The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1909-05-04


proven guilty Of crime by due pro-
cess Of law, and he now claims the
right to confront his accusers and to
be duly tried by jury, if he has vio-
lated the law in such case provided
as to the practice Of law, unless ad-
mitted and sworn, the same being set
out in chapter XCI, Section 20ll,
Civil Code: "No person whatsoever
shall practice or solicit the cause OF
any other person in any court OF this
State unless he has been admitted
and sworn as an attorney, under a
penalty Of five hundred dollars for
each cause he shall so solicit. one half
to the State and the other half to him
or them that will Sue for the same. y
Is. Respondent now calls the at
.tention of the court as to the nature
and contents Of the two affidavlts OF
the two negroes; offered and submit
ted by the attorney general, charging
respondent as acting as an attorney
and counselor at law.
19. You see the woman saying at
the outstart: "When I heard from
nv husband he Was under arrest and
I desired to get up ten dollars and
pay his fine. I went to my employer,
W. L. Bennett, and asked him to ad-
vance me $3.50 on my wages and to
lend me $500 more; that I had $3.50
in cash. - When her uncle tells you
she told him she had $500, and also
he says later: "She replied Ito Dun
can) she had five dollars" Did she
have $1,000 or $500? Did Jesse
Montgomery tell the truth on her?
Then she tell a falsehood to her EN-
ployer; tells another to her uncle, an"
repeats it TO Dr,rran, ...G sets lp
falseh, i. &c: efh avit.
She also sets out that on going to
the county jail she was Informed
"that her husband was out at work
and would not be back until night, -
when all our citizens know that the
county keeps its laborers out in camps
and they do not return to the county
jail at night. She tells You, "Gn our
way up street we saw Duncan.
Who was doing the seeking? Yet
she says she twas persuaded' to
sign the paper and on the instant
she boasts of her cunning in refus-
inc to write '':'r name on the -aor;.
gage. yet boasts, II can write my
NAME" a boast which must be fa-
miliar to this court and suggestive OF
a notorious case Of the past; and yet
I beg of the court to observe for It,
self whether it is a signature OF
which she may justly be proud.
AS to the further remarkable state
ments contained in Nita Saunders
affidavit, it would appear to all ordl-
nary person that she was dllatlng on
Duncan as subject for the entertain:
ment of some one, for her flights of
imagination as to structures as to a.
former magistrate trying to pocket
the ten dollars (when being out Of Of
flee he could not even collect the
money! certainly could not be eonsid-
cred by this court TO even remotely
apply to the charge now preferred
against respondent as practlclng law
without a license.
Respondent now calls the attention
of the court that the affidavit OF Nlta
Saunders is not corroborated in even
one particular by that Of Jesse Mont
eomery, and still we find enough to
show, in the two, that respondent
was sought first by one and the next
day by both of these witnesses used
br the a;torrer general to hHlr pay
the fine to release a negro serving a
sentence on the chain gang ( and be-
vond the reach of legal serviees), and
that a mortgage was given to secure
to Duncan his money advanced and
"to pay him something for his trou-
ble," and "when Jim got out he
would work to make the money and
pay Mr.. Duncan.
20. Respondent protests that he
fails to see in the two affdayits sub
mitted any matters or statements to
support Sections III and " Of the
allegations or charges made by the
attorney general, and respondent de-
MES the same.
81. As to Sections I and II, respon-
dents admits same, that he was duly
and legally served with the order OF
this court, Of date September llth,
1908. disbarrine from the practice