Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1914-01-20

an agent in Washington whose busi-
ness 1t is to notify by telegraph imme-
diately upon call from the comptrol-
Ter of the currency for a statement OF
condition. The telegram was received
at 1920 a. m, and Cashier ALLEN i'm
mediately telephoned The Enquirer to
know whether the statement could be
handled in the issue Of that day. On
being advised in the affirmative, he
prepared the copy, turned II over
shortly before 1 o'clock, and, upon re-
ceipt of proof Of publication a lew
hours later, got the papers off to Wash
ington the same evening. The People
National Bank of Rock Hill published
its statement in the Herald Of Friday
afternoon, and the First Nationai Dank
of Sharon, had its statement ready;
but was unable to get 1t to Yorkvtlle
until Friday night.
York County Teachers Association.
One Of the largest meetings Of the
York County Teachers association
ever held, took place at Winthrop
college last Saturday. DR.. D.. B.
Johnson welcomed the teachers to
Winthrop and asserted that Winthrop
was at all times eager to help the
rural schools Miss Mary Stokes OF
the Rock Hill Graded school, gave
a demonstration reading lesson with
a class of children, and Miss Ruth
Stokes of the Ebenezer schools read
an interesting paper on The use OF
the library in connection with read
ing" DR.. P. B. Wells, pastor OF 81.
Johns M. E. church of Rock Hill,
addressed the teachers, his subject
being Some old truths restated." A
meeting of the county Rural Improve
ment association was also held In
connection with the teachers meet
ing. The following officers to serve
during the ensuing year were elected:
President, Miss Leila Dussell; vice
president, Miss Minnie Garrison; Sec
retary, Miss Winnie Crawford; treas
urer. Mrs. Hettie s. Brown.
Rock Hill w. May Reversed.
Rock Hill Herald, Monday: Wilson
and Wilson, attorneys for Rock Hill In
the case Of Rock Hill VS.. c. 8. May, ct
al, have received copy OF an order
by Judge George e. Prince setting
aside the verdict recently rendered In
the above entitled case and ordering
new trial. The case may come up at
the February term. The case came up
at the fall term Of York court and a
verdict was returned in favor OF the
defendants. The plaintiff immediate
ly made motion to set the verdict
aside and a new trial ordered. The
suit was to recover $1,000, the amount
of the bond given by the defendant
while city clerk and treasurer OF Rock
Hill. The suit was jointly against
May and his bondsmen. The amount
misappropriated and the interest on
same to date would amount to more
than the bond, the suit having been
pending some time. The order Of Judge
Prince Is as follows: The above en-
titled case was tried by jury before
me at the recent fall term Of the court
Of common pleas for York county and
resulted in verdict for defendants
Thereupon plaintiffs counsel moved
for q new trial on the several GROUNDS
taken down by the stenographer and
to be found in the report Of the case
After argument Of counsel on this
motion the matter was taken un-
der consideration by me until could
be furnished by stenographer with a
transcript Of the record. After care
full consideration Of the record fur
nished by him, ! am Of the opinion
that the verdict Is not only not sup
ported by the great weight Of the tes-
timony, but Is manifestly against It.
and it is clearly against the law as
charged by me. In so holding / have
not overlooked the defendants con-
tention Of estoppel en- pals. There IL
no evidence that the city council ac-
cepted money from the defendants
with notice that defendants INTENDED
such payment in full settlement Of al
breaches OF both bonds. There is nc
evidence that either the city council
or the sureties knew at the time thai
there has been any breach Of the bond
given February 6, 1905. The evidence
is clear that the amount paid in the
summer of 1909 was the amount dis.
appropriated by the treasurer during
his term Of Office subsequent to Febru-
ary 6, 1908. The evidence is clear that
the amount then paid was all the mis-
appropriation then known, and have
no doubt that the sureties then thought
there had been no precedent misap-
propriations. But there is no evidence
tending to show that the city council
had notice that the sureties intended
such payment to cover any breaches
of the bond made February 6, 1905
The evidence clearly shows that this
bond was preached by misappropria-
ton Of the citys funds and the defen-
dants have failed to establish by the
preponderance Of the evidence their
plea Of accord and satisfaction. 1t is
therefore ordered and adjudged that
the verdict herein be set aside and q
new trial had"