Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1905-11-24
SOUTH CAROLINA NEWS.

- Columbia correspondence of the
| Charleston Post: Chairman Evans
| says he will offer for reelection at
the hands Of the coming legislature,
and that he is going to beat the hound
out Of anything that sets up a fight
against him." But 1t is understood
that neither Of the other two members
Of the board will try for reelection.
AS a matter Of fact one of the board
| favors abolition Of the dispensary law
with local option substitute giving
the counties the choice between pro-
hibition and high license or dispensa-
ry under the present constitutional
restrictions, the position taken by the
most influential element of the So
called prohibition party Of the state:
= Columbia State, Thursday: A new
move was made yesterday In the legal
fight the object Of which Is to prove
that the "Brice law" Is unconstitu-
tional. In the litigation which has
started prior to this time the attempt
has been made to have reopened the
| dispensaries which have already been
| closed. The new move means that
an attempt will be made to prevent
| the dispensaries from being closed
at all. At Newberry last night Chief
Justice Pope at chambers granted a
temporary injunction restraining the
county board from closing the dis
| pensary until the board could show
cause why the dispensaries in that
| county should be closed, The date set
for the return Of the order Is Decem-
| ber 4th at 10 o'clock a. m. before the
supreme court In Columbia. BY that
| 1t will be seen that the dispensaries In
Greenville will be kept open for at
least another fortnight. Mr.. r. II.
1 hn ArTn m
| linger & Welch, presented the COM
plant to Chief Justice Pope last night
and received the temporary restraining
order. Mr.. Bellinger, who was seen at
| his Office last night, was asked the d.
rect question II his firm had been en-
| ployed by the state dispensary to bring
| this systematic fight against the
| "Brice law" He stated that he had
been asked the same question many
times and that he has but one answer,
an emphatic denial. However, he did
not mention the names Of his clients
as that was immaterial In so far as 1t
is not the state board by whom the
| firm is employed. In this particular
case Louis r. Cox, citizen and tax
| payer Of Greenville county, Is named
as the plaintiff and the respondents
are James Hodges, ]. A. Harris and
e. D. Cox, the members of the county
board of that county. 1t Is alleged
| that the plaintiff has in school In that
county grandchildren to whose sup
port he contributes and that the clos
| ing Of the dispensaries under the OPP
erations Of the Brice law would mean
| that the schools Of that county would
be Disseminated against In the dis
tribution Of school funds, as the sur
plus fund is cut off entirely by the law.
The com plant urges the same charges
against the law as were specified In
the case to compel the reopening OF
| the Newberry dispensary, viz, that 1t
| Is unconstitutional to assess q special
| tax Of of a mill to assist In the en-
forcement Of a general and state law.
And that this Is special legislation and
is depriving a citizen Of his property
without his consent. The complaint
shows the following sums have been
turned over to the county school fund:
1899, $6,227.S9; 1900, $3,369.39; 1901,
$3,6O1.51; 1902. $1,340.21; 1908, $5,-
S85.82: 1904, $12,193.96; 1906, $4,-
371.62, making a total Of $37,090.40;
and the profits received by Greenville
county for the same period have ag-
gregated, $69,451.99, with an equal
amount for the city of Greenville.. The
amount Of school fund which 1t Is
alleged would be cut off from Green
Vile county by means Of the opera
ton Of the "Brlce law" would be $l,-
063.69.