Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1903-12-04
THE CIRCUIT COURT.

i
the G. C. & N. railroad, which was
commenced last Monday, continued
through Tuesday, and resulted In a
verdict for the defendant.
The next case taken up was that OF
Pinckney Anderson, plaintiff, vs.. the
Southern railroad; Wilson & Wilson
for the. plaintiff and Witherspoon &
Spencers for the defendant. The action
was brought on account Of injuries
alleged to have been sustained by the
plaintiff, while in the employment OF
the defendant as a section hand in
Spartanburg county, about two years
ago. He wanted damages In the
amount of $4,000. His allegations
were to the effect that he had been or
dered to lift a barrel Of molasses, along
with other laborers; but that the help
was inadequate for the work. While
helping with the barrel and walking
backward, his foot struck against q
rail and he fell with the barrel on top
of him. His leg was permanently in
jured. The defendants claimed that
they had eight men available for the
work Of moving the barrel, and were
using six of them; that the plaintin
had not been called upon to help; but
had volunteered on his own motion.
The plaintiff testified that he was Or
dered to relieve one Of the men whose
fingers were being cut under the rim
of the barrel. There were several wit
nesses for the railroad all testifying to
practically the same thing. The tes-
timony Of the plaintiff was uncorro-
borated. The jury found for the plaint-
if in the sum Of $500.
The next case taken up was that OF
It. M. Allen, guardian, VS.. William
Martin. Wilson & Wilson appeared
for the plaintiff and Henry & Mcclure
of Chester, for the defendant. This
case grew out of the failure Of the
Commercial and Farmers Bank OF
Rock Hill. Martin owed Allen, as
guardian, the sum Of $526.22, and on
January 81, 1901, gave him check
for the amount on the Commercial and
Farmers bank. The bank closed Its
doors on February 3, and the check
not having been presented, remained
unpaid. Hence the suit. According
to the testimony, Martin, unable to
see Allen, had deposited the money IN
the Commercial and Farmers bank
because he knew Allen did business
there. When he gave the check to Al
len on the day mentioned, he claimed
to have understood that Allen would
present 1t next day; otherwise he
would have sent to Rock Hill and got
ten the money himself. Both men live
more than ten miles from Rock Hill.
When Allen took the check, 1t was with
the intention Of having it cashed at
the earliest possible moment. He had
no reason to suppose that the bank
was in an unsafe condition. He had
heard stories to such effect year pre-
viously; but instead Of believing them
had subsequently deposited money OF
his own. However, February 1 and 2
we're cold and disagreeable days, and
because of this and the fact that he
was not feeling we'll he failed to go to
Rock Hill. Next day, the bank failed.
The testimony was frank and straight
forward on both sides and 1t conf1icted
in but few details. The principal
question at issue was whether or not
Mr.. Allen had presented the check
within a reasonable time after it's re-
ceipt, and Judge Mcdonald ruled that
that was really the whole issue. AS
matter of fact, however, there was
testimony to show that after the de-
fendant had given the plaintiff a check
for the whole amount he claimed to
have in bank, and knowing that check
to be still outstanding, during the
liquidation Of the affairs Of the bank
claim to the entire deposit, and COL
lected and received dividends on the
same. These dividends, however, he
had turned over to the plaintiff, reduc-
ing the amount Of the Indebtedness to
s459.80, which was the sum for which
the plaintiff sued. The jury found for
the plaintiff.
Following the case Of Allen VS.. Mar
tin, the court took up the case Of R.
Lee Kerr VS.. John T. Roddey. F. P.
Mccain, Esq, for plaintiff and Thos.
F. Mellow, Esq, for the defendant.
The case involved an accounting; but
went off on a non-suit.