The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1912-06-25


But, 10 and behold, when it got to
the supreme court, Corporation Jones
wrote an opinion in which he set aside
the verdict, making the poor widow
pay the costs, Notwithstanding the
fact that the Western Union Tele-
graph company kept her twenty-five
cents for something they had never
done. However, We are not surprised,
for John Gary Evans was the Western
Union Telegraph company's counsel in
the case. Chief Justice Pope dissent
ed and said that the widow was en-
titled to recover. Corporation Jones
not only took her verdict away from
her, but stole her quarter and gave
that to the Western Union and made
the poor woman pay the costs.
Again, in the case of King VS.. At
lantic Coast Line railroad, sc South
Carolina reports, page $40: This was
a case in which the plaintiff shipped
some goods over the Coast Line which
were lost in transit. The magistrate
in Darlington gave the plaintiff judg-
ment for his lost goods and $50 pen
atty. Judge Sease sustained the mag
istrate's decision. The corporation, of
course, appealed to Corporation
Jones: Corporation Jones wrote the
decision, in which he reversed the
magistrate and the circuit court as to
the $50. Mr.. Justice Gary dissented,
standing by the side of the magistrate
and the circuit court, hut Corporation
Jones controlled and the citizen was
deprived of his rights, as usual.
Again, see the case of Kirven VS..
Virginia Carolina Chemical company,
SO Southeastern reports, page 424.
Here is one of the greatest corpora
tions in this State, and one which
South Carolina herself has had much
trouble with. After this plaintiff had
recovered his verdict against this cor
poration and combine, before that
honest and Christian judge, Klugh,
We find Judge Gary and Judge Watts
saying that the judgment should be
affirmed; but, along comes Corpora
ton Jones saying that the judgment
should be reversed. Again, we find
Jones favoring the corporations and
the mighty of the mightiest, and that
to the detriment of one of our own
citizens; one who had helped, in his
humble way, as a member of the leg
islature, and otherwise, to promote
the welfare of his State. have heard
the question asked, What did that de-
cision cost the V. C. c. Coz
There are many others, but only
mention these as a sample OF the
Justice meted out Examine carefully
and see if it is not fact that Jones
was always in favor of corporations,
particularly the Southern railway, OF
which his son was the attorney, and
see if you do not find that only when
he was against them was when the
court was unanimous, but whenever
there was an opinion for the railroads
CT divided court on a railroad case,
that you found Jones siding with the
corporations, the railroads. Why did
the Southern railway have son Char
les, with his pass, in Columbia in the
Merger case? Did he question any
witnesses? Did he speak? Or, was
he there, getting paid, in case an ap-
peal had to be made to pa? How did
pa and Charles get so immensely rich
practicing at little Lancaster?
I regret to go into these matters.
Two years ago we had a clean cam
paign, a crowd of gentlemen running
for governor, and on so high a plane
was the campaign that when one
would go back to the hotel, out on
the street with his friends or some
where in a shady nook for rest, be-
cause he knew that his opponents were
not going to say one word about him
or make any criticisms OF his public or
private record. 1t was a pleasant
race; it was free from abuse and
vituperation, and if l had the privilege
of choosing, would choose such race
for this campaign; but nine months
ago, l was put on notice of what was
coming, and in the last few months,
it has been repeated time and again
bv abuse of me, in my absence, and