The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1908-03-04
FEDERAL JUDGE takes CHARGE.
ANOTHER SENSATIONAL DEvEI.-
OPMENT IN TUE DJsPENSARY
CASE.

-
Judge Priahard Assumes Juristiic.
zion, Declaring tho State forfeited
Constitutional Rights When Il I'm.
ssgeA IN the Liquor Busirsss and
Can BE Sued on Dispensary CiAins.
AZ An IndivtiualATwo Special
Masters 1p Be Appointed To Make
Testimony.
Ashevills. N. c.. Feb. es.---In the
matter OF the Tleischmann Company
against the dispsnsary commission Of
South Carolina. Judge ]. =. Prtch-
ARD in the United States circuit court
today held that the court could ~
same.s Jurisdiction in this case on. III
szound that the funds in the hands
of the dispensary Commissioners IL y
trust fund held for the sr~ditors Of
the dlspensary.
In substance the Judges decision
statss: .e1
rThat a. the state Of South Caro-. q
linA has seen nt T., engage In the pur-
Chase and sale OF spirituous ,iquors.
Il con not b Ssasonably contsndsd
that in 20 doihs Il Ii performing the
functions usually exercised by state
when necessary to preserve It's auton-
omy and maintain its sovereignty.
The supreme court OF that. stats
has decided that the act authorixins
tho establishment OF . dispensary was.
constitutional. Howevee. It can, hard
~ be assumed that It was contsm-
plated at the tims ok the adorti6h o.
Tho ,ilth aamsncimsnt that q sexersasz,.
ptate would engage In the, purchase
and sale OF spjrituoas liquors \ for,
proat. -, 2li ,ias ~, .,ss,a
the stase. having seen NJ 20 en-
gaSs IN this crsinsSs. and at the ra,ns
tire 70 deprive its eitissns OF. the
right 70 sngage In such business sn'
competltton with the state. thArsby'
placed Itself In = position where itl
could net with consistency. avail M.i
sslf ot the imn,unity conferred byss
saas I'm 4msndusRt = = suit IKE the
oas q bar, in which Il = sought 'soa
collect . dsht contracts4 by THE Judi.
vadualS piacsd IN .control OF such bua.,
hess. Snh implied Il not direct an.
thority t,' contract such debts. Hav-,
Ing deprived IL citisens of right to
engage In this particular lire OF bust.
Ness. rescrving the right to monopo.
lise the business through its agents
appointed for thnt purpose. it would
be manifcstly unjust to permit the
State under any circumstances what ;,
soever to avoid the payment of debts
contracted by the purchase of good.
from tho sale OF which It has depriv-
ed enormous profits"
= The dspcnsary matter was brought
up In court today ON an order of
Judge Pritchard signed on motion OF
the Wilson Distilling Company and
other creditors citing the dispensary
commission to appear and show caus
why receiver should not be appoint.
ed for the $685. fund now held BY
them. Before the hearing in this
case Judge Pritchard informally an.
nounced his decision in the matter OF
the Jurisdiction OF the court in tho
Fleischmann casc.; which was also a
suit asking for receiver for the dis
ponsary fund. 49,
The court maintained that the de-
PENDANTS. the dispensary commission
ers. were not officers Of court in
the strict sense; that they were mere
ly officers to perform a certain soeci-
nc duty He said that the sum of
$s60.000 was placed in the hands of
the dspensary commissioners to set.
tic all just liabilities Of the dispen-
sary. and that it was clearly a trust
fund.
The Judge declared that the suit is
not suit against the State and add
ed: II have carefully considered this
whole matter and had I any doubt
would give tho defendant, the benefit
OF that doubt and rule In favor of the
State. There Is no doubt in my mind,
however. and therefore the court
takes Jurisdiction
Judge Pritchari seid 1t was his
purpose to appoint two special mas
ters to hear evidence anu make re-
port on April 6. 1t Is understood that
these masters will be appointed next
Monday when the defendants make
formal oosuvar