The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1896-09-23
Those Beer Privileges.
The Prohibitlonists Make a
Determined Charge.


Yesterday afternoon Mr.. T J La
Motto appeared before Magistrate Smith
to make affidavit charging MIR. Charles
Marcy and Mr.. John C. Seegers, the
two persons who hold beer privileges 10
Columbia. with violating the dispensary
law The afGdavi, 10 each case is as
follows:
State of South Carolina,
Richand County.
Personally appeared Thos. J. La
Motto, who, being duly sworn, says
that he is Informed and believes that
Charles Marcy is maintaining com
mon nuisance on the premises occupied
by him 10 the city Of Columbia, known
as No. 901 Main street, in that the
said Marcy is engaged at the place
aforesaid as proprietor or manager in
the sale and delivery Of lager beer 10
violation of section % and other Sec
tious Of the dispcnsary law, aud that
W. r. Kraft and Wm. Altee are aiding
and assisting the said Marcy in such
sales and delivery contrary to law.
That the said Charles Marcy is not
county dispenser, authorized to sell
intoxicating liquors as provided by the
9th. 7th and 8th sections of said act,
and that the liquors kept. sold and de-
livered by them are contrabaud under
the provisions of the 1st, 2od and 3rd
sections Of aaid act, and said sales and
delivery are in violation Of the provis-
ions regulating such sales as contained
in the 10th, 1lth and 10Th sections Of
said act.
Magistrate Smith, after bearing the
statement of Mr.. LaMotte, asked to re-.
tain the papers until o'clock this after
noon, when be will render his decision
in the matter
Mr.. LaMotte bases his proceeding on
the 22ud section of the dispensary law,
which says THAT all places where alco.
holic liquors are manufactured. sold,
bartered or given away in violation Of
this act, or where Alcoholic liquors are
kept for sale, barter or delivery in viola
tion of this act. are hereby declared to
be common nuisances, aud any person
may 60 before any magistrate in the
county aud swear out an arrest warrant
90 personal knowledge, or on informa-
tioo and belief, charging said nuisance,
giving name of witnesses against the
keeper or manager Of such place. aud
bis aids and assistants, if any, and such
magistrate shall direct such arrest war
rant either 10 the sheriff of the county
or to any special constable commanding
said defendant to be arrested and
brought before him to be dealt with ac-
cordipg 70 law, and shall issue search
warrant in which the premises in ques-
ton shall be particularly described,
commanding [such sheriff or constable
to thoroughly search the premises in
question aud to seize all alcoholic liq-
uors found thereon. and to dispose Of
them as provided in section 81"
r Under this warrant the parties, it
seems, must be bound over to appear at
the next term of court to answer to the
nuisance, and in the meantime il is
made the duty of the solicitor to take the
papers as prepared by the magistrate
and carry the matter before the circuit
Judge, who, upon the hearing, may
determine the existence of the nuisance
and discharge the case or order the
proceedings continued to the circuit
court
These men are conducting their busi-
ness Under a license granted by the
State board of control, which, it is
claimed. is without the authority of
law, and this proceeding is intended to
test that question.-The State.