The Semi-weekly leader. (Brookhaven, Miss.) 1905-1941, 1913-04-05
SUING FOR THE PR|zEAUT
Miss Ethel May Charges The Picto
Theatre With Fraud in Award
ing the Machine.

aMS AMS hs@shsttSs
There has been filed in the Chan
Gerry Court by Hon. L. L. Tyler /
case of unusual interest to our peo.
pie. The case is styled sEthel
May. minor. who sues by hei
uncle and next friend. J. A. May
the complainant, vs. s. p. KimbIt
and o. j. Bridges, resident citizens
of Lincoln county. and B. Z. Guice
a resident of Adams county, Miss.
issippi, the Defendants. /"
4 The complainant represents that
Ishe is an orphan girl. under the
Eage of q years. and is endeavoring
to secure an education BY her owl
personal efforts. having no kindred
able to support, maintain and edu.
cate her.
The Defendants, for severa
months have been conducting q
moving picture show in Brookha-
ven. known as 1.-The Picto. = The
maintenance of the proprietors de.
pending upon the patronage receiv,
ed, they soughtsix weeks ago to in.
crease their growing popularity by
/ putting on an automobile contest,
through which the solicitor receiv-
ling the greatest number of votes
represented by tickets would re-
ceive a S66l 90 five-passenger Ford
auto. the contest TO close the even.
ing of March 81, at 9 o'clock. and
! the prize to be awarded April ! tc
/ the winner. ~
/ Associated with Messrs. Kimble
and Bridges, of The Picto, was Mr..
B. L. Guice. of Natchez. who con-
Quoted the Campaign as a disinter-
ested party, at a salary to be paid
by them. as their agent and repres-
entative.
The contest was to close as stat
ed. three disinterested parties to
count the votes.
Miss Ethel May. the complain
ant, represents that she contracted
to work for The Picto. on the basis
outlined above and with the prom
ise of reward stated. should she
secure the greatest number of votes
and that she continued her service
in good faith. She further shows
that when the hour of 9 o'clock D.
M. March 81 arrived she had sold
and procured to be purchased suffi-
cient admission tickets together
with premiums awarded to the
grand total Of 480, 920 votes actual
ly in the ballot box''. or box CON-
tanning the votes. In addition to
the votes actually in the box, she
had procured to be purchased for
her account 200 one-dolIar tickets,
and said tickets had, prior to 8
O'clock, been deposited and voted
for her. aggregatiHg 100, 900 votes
included in the total number mem
toned. she shows that the De-
PENDANTS should have placed 40. 600
votes to her credit in the box and
claims that they 'fraudulently,
Intentionally and wilfulIy refused
to so do and failed and neglected
to deliver said credit slip for 40. 900
votes and to deposit the same in
the box with the other votes.
The defendants stated that they
had been deposited in the box. But,
regardless of this, the complainant
claims that the 480. 800 votes in the
box were more than any other
solicitor or contestant received,
and that she was entitled to receive
the automobile.
In utter disregard of complain
ants rights. however, the declara-
tion states, in order to carry out
their fraudulent scheme and device
to cheat and defraud her she verify
believes, the defendants caused rs
one-dollar tickets purchased in ac-
count Of complainant and voted for
her" at the proper hour, to be de-
Quoted from the actual number Of
votes in her favor or an aggregate
of 81 800 votes. making a total loss
to complainant of 1880 votes.
unauthorized, illegal and a
fraud" /" Complainant further con-
tends that If she were entitled to
but 125 Of the said 200 one-dollar
tickets she would still be the win
ner. She complains that the ac-
cused have wiItully neglected and
failed to determine the result Of
the votes.
Each of the defendants is COM
manded to appear before the court
the third Monday Of April. to
answer the allegations set forth, at
which time the court will decide
the merits of the case, the COM
plainant suing for money decree
against the defendants to the value
| Of the machine, or such other re-