The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1905-03-08

W F- (N &
State Board iPowerlss1 TO Remove
( Dispensafy when Established.
Supreme Court Decides
the Issue.
The State Supreme Court last week
handed down "a decision in. the case
of the removal of the ~dispensary from
Elloree. .S(Q@ lsusfams the pos;b-
ton taken BY. Chairman II. II. Evans,
WHO, acting upon the advice Of the
Attorney GeaessI.Exoted against the
proposition-to do away-with the -dispen.
sarY atithat place on the ground that
the State board had not the authority
ITO take such action.
Ecs1n the decision of the Court, written
by the Chief Justice, Hon. Y. JTPope,
a brief history of the case is given. In
October last the EIlofee
signed a petition for the removal of the
dispensary. No charges of misconduct
were Brought against j. M. Weeks, the
dispenser. The people wanted to be rid
Of the. dispensary and did not hesitate
to. say SO, all but half a dozen of the
meniof that community having signed
a petition asking for the removal of the
liquor shop. 81 II 1
The petition was acted nponabysth e
board on the 18th of December, and
Messrs. Towill and Boykin are recorded
as having voted to grant the petition.
Mr. Evans is recorded as having voted
against the action, of the, majority, fol
he thought the State board Mad no juris.
dietion, Dispefsef Weeks then appealet
to the Supreme Court for a @ritSof pto.
hibition to estop the decree of the State
board, In his complaint to the Supreme
COURT Weeks says "that no vote hat
been taken by the qualified electors OF
rtbeIcounty of Orangeburg to close dis.
penFaries in said county as provided by
Jaw He also alleges that no charges
had been made against his management,
that he could not be ff9emoved EXCEPT f 10
cause, and hat the State board has nc
authority to close d dispebsary except
upon the order of the majority of the
people of a county,
After isummihg6dpa these facts, the
Chief Justice says:
"a scrutiny of the powers conferred
by lfN upon the. board Of d~irectors,of
the itlte dispe9sar9 Ma to show That
any Sdger to close a d~ispensary once
established has befq p6pferred! by law
to said.board of directors but, on the
contrary, the law confsrs such power
upon a different tribuHaY.'Ss He thea
quotes the law as amended by Senator
Brice'ss bill in 1904, and cohti6ded So
Apart from all this, such power in
ashoard Of directors of State d~ispensars
might set at naught the will of the PEG
pie, as expressed by their representa-
tives, legally chosen. AS we have
heretofore remarked, there is no power
given to the State board of directors to
close a county ~dispensary. The demur-
rer is overruled, and as any further
consideration is not desired on the mers
its we will grant the petition.
ut is therefore ordered that the act
of the State board of control 10 null and
void and the writ of prohibition is hereby
ordered to issue, restraining correspond.
ent from enforcing their resolution
adopted on the 14th of December, 1904
Messrs. Moss & Lide, of Orangeburg,
and Mr.. William Elliott, Jr., of Column
bia, represented Dispenser Weeks. Mr..
c. w. Wolfe, of Orangeburg, repre-.
sented the people of Elloree. The ac.
ton of the Supreme Court means thai
no community canrid itself of the liquo,
curse, although that same community
might not have wanted a dispensary
thrust upon it. 1t requires the vote OF
an entire county to give relief.