The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1905-03-31
tFshEFEREE
TN PROSPERITY CASE

Continued From First Pags.)
that ordinance appears on the min
utes, and it is evidently the same
mentioned in minute book as passed
Iulv eth. | so find. There seems
to have been some doubt as to the
proper execution, and, possibly, the
ucnuineness, OF this ordinance, but
he testimony is, the ordinance was
:.sscd in council. The witness rec
o:iecton is. that the ordinance was
also signed in council, but as to that
he was not exactly sure. l am salts
lied, however, that the testimony Will
sustain the finding that the ordl-
lance in every respect, was regularly
and properly passed and executed
The ordinance shows upon its tace
that the zone was being borrowed
TO carry on the affairs OF the town
There is no testimony going to show
that, when said note was negotiated
at the Palmetto Bank & Trust co.,
the note then having the ordinance
attached to it the Palmetto Bank &
Trust CO, knew, or had any reason to
uspect that it was being borrowed
as alleged in teh complaint to De
used for the purpose Of building or
h,i1i;ng. OF a town hall, market
for the purpose OF assisting in the
house, guardhouse, or for any other
y ;r,.>:e than what was stated ~ the
ordinance. It is true the minute
book shows the 100000, to have been
borrowed "for purpose OF building
CITY hail." The explanation OF u
ell as to the apparent Inference IN
nuraose f. which the cuCt! as
y r. wed IS, that Hh~n it Wa: decA'ed
90 b:i;iI ..>ruicil knew =: H"Hic nave
70 borrow some money with which
to begin the building: that this fund
was put into the common treasury
and. Daid out as needed, whether tor
material and work on building or tor
ordinary current expenses. l can
in,pute no wrongdoing to council. l
accept this explanation, and so lind.
This note for $4,000 to the Pal-
metto Bank & Trust CO. was taken
I'D bv the Bank of Prosperity, and
renewal sealed notes were gwen IN
oo3 and 1904, respectively, under
authority of ordinance attached, and
it is admitted that the question as to
the creation of the SIoco.oo debt,
evidenced by the several notes that
sum was neve submitted to the quail
fled voters of the town Of Prosperity,
nor an election held thereon.
The only deb Of said town on july
II. 1902. so far as the testimony
shows. when the debt of the 100000
was created, was the debt OF $4,000
contracted for the purchase money OF
the lot on which the building was
erected. The debt OF 100000, now
due. the Bank of Prosperity, the
the, payment OF which is sought to be
erioined herein, is the same debt that
was contracted on July II, 1909, with
the Palmetto Bank & Trust GO.
The testimony taken shows that
before the debt Of $4,000 was made
the town council made an estimate
OF the cost Of the building, such as
they a. first intended and expected
to erect. made an estimate OF the
income of the town from all sources
for the remaining part OF. the tlscal
year., and reached the conclusion tina:
with the money then to their credlt
and the income to be collected from
then to the end Of the year, they
could pay off the note for $4,000
given for the purchase money OF the
lot, expend $4,000 on the contem-
plated building, and, with economy
still pay the ordinary current expens-
es for the balance of the fiscal year.
.Rut council fell far short of their es-
timatr, so much 50, that on Septem-
Der 8, 1902, following the completion