The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1898-01-19

Vanderoook decision were granted all
they desired. In this case the same
Judge held that citizens Of another
State might import, store away, and
sell liquors in original unbroken pack
ages Of all sizes not less than one-half
pint. This led to the opening, in the
State, of hundreds of private liquor
houses and flooded the whole Of South
Carolina with whiskey.
Blind tigers, furnished by 'soriginal
package" dealers, began the sale of
whiskey in quiet, peaceful communi-
ties where liquor had never been sold.
In my efforts to enforce the dispensary
law as modified by the Judges decis-
lens I met with great difficulties. At
one time Judge Gmonton seemed to
assume the combined prerogatives Of
the Chief Executive and the Legisla-
ture Of South Carolina. and undertook
the amendment Of the dispensary law
by injunction. The Governor, the
constables, and all persons connected
with the enforcement Of the law, were
enjoined from interfering in any way
with the "original package" dealers,
and lar. c--.cted by the representa-
tives Of sovereign State was practi-
eally repealed by Federal Judge.
When it was reported to me that
Warn, Byrd 6 Co., Original package.
dealers at Bamberg, were selling whis-
key to 'drunkards, I Immediately or
dered the constables to seize their
liquors and arrest them for maintain
iug nuisance. This was done, but
they applied to Judge Simonton to
have the stock Of liquors returned at
once, and asked that the eenstables
and all persons acting under them, or
by virtue Of authority from them, be
restrained from further intermeddling
with the said property. This request
was granted, notwithstanding wit
nesses swore that they had seen the
men who bought liquor at or about the
time Of the sale, and that he was
drunk. The Judge held that, to be
guilty of the offense Of selling to a
drunkard, the party selling must
either know or must have substantial
reason to believe that the party buy
ing was drunk at the time.
Again, in the case Of E. j. O'Con-
nor vs.. George s. McCravy ct al,
George S. McCravy, sheriff Of Laur-
ems County, notified me that four two
horse wagons had been sent to Au-
gusta for whiskey and that on their
way back to Laurens he received in
formation that the drivers were drunk.
and boisterous and were selling whis
key from the wagons. I ordered the
wagons and liquors seized as soon as
they arrived at Laurens. Thereupon
+. j. O'Connor fled bill of COM
! plant in the United States Circuit
Court praying for perpetual injunc-
tion restraining the defendants from
seizing liquors Of the complainant.
Upon this bill being filed Judge Si-
monton granted a rule against the de-
fendants, requiring them to show
cause why temporary writ Of injunc-
ton should not be granted; and at
the same time he made restraining
order to the following effect, 70 wit
Enjoining the defendants from seiz-
ing or attempting to seize, in transit,
or after arrival, or otherwise carrying
away or con6scating or OBTAINING any
of the liquors, wines or beer imported
or sent into the State by the COM
plainant: and furthermore command
ing said defendants to forthwith de-
liver the horses, wagons, wines and
liquors to the possession and control
of the complainant.
In the above instances you can see
some of the difficulties that have con-
fronted me in the enforcemente Of the
dispensary law. ''Orignal package"
dealers have been allowed to sell to
drunkards, and from wagons on public
highways. Whenever seizure was
made the complainant would hasten
to Judge Simonton, who seemed at all
times ready and willing to lend help
ing hand to such applicants. Judge
SiMonton's decisions and his unfriend-
ly attitude towards those who were
charged with the enforcement Of the
dispcnsary law SO completely demoral-
lied tie State constables chat they
we're Of little use, and became almost
dead expense to the State. The
cost Of maintaining the constablcs was
about $4,000 month. They were
afraid to seize liuuor for fear the Fed