The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1911-11-17
DARLINGTON AND Young LOSE.
Seminole Ofiicers to Prison Says Su'
preme C0urt.-Both Out On
Bond.


Bond.
Columbia, Nov. 13.-Rejecting the
ALLEGATIONS OF error in the trial in the
lower court, the South Carolina su-
preme court this afternoon, in an opin-
ion by Chief Justice Jones, afdrms the
Judgment Of the Richland county cir
cult court, in November, 1910, when
John Y. Darlington and James Stobo
Young were convicted on charge OF
breach of trust, as officers Of the Sem
mole Securities company, and SEN
fenced to serve three years and one
year, respectively, on the public works
or in the State penitentiary.
Convicted on One Count.
Garlington was president and Young
secretary and treasurer of the COM
pany. They we're brought to trial IN
the Richland court on an indictment
embracing five counts, including
charges Of conspiracy, breach of trust
with fraudulent intention, and grand
larcencv. They we're found guilty by
the iurv on the fourth count, only,
which charges "a breach OF trust b..
the said defendants, by the conVer-
sion to their own use of the sum OF
s55,59e in money Of the property OF
the Seminole Securities company, in
trusted to the defendants and convert
eS TO their own use with fraudulent in
tention.'
In Chicago-NOtfed.
Darlington and Young are both from
Laurens, and are under $4,000 bond
each for their appearance. The bonds
men are a number Of men in this city
and Laurens,!fit is understood. It is
stated here tonight that the men are
now in Chicago, but they will be COM
,municated with at once, and are ex-
Injected to arrive in the immediate tu-
+,H: +1ireH: To- commence serving their SEN
feace.,
+: The court discusses in full the va
rious exceptions in which error to the
lower court is imputed and upon
which the aDpeal is based.
Their Case Not Injured.
Among these exceptions, to assign
error in the admission of testimony as
to the value of the stock Of the Caro-
lima Agency company at time sub
sequent to the transfer of such stock
BY the defendant, Darlington, to the
Seminole company, the court holds
that even assuming this evidence to
have been immaterial and irrelevant,
no showing is made that the defend
ants were prejudiced thereby.
Four exceptions seek to present the
question as to whether there was er-
ror in refusing to entertain a motion
made by the defendants, at the con-
clusion OF the evidence for the State,
for the direction of verdict for &C
quittal.
The record showsd. IlY:s ssdy.clf} lh9weX:ers w9S:rs that
This ruling by the circuit Judge was
Followed by statement by the defence
that they would offer no testimony;
that thereupon the motion for di-
rected verdict was renewed, fully ar
gued, and refused, following which the
Judge ruled that he would allow the
defense to introduce testimony, should
they so desire. Taking this course as
a. whole, the supreme court does not
hold that there was any error.
Three of the exceptions, imputing
error, related to the right of opening
and reply in arguments before the
jury. Matters of detail as to order OF
arguments, says the opinion, are or
dinarily to be left to the sound discre-
ton of the presiding Judge and "there
is no complaint here of any abuse OF
discretion in this particular"
: Their Rights Safeguarded.
There is no ground for contending,
comments the opinion, *Fthat any sub
stantial right of the defendants in the
matter of argument was either abridg-
ed or denied them"
when the charge of the presiding
Judge is considered as a whole" con-
tinues the opinion, *'it will be found
free from in any of the particulars tc
which reference is made in the re-
naming exceptions.
For Jury TO Decide.