The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1897-04-23
IThe State, goth.

vSrsed the action Of Judge Benet in
the matter Of tho ruling of the Char
lesion attorneys for contempt of
court in carrying the Palmetto Blew,
cry case into tho United States court.
The decision of the supreme court
in the matter is unanimous. Justice
Jones renders tho opinion, which
covers 03 closely written pages, and
the chief justice and the other asso-
ciate Justices concur in tho opinion.
The court has had the case under
advisement for some time and the
decision has been expected daily for
month past. 1T was filed yester-
day afternoon.
The followings synopsis of the
opinion was prepared last night:
rms lsan appeal from an order
OF 'u1ge Benet adjudging j. N. Ma
thaps, James Simons, Julian Mitch
eil@H. A. M. Smith, Huger Sinkler,
u. H. Doseher, A. +. G. Cramer and
E. H. Sparkman guilty of contempt.
The alleged contempt was in disc
bedience of an order appointing a
receiver for the Palmetto brewery
and enjoining creditors and stock
holders of the brewery from prose-
cutting any action against the comp
any except in tho cause pending in
the circuit court. On an appeal tax
en from this order this court revers-
ed the same O.. the ground tnat the
complaint in tho cause did not state
facts sufficient to justify a court Of
equity in displacing corporate con-
troll of the company's property at
the suit of stockholder.
A preliminary question was az
guod whether the reversal of that
order out of which the contempt pro-
ceedings grew would operate to an
null the contempt proceedings.
We hold that tho order of injunc-
ton by Judge Benet was not void,
but was merely erroneous and void
able. The circuit court had undoubt-
ed jurisdiction over the defendant in
the case of Wingel, ct al, vs Pal
motto Brewery Co., etc. (excopt the
De LaVergne Refrigerator Co.. and
it had undoubted jurisdiction over
the subject matter of the suit, the
property and business of the brew
cry company, the rights of stock
So holders and creditors with respect
thereto, with power to appoint re-
ceiver for an insolvent corporation
of this State and to restrain suits
against said corporation, and this,
too, on tho suit of a minority of the
stockholders. The complaint failed
in not stating facts sufficient to JUS
tify the court to interfere with the
corporate management. 1t was as if
in a suit to foreclose n mortgage of
realty the complaint failed to allege
the execution of the mortgage.
On demurrer on the ground that
tho complaint did not state suffic-
iont cause of action, the complaint
would bo held insufficient, but it by
no means could bo said that for that
reason the court had no jurisdiction
Of the subject matter of suit and
yet commit reversible error in main
tanning or retaining jurisdiction of
the suit The subject matter of a
suyy is one thing and tho suit there
on Is another D
Tho correct rule is stated to bo in
r.No1palje, which is quoted, and the
court proceeds to quito longthy
discussion of the nature of proceed
ings in contempt, quoting from 4
Ency. Pl. and Pr. 7GG, Bisnop on
Criminal Law, vol. 2, pago 140, 9th
edition; Now Orleans vs. New York
Mail Steamship Co., 20 Wall, 302.
Adding it's own conclusions, the
court says what was the form Of the
proceedings in contempt, unless it is
used as moro remedy to compel
the performance of IN act to which
asuitor is entitled, tho proceedings
are criminal. Such a proceeding is
Especial criminal proceeding, sum
mary in i.J nature and distinct from
the cause in which it may sriso.
This court entertairs appeal from a