The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1905-09-27
The Public Cotton Weighers Of Sum-
ter County Will Continue to Ex-
! ercise the Duties of Their
( Office.

| The action, in the form Of tempo
rary injunction pending the hearing
of the case upon its merits, directed
by Messrs. J. M. Woodley, W. Dukes
Carson and C. L. Williamson against
the public cotton weighers Of Sumter,
was heard by Judge Purdy last Sat-
nrday at 10 o'clock, and, contrary to
expectations his decision was handed
down today.
| His order refusing the motion is
clear and explicit in its terms, and is
1self explanatory. 1t is quoted in full
below.
The question of the constitutionality
of the act, while not definitely de-
cided, is at present Of little moment,
for the decision of Judge Purdy was
reached without touching the consti-
tutiona1 questions involved, and the
weighers will continue to exercise the
functions of their Office, until further
litigation restrains them.
The Decision.
State of South Carolina.
| Sumter County.
| Court of Common Pleas.
III. M. Woodley and Others, PLAINTIFFS
VS.. ]. <Whilden Nettles and Others,
Claiming to be Public Cotton
Weighers in the City of Sumter, S.
c., Defendants.
This is an action to permanently
restrain And enjoin the defendants
from exercising the duties Of public
cotton weighers in the city Of Sumter,
IS. c.. and an application has been
made before me in behalf Of the plain
tiffs to grant a temporary injunction
restraining the defendants from act
ing as public cotton weighecs, pending
the litigation.
The case was most ably argued be-
fore me. and so far as I have been
able to determine the situation, there
is scarcely any issue raised by the re-
turn. as to the statement Of facts
made in the complaint, but issue is
taken largely as to the conclusions to
be drawn from such statements, and
as to the law governing the case.
It's now we'll settled law in this
State. that where it shall appear oy
the complaint that the plaintiff is en-
titled to the relief demanded, ano
such relief or any part thereof, con-
sists in restraining the commission OF
continuance of some act, the commls
sion or continuance of which during
the litigation would produce injury &c
the plaintiff" the parties are entitled
to temporary restraining order ano
the court will grant such order. AL
derman VS.. Wilson and eases there
cited; 50 S. c., page 156.
It is also settled that: "In doubtful
cases. the court weighs the nature
land extent Of the injury which VII
arise to<either party from the grant
ing or withholding Of an injunction
and determines the question OF equit'
able relief in the manner best calcu
lated to promote substantial justice.
Pelzer, Rodgers &. Co., VS. Hughes, q
S. c., page 4OS, and cases there cited
In this case the defendants are tn
successors in office Of others who hav'
filled the position without question o
molestation for years. 1t does not ap
pear from the allegations Of the com
plant, nor were affidavits submitte'
charging that the defendants were do
ing or threatening to DO any act o
: acts which would interfere with tn
rights Of the plaintiffs.
:. 1t might be that if the plaintiff
sought to carry out the contracts
: sell their cotton, as alleged in tE
complaint and undertook TO weigh tn
r same in the city Of Sumter. and tn
defendants in any way interfered wit