
when Judge Nathan Golf entered
from the apartments in rear of the
court room, accompanied by Clerk
Hagood and Marshal Hunter,
and took his seat upon the
bench. Judge Golf is very
pleasant-looking gentleman. He IS
small Of stature, quick in his move
ments, erect in carriage, with a head
that indicates intellect of more than
ordinary character. He is quite cour-
teous to the lawyers, and whilst he
promptly decides such points as must
be summarily disposed of, he has
none of the abruptness sometimes
amounting to rudeness) that was one
of the most offensive qualities of the
late Judge Bond. Judge Golf comes
here with the reputation Of a learned
lawyer, and nothing has occurred, IN
the proceedings lately had before him,
to alter the generally received opinion
as to his intellect and his legal attain
ments.
The first case called was the one
against the Supervisor of Registration
for Richland County. It vas suggest
ed by Mr. Douglass that as the other
case involved substantially the same
points, the two should be heard to-
gether. Attorney general Barber ex
pressed his willingness for such an
arrangement; and it was so ordered.
The bill of complaint against the
Supervisor of Richland County was
then read by Mr.. Douglass, and the
bill against the Governor and other
State officials was read by DR.. Pope.
The answer of the Supervisor, read
by the Attorney General, was as fol-
lows:
THE STATES RETURN.
Mr.. Barber then read the following
return to the bill in Green's case:
United States of America, District OF
South Carolina, Fourth Circuit-in
Equity-Lawrence P. Mills VS.. W.
Briggs Green-Bill for Injunction.
To the Honorable Judges of the Cir
cult Court of the United States for
the District of South Carolina:
And now comes W. Briggs Green,
supervisor of registration for R:chland
county in the State of South Carolina
upon whom has been served an order
of this honorable court, both as super
visor and individually, restraining and
enjoining him until the further order
of this court, from the commission of
any of the acts complained of in the
bill in this cause, and also requiring
him to show cause before Honorable
Nathan Goff, United States District
Judge, at Columbia, S. c., on Thurs
day, the I'd day of May next, why the
restraining order granted. should not
be continued or some order of like
purport and effect be then granted,
enioining and restraining him, both
individually and as supervisor of reg
istration, from the commission of the
acts mplained of in the said bill, IN
til the final hearing and determina-
ton of this cause, for cause why said
order of injunction should not be
granted, says:
1. That he is supervisor Of registra
ton for Richland county, in the State
of South Carolina, and as such is not
amenable to the jurisdiction of the
court for his conduct in his political
capacity aforesaid; that the matters,
facts and things alleged and COM
planned of in the said bill, and upon
which the injunction has been improv
identity granted are all matters relat-
ing to the political duties of the Office.
- That he submits that the bill pre-
sents no question arising under the
Constitution or laws of the United
States to give jurisdiction to this hon.
orable court
3. That he submits the bill presents
no case upon which the jurisdiction of
the court of equity can be founded, as
there are plain and adequate remedies
at law for the correction of any Of the
matters and things alleged, if so be
that the allegations are true.
4. That he submits if the case as pre-
sented were one for jurisdiction, that
the bill is multifarious and cannot be
maintained.
5. That the bill is fatally defective,
for the purposes of the motion, in his
allegations. and in the verifcations in |
this, that there is no sufficient aver
ment of irreparab!e injury and state
ment of facts supporting it, and that
the material facts on which the injunc- |
ton is sought are not positively sworn
to by the conpiainants.