The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1909-12-01

modihcations the judgement of the cir
cult court In appointing receiver for
the property of G. Wash Hunter. The
appellant was convicted of the killing
or j. Elbert Copeland in Laurens coun-
ty and sentenced to a term of eight
years in the State pententiary, but
his case has been appealed to the
United States supreme court in the
criminal action.
In the civil suit Hunter is given
permission to move before the circuit
court for the removal OF the present
receiver and the appointment of Il dis
interested person in his stead The APP
pointment of II receiver by an order
from the circuit court grew out Of Il
suit brought by the Virginia Carolina
of SLABS.
Hunters case has been up and down
In the courts for several years He
was tried for murder in LaurenS coun-
ty and the case was finally moved to
Greenwood, where he was convicted of
manslaughter and received n sentence
OF eight years. The State supreme
court overruled his appeal for new
trial and the case was then appealed
to the United States supreme court
All Of these court proceedings were ex-
pensive and it appears from the state
ment of the case by Associate Justice
Woods, that Hunters creditors feared
that he would not have the money to
pay them, and they applied for re-
ceiver.
The planting season has come a.
round again and ho doubt Hunter and
his creditors would like to make ar,
rangements for next year The deci.
sion of the supreme court permits
Hunter to apply to the circuit court for
a change of receiver. The case may
be in litigation even longer
The following Is the opinion i'm part:
This is an appeal from an order
appointing receiver of the property
of G.. Wash Hunter, at the instance of
the plaintiffs, bringing the suit for
themselves and all other creditors who
may come in and contribute to the cx-
Denses Ot the action. The question is,
whether The complaint and the an!da-
Wits on the part of the plaintiff and
the defendants presented such case
to the circuit judge, as warranted the
appointment of receiver either I'M
der the assignment act of this State
or on the general principles of law as
to fraud. These stated i'm short are the
allegations of facts made i'm the com
plant:
Indebtedness by Hunter to the
plaintiff OF $l,42S.90, and interest rep
resented by two notes, dated 9th April
1908, and 23rd July, 1908. due 18th No
vember. 1908, which Hunter refused to
pay; Indebtedness to other unsecured
creditors named, amounting to 5000
and large Indebtedness to other per,
sons; the execution by Hunter Of
mortgages to his sister, Mrs. Evans,
which was alleged to be without adj
eQuate consideration and void under
the statute of Elizabeth and under the
assignment act as follows: for $4,000
on 625 acres of land. dated 18th OcO-
ber. 1907, and recorded 25th October.
1907; for $4,000 on 10 acres of land,
dated 10th November, 1907 and with
held from record until 10th November,
1903; for 81 $50 On 500 acres of lanc.
dated 9th November. 1908. recorded
10th November. 1903 the execution of
mortgage to Cole l.. Blease for $1,000
on 800 acres of land 14th November.
1908. alleged to be invalid as a prefer
ence under the assignment act; Hun
ter's disposition of the greater pOr-
ton of large crop made on the land
covered by the mortgages, and his fail
ure to apply the proceeds to the pay
ment Of debts made I'm the production
OF the crop. and HIS placing the pro-
ceeds entirely beyond the reach of
creditors; the claim by Hunter that he
had transferred all his live stock to his
sister Mrs Evans. and the entire want
of consideration Of such transfer; a
statement by Hunter that he has no
money derived from his crop or other
wise. and no property from which his
creditors can collect their debts. and
that he is totally insolvent; Hunters
failure while refusing to pay his debts
OF the proceeds of his crop of the year