Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1908-09-22
The Common Sense Way.

In discussing in our issue or laSt FIJI
day, the probable effect Of the action
Of the United States circuit court Of
appeals in upholding Judge Pritchard's
dispensary decision, we laid rather more
stress on what we assumed would be
than what we are inclined to think
ought to be, and for the purpose of
making the record clear we will take
the liberty of referring to the matter
again.
Upon the filing of Judge Pritchards
decision last spring and before the an
nouncement Of the personnel Of the re-
ceivership under the jurisdiction of the
United States court The Enquirer, in
its issue of March 3, had this to say:
AS to what will happen now, we can
not predict with any degree Of certain
ty. We believe that If the commission
persists in it's appeal, Judge Pritchard
will be sustained and then the case will
come back to where 1t is now. III the
United States court will make real
ly honest effort to probe the dispen-
sary rottenness to the bottom, we be-
lieve it can accomplish that end much
ever been accomplished by the wind
ing-up commission. The winding-up
commission had but little power in
compelling the attendance Of witnesses.
The power of the United States court
is without limit. And after all, the
the principal thing is to get at the bot
tom of the whole rotten business and
punish the grafters.
1t is hardly to be denied that there
is a strong feeling Of resentment, not
only in this state but in anhost every
state of the Union, against any and
everything that appears to have the
flavor of Federal interference with
state sovereignty. We confess to being
imbued to a certain extent with such
4 feeling Possibly it is more or less
hereditary. 1t is certainly traditional
But, however, it is to be accounted
for. good common sense, in the light OF
the bitter experience this country has
passed through along that line, sug-
gests that this feeling Of resentment
should be forgotten.
We never have believed, and we do
not believe now, that the object of the
whisky people in taking the dispensary
commission into the United States
court was to get justice. We thought
then and we think now that their prin-
cipal object was to secure delay. 1t
will be remembered that at least one
of the plaintiffs declared that he would
lose his whole account rather than
show his books. The reason of such a
position is too clear to require eXpla-
nation.
OF course, hindsight is better than
foresight; but as we look back on the
situation now, we do not think that
there has been a single incident Of the
whole litigation that has been more
pleasing to the plaintiffs than when
the defendants decided to take Judge
Pritchard's decision up to the court Of
appeals. We are almost tempted to
suspect that some of the hard things
that were put in the plaintiffs petition
and the rough language used by the
plaintiffs counsel at the hearing, was
intended principally for the purpose of
taunting the defendants counsel to
take the matter up, the object being
delay.
The case of the state is in the hands
Of able lawyers, who have done splen-
did work in this whole matter, and
while we do not feel like presuming
to advise them, at the same time We
hope there will be no further appeal.
From all indications, the chances
against securing a reversal of Judge
Pritchard in the United States supreme
court are very slim-tOO slim to be
worth the taking. Even If Judge
Pritchard should be reversed after a
year or two more of delay, time will
have largely eliminated the present
probabilities of a successful prosecu-
tion Of the people the state is after.
1t would have, perhaps, been better
if the commission, instead of appealing
the case, had brought the issue up on
habeas corpus proceedings and had it
settled in thirty days; but that is past
and gone now, and we feel quite sure
that the next best thing is to drop the
appeal and make the most Of the pow
elful machinery of the United States
court in the collection Of evidence