The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1911-03-08

exhibit 3D." This report purports to
lie a correctly printed copy. but it is
submitted as a printed copy only Of
the correct report which was filed in
the governors office subject to errors,
If any of the printer. 1t may be veri-
fled by comparison with the original
report on file in the governors Office
They also attach hereto a printed
copy of report, rendered to the gov
ernor (marked exhibit "E"O of their
doings up t. January 1st, 1911, and
subsequent to January 1st, 1910, and
ask reference thereto, making the
same statement as to its correctness
and the same suggestion as to it's be-
ing compared with the original which
was filed in the governors office, as
is made in reference to the first men,
toned printed report. They attach
hereto statement Of the transactions
had from the first day OF January,
1911, up to this date, the same being
ih'i "Ou SNih'il r. Inc COnnllS-
sion would state as to the matter of
attorneys fees that final settlement
In so far as the commission was con-
cerned was made with Messrs. Abney
and Stevenson on or about January
1st, 1910, and that they have had no
expenses for counsel fees since such
date. except such fees as accrued to
the firm Of Anderson. Fielder, Roun-
tree & Wilson under their contract
heretofore exhibited.
While the contract entered into
with Messrs. Anderson, Fielder, Roun-
tree & Wilson did not obligate that
firm to represent the State or the
commission in the litigation had in
the federal courts, nevertheless, that
firm assisted in the argument Of the
cases in the circuit court, the circuit
court OF appeals and the United States
supreme court and bore all Of their
expenses incident thereto, and re-
ceived no compensation for their ser
vices and expenses in this particular
from any source whatsoever.
Fifth. Replying to that part Of yo,ir
letter which asks us TO state why
the law has not been complied with
in regard to the wiIding-up of this
matter as provided in act at the earl
lest date practicable" the commission
submits that is is complying with the
provisions Of the act referred 10 as
expeditiously as the best interest of
the State will permit. That subse-
quently to the act from which you
quote the general assembly, passed
acts in 1908 and 1909 and 1910, each
OF which provided other and further
duties for this commission to perform.
That the act Of 1910 among other
things directed this commission to
proceed to ascertain the amount Of
any claim of the State against any
liquor dealers growing out Of trans.
actions with the State dispensary and
to make settlement thereof. This
work has been pursued during the
last year. and large amounts of mon
ey turned into the treasury through
the efforts of the commission and its
attorneys. This work is necessarily
slow and tedious, for the reason that
II Is very difficult to discover frauds
connected with such transactions and
then force settlement with persons
who almost invariably live in other
States. In this connection we would
advise you that our attorneys are now
at work on claims of this nature from
which they hope to net the State
many thousands OF dollars.
Further replying. we will say that
I'm October. 1907, a restraining order
was granted by the circuit court Of
the United States in the Garrett case,
which was the beginning Of long
series Of distractions interposed by
alleged creditors to the act of the
commission In requiring an honest
accounting by the claimants Of such
transactions as were fraudulently en-
tered into between them and the for
mer State officers. See report Of at
torney general for year 1908, page s.
That this was followed by further re-
straining orders in January. 1908, and
the appointment OF receivers by the
circuit court Of the United States. An
appeal to the circuit court Of appeals
of the United States was necessary to
protect the rights and interests Of the
state. This appeal was heard in May,
1908. with the chief justice Of the
United States presiding and the judg-
ment OF the circuit court OF the