The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1909-11-20


Totals -. .$303,555.63 $215,178.36
In more than half the claims there
were overjudgments rendered in fav-
or Of the State by the commission
AS stated these may be collected
through the courts. The commission
states in it's findings that the men,
bers have made careful investiga-
tion of the business of the old State
dispensary and also all Of the evil
dence taken before the legislative in
vestigating committee.
Due and formal notice, states the
decree. was given to all creditors to
produce before the commission their
books Of account and other records
and correspondence disclosing the
transactions between the creditors
and the State dispensary, and in a
few instances some Of the creditors
complied with this demand and pro-
duced their books and records in part
at least for the inspection of the COM
mission. The commission also heard
oral testimony and received affidayits
from members ofewhiskey concerns.
The commission states that several
of the creditors entered into a con-
spiracy with members of the boards
of directors to cheat and defraud the
State with the assistance of some of
the memebrs of the board and goods
were sold at price large n excess
of the market value, the officers or
agents of the concerns and members
of the board making use of the funds
in corruption and bribery.
1t is also stated that many of the
claimants did not comply with the
law in that:
1. They resorted to various de-
vices to destroy competition.
2. The law as to advertising for
bids was so worded as to prevent
competition instead of promoting it.
3. That bids submitted upon
which awards were made were exor-
bitant as to prices with the knowl-
edge and consent of the board.
4. That the claimants violated the
law in maintaining agents anL solicit
tors in the State to obtain contracts
for the purchase of their goods.
s. That in many cases the bonds
were furnished on awards given.
6. None of the claimants fled at
the time of making bids an analysis
of the liquors for sale.
The commission rules that the
claimants have all violated the law,
but thinks that it should deal with
petitioners uopn equitable principles
adm make such settlement as will be
fair and just. It therefore finds that
1t should compensate each claimant
for goods actually sold and delivered
whole course Of dealing by paying
the real value Of the goods after de-
Quoting from the claims Of some of
the claimants certain fees and expen-
ses incurred by the commission in
defending the recent suits
1t is also ruled by the commission
that certain claimants who filed bills
in the Federal court asking for in
junction against the commission in
clude the firms Of Garrett & Co.,
fleischmann & Co., Wilson Distilling
Co., Gallagher & Burton, Jack Gran
ton Company. The bills brought by
Fleischmann, the Wilson Company.
the Jack Cranston Company and Gal
lagher & Burton were consolidated
into one action into which Garrett &
Co. afterwards intervened, followed
by the Big Springs Distilling Co.. Ull-
man d Co., Anchor Distilling Co.. Be-
lair Distilling Co., Richard & Co.. and
the New York anu Kentucky Com
pany.
After reviewing the victory won by
the State of South Carolina the COM
mission calls attention to the fact
that the fight carried to the United
States court cost $21,526.17 and con-
siders the State damaged to that
amount. The yariOust oo,ooor;o,
mentioned above are assessed pro-
portionately this amount.