The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1905-09-10
DAPHNE PROBABLE WINNER
IN COURT HOUSE REMOVAL
Hot Fight In Supreme Court Being Made
By Bay DlIneHe TO RetaIn
County Seat

4 sufficient evidence to change his pres
u ent convictions, he could not see his
! way clear to do anything but hold the
next term Of the Baldwin circuit court
at Daphne.
The recent decision Of chancellor
4 smith Of this district, declaring fur
1 ther payments of warrants on the
/ county court house recently erected at
Bay Minette, said Judge Browne. ap-
/ peared % him to be an upholding OF
/ the decision Of the supreme court in
/ the matter at issue and he would
| like very much 10 have sumcient evil
. dence given him to warrant a throw
/ ing aside Of the decisions Of the su-
/ preme court and Chancellor Smith.
/ As to the place Of holding court. he
said, it was a matter not optional with
him, as he did not propose to show
: any preferences in the matter. But,
he declared, if the court must be held
at Daphne there it viii be held.
Baldwin Times Speaks.
The exclusive announcement made
In The Herald yesterday to the effect
that Judge Browne would probably
hold the next term of the Baldwin
county court at the deserted former
capital Daphne. was read with much
interest In Mobile. Nearly every men,
Der Of the Mobile bar practices in the
adjoining county and the statement
Of Judge Browne affected their future
visits and interested them. as il also
did the people generally, for a deci-
sion from him to hold court at Daphne
instead of at Bay Minette would mean
Tor the time being at least, a victory
for the bay-side village over the grow
ing town at the upper end of The
county.
The case would be without a parallel
in the history Of Alabama.
The Baldwin Times. formerly OF
Daphne, where, toward the close Of
Its residence, it advocated removal
OF the county seat to Bay ldinette. is
at hand today with the following ar.
ticle:
That Chancellor Smith would de-
eide the chancery suit. known as the
case Of G. B. Stapleton, ct. al. VS.. J.
d. Hand. ct. al against the Bay Mi.
nette end Of II has been known for
several months and ARRANGEMENTS
made to meet it. The decision is no
surprise and cuts no figure An aD-
peal has been taken to the supreme
court and Mr.. ". T. Hand, who holds
and owns the bonds or warrants
which are affected by this decree, mas
given a $4,000 appeal bond, and to-
gether with the county commissioners
and citizens committee. will fight this
question 20 a finish before the supreme
court. We have no desire TO open up
old sores on this court house cues
ton. Quite the contrary. The condi-
ton Of all matters pertaining to il
have materially changed since the re-
m0val from Daphne TO Bay Minette
Bay Minette is now. even if not then.
the one place in the county which
Is suitably located as our county seat.
The county BUILDINGS here are new and
just what are needed. Their cost has
been low and all the work done was
both honest and economical. There
was absolutely no graft in that deaf.
BY reason Of the splendid railroad
facilities Of Bay Minette and the nos.
sibiEues Of even more and better IA.
ciliIies here IL is easily the most &C.
cessible town in the county. Again,
many Of those who opposed Bav Nj
nette as a county seat are now with
us and viii be to the end. True. these
facts may have nothing TO do with
the case as Il now stands in court to-
day but il viii have mach to do with
the fast growing sentiment and pre-
vailing feeling that the court house
should remain az Bay Minette and
that this removal case and coutro-I
versy be ended for all time. That III
VIII be fought 10 a successful CON
clusiOn when It reaches the supreme
court there is no doubt Mr.. ". IT,
Hand Is represented by Stevens 81
Lyons. Of Mobile. The county CON-
missioners by r. T. Erwin. J. D. Hand I
by ". A. Collier. Ex-Judge Charles
Han by Leslie Hall. and the citizens
committee Of Baldwin county and Bay
MinetJe viii be ably represented byI
Mobile attorneys. Something will be
done. Meantime the county seat is
here and the court house remains at
Bay Minette
In making an appeal bond and
taking the case at once 10 the supreme
court, the decree Of Chancellor Smith
IS superseded and can have no effect
whatever upon the case"