The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1897-06-02

| [ Joined with Governor Evans in ask
| ing that the Legislature should ap
point committee to look into the Dis
pensary's management and set the
charges of corruption at rest forever.
| The books of the Dispensary and every
thing connected with its financial af'
fairs have been investigated and re,
ported on time and again by legis
Iative committee, one of whose mem.
bers was an anti, incapable OF
seduction or of being induced to cloak
wrong. The committee has never yet
made report rejecting on the integ'
rity or honesty of its management.
Now, the cry is 'Investigatel" and
while CAN'T and no one else has or
can give any satisfactory reason why
nv administration of the dispensary
should be investigated, I desire to ask
the Governor to select committee OF
citizens to enter upon an investigation
Immediately, and I am will to answer
any in nquiries made. and I doubt not
that every other man connected with
the dispensary in any official way
would I've willing to do likewise. The
expense cannot be great, and could be
paid out of the contingent fund, and
the matter is of sufficient Importance,
think, to warrant the outlay.
The friends of the dispensary can
not allow it to be undermined and
smothered in filth by the guttsrsnipes
who are running the editorial pages
of our daily papers, and if any cor
ruption can be shown, other than
what has already been shown to exist,
punishment swift and sure should
follow. I stand ready to explain and
justify every act of mine in connec-
Iion with the law, and l doubt not
that Governor Evans can do likewise.
Let the mstter be set at rest and the
smoldering embers of envy and hate
be put out once for all.
Now, in regard to the Agricultural
Hall matter. I presume to offer ad
vice because I am solely respop slble
for the States attitude in the case, and
felt, az the time I took action ana feel
still, that it was the only proper course
to pursue. I have seen the full text
of the de- cision of the Supreme Court,
and speak in full knowledge Of its I'M
port. The situation is this: Mr.. Tin
dal cannot deliver the property if he
wanted to. cannot believe that 81
monton or any other judicial tyrant
will undertake to take the building
by force from the present State off,
GERS. If they do, then the act of dis
possessing the State will in the minds
of fair minded persons show the falsi-
ty of the decree that it is not a suit
against the State. The whole fight
hinges on the possession of the build
ing, and so long as the State can hold
that, it must retain the advantage.
Once Wesley and his attorney get
possession, with or without the con-
sent of the State, the situation will
become very grave. If the State sur.
renders the property, then it must
either sue on the mortgage for the
payment of the purchase money, or,
by failing to do so, confess that it has
received full payment and thereby
validate by it's own act the Blue Ridge
bond script. If it sues, then the ques.
ton of the validity of the tender OF
that script must be determined by the
United States Supreme Court and the
legality of the Blue Ridge bonds be
settled by that tribunal.
Judge Harlan goes into this phase
of the question very fully. Attorney
Lyles in mis- testimony before the court
and in his statement now in the news
papers clearly sets forth the conspira.
cy by which the Blue Ridge bond
script is to be brought before the
court for judicial determination. The
Judge declares that Wesley has right
to do this. Then, with a lot of legal
iargon which only confuses the ques.
lion, because it is in no sense an
analogous case to that of General Lee s
suit for Arlington, he declares that it
is not a suit against the State, although
the whole question at issue is one at
fecting the legality of the repudlated
bonds, and not the title to the Agri-
cultural Hall at all. His purpose is
to have the State herself declare the
bonds valid by not suing on the mort.
gage or force her into court on suit
which will almost inevitably deter.
mine their validity. He would thus
accomplish by indirection what can
not be done directly, for Wesley has
already had one suit on these bonds
thrown out on the ground that it was
suit against the State. With bitter
irony he concludes his opinion in these
words: 1T said that the judgment in
this case may conclude the State.
Not so. 1t is a judgment to the effect
only that, as between the plaintiff and
defendants, the former is entitled to
posse ssion of the property in question,
the latter having shown no valid au-
thority to withhold the possession
from the plaintiff; that the assertion
by the defendants of right to remain
in possession is without legal founda-
ton. The State not being q party to
the suit, the judgment will not con-
clude it, Not having submitted its
rights to the determination OF the court
in this case, it will be open to the
State to bring any action that may be
appropriate to establish and protect
whatever claim it has to the premises
in dispute. Its claim, if it means to
assert one, will thus be brought to
the test of the law as administered by
tribunals ordained to determine con
troverted rights of property; and the
record in this case will not be evidence
against it for any purpose touching
the merits of the claim.
Ifthis were only suit for t the pos