The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1909-04-23

Schumpert should keep and use the
otice then and now used by county
auditor and that the auditor should
be removed to the Office room in the
rear or east end Of the court house.
Section Z Of the answer of the SUI
pervisor admits thathe' made positive
demand upon the auditor to allow the
furniture, books and papers provided
for the county auditor to be removed
to the Office in the rear Of the court
house in conformity to the decision
Of the county board, which demand
the plaintiff refused, after having
previous as this defendant is in
formed, believes and alleges, and less
than two hours before the time set
for removal, consented and agreed
thereto under protest, however, but
he denies that any force was used or
offered or contemplated or that any
undue effort was resorted to to cause
the removal Of the books, records,
equipments and furnishing there
FROM
The supervisor also alleges In his
answer that mis- efforts were at all
times lawful and moderate, and after
he was, informed that resort would
be made to the court he made no fur
ther demand.
Amdavits Of County Commissioners.
The defendant also submits an aff-
davit from G. L. IeitzSey, member
Of the board in which it is stated that
the board decided that the room now
occupied by the auditor should be the
room for the probate judge and that
the auditor should vacate that room
and thereafter occupy the Office IN
the rear end Of the building.
L. C. Livingston, another member
Of the board Of county commission
ers, makes an affidavit TO the same
effect as that of Mr.. Leitzsey and
adds that $50 far as this deponent is
concerned he had investigated the
matter thoroughly and while not CIV
ing his. reasons at large for such, he
was convinced and satisfied by every
fact and circumstance that Of the two
Offices in question the probate court
should occupy the one then in pos
session of the county auditor. -
". II. Wendt and Thomas j. Will
son, former members Of the board OF
county commissioners make affidavit
and deny "that ". W. Cromer as
county auditor had the consent, ap-
proval and authority Of the county
board of commissioners Of Newberry
county to use and occupy the said
Office or room" They also state un-
der oath "that the matter Of assign
ment Of the Office rooms in the new
court house was never before their
board for action and that they were
never called upon to render any de-
cision or judgment thereupon."
Thev also under oath said that If
the room in the rear is unsatisfactory
for the Office Of the county auditor
that it is all the more true that 1t
would be unsatisfactory for the office
Of f~probate judge, and that if the mat
ter had come before their board they
would have favored the assigning to
the auditor the office in the rear OF
the building and the probate judge
to the Office now occupied by the au-
ditor.
The supervisor also submits in his
answer petition signed by nearly the
entire bar asking that the probate
Judge be given the Office now occu-
pied by the auditor.
The Other Side.
The attorneys for Auditor Werts
submitted in their argument to the
Supreme Court afidavits from Mr.
George S. Mower, chairman of the
court house commission and from Mr.
Klettner, secretary Of the commits,
sion, and from Auditor Werts, and
from former Supervisor J. Monroe
Wicker.
They also submitted an extract
from the presentment Of the Grano
Jury at the recent term Of the ses'
sions court bearing on this subject
and an extract from the order Of
Judge Prince on the same subject.
The afidavits Of Mr.. Mower anc
Mr.. Werts and Mr.. Wicker are giver
in full. We also print again the ex
tract from the presentment Of the
grand jury and an extract from tht
order of Judge Prince.
Affidavit of MIR. Geo. S. Mower.
Personally came before me George