The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1908-01-29
CHARGES GRAFT
Flsischman & Co., of New York,
Ask-fcr Recsivers Of
DISPENSARY FUNDS.

ysSrENSAEE EUESDS,
They Auege That the Reason th
Money Is Withheld from Creditor
is Because Members Of the Dis
pensary Commission Have Place
It in Certain Banks in Which The
are Individually interested.
In the United States Circuit Cour
Tuesday at Asheville Judge J. c
Pritchard signed an order citing tn
dispensary commission Of South Car
olina to appear on wednesday, Jan
20, and show cause why the relie
prayed in bill OF complaint fled b,
FIeischman & Co.. OF New York
creditors of the dispensary, shoult
not be granted and receiver ap
pointed to take charge Of the fund
held by the dispensary commission
and the affairs Of the commission
wound up.
The bill Of complaint fle6 b!
attorneys representing Fleischman 6
Co., is interesting and in parts sen
sational. The complaint in etec
charges that the dispensary com
mission has failed to pay the claim:
Of the creditors because the commits
sioners are financially interested II
the banks in which the great sum o'
almost 100000 is deposited. The
bill alleges that the commission has
violated it's trusts and receiver
should be appointed to take charge
Of the monies and affairs now undel
control Of the disDensary conmls
sion.
The bill in part recites that salc
defendants are abusing the trusts re
posed in them by wrongfully and un'
lawfully failing and refusing to car
ry out the terms and provisions o.
said act Of 1907 OF the general as
senbly OF the State OF South Caro-,
lima, and that the greater part o'
the money which the defendants
have received, as aforesaid, has peer
on deposit for many months, anc Is
now on deposit in certain banks II
the State Of South Carolina, in which
banks the said defendants, or some
Of them, are respectively interested
either as officers, stockholders or DIR
ectors; that large sum OF SAID mon
ey Is now in the National Loan ano
Exchange bank Of Colum bia, in which
hank the defendant, Murray, VINO Is
chairman Of the dispensary commls-'
sion, is a large .stockholder and or.
ector: that another large portion OF
said money is deposited IN the Bans
Of Timnonsvills, in which said BANK
the defendant, NcSween, Is a STOCK
holder and director, and IS also lts
president: that another large portion
OF said money is on deposit IN the
PEOPLES bank of Union, in which
hank the defendant, Arthur, is 9
stockholder and director and also us
president; that another large por1aon
op said money is on deposit in the
Bank Of Aiken, IN which bank the
defendar. Henderson, is STOCK
holder and director; that another
portion of said money is deposited II
the Piedmont Savings and invest
ment Company CT GTeenvilie' IL
which the defendant, Patton, IS
stockholder, and 8 portion OF saio
money is deposited in the Aercnants
and Farmers bank Of CheraW' II
vbich bank one W. F. Stevenson
who resides in the said town OF Che
raw and who is the attorney TOT ene
6esendants constituting the STATE
dispensary commission, is q STOCK
holder and director and also us pres
idert.
That the said defendants have
wrongfuIly, unlawfully and rEapou
,eotly declined and refused to nax'
6is+rihrtion Of the said none!
among the creditors Of the saie
State dispenasry or to pay the ciaih
of vour orator or any Of the o1ne
said creditors, for the reason as you
orstor verify believes and alleges TN
fact to be, that there has been form
al and now exists an unlaWTul IN
Outstanding or agreement oet"ee'
+he defendants by which it mas peel
decided that the money deposieeo Il
the hanks above named shall be nei'
and allowed to remain IS long a
possible in said banks and be uSe'
Nv them for their own beneht an
profit. CO,
Attorney General Lyon OF Sout!
Carolina was present in the Ineeres
of the 6ispensary commission. ne
side contends, in effect, that cersal
claims of creditors are not genuine
that undue influence was used II u
nurcbase OF goods and too great
o-ice was paid. It is understoo
that there are claims assregat1a
about $500, 600 asainstthe disDensaI
commission and these creditors g.
,egins that the funds in the hano
y, the commission aggregate abor
ssoo.ooo, demand that their claim
be paid. It is probable that thes
viii be an interesting hearing 0
January 90, when the dispensa1
commission will appear to sho
cause why a receiver should not