The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1916-01-08
LAST CHAPTER OF SEMINOLE.
WILLIE JONES, r. s. BRYAN AND
w. A. CLARK ABSOLVED OF
WRONGDOING,
Breach Of Trust Charge Dismissed
Plaintiff Stockholders Held to Have
Been Passively Responsible.

SSAA - ssSfSA'SAJ ASScPOlASlUACs
Columbia, Jan. 5.-The Supreme
Court of South Carolina today render
ed decision which is very probably
the last legal chapter to be written
in connection with the celebrated
Seminole Securities case. The court in
a decision absolved Willie Jc aes, T. s.
Bryan and w. A. Clark, trustees Of
the company, and well known busi-
ness men of Columbia, from wrong
doing in connection with a case that
claimed attention Of the people Of
the State for several years. The ma
jority opinion was written by As
sociate Justice Gage and concurred in
by Associate Justice Watts. Associate
Justice Fraser wrote a dissenting
opinion.
The action was brought in Richland
county by j. s. Klugh, T. ]. Crymes,
]. L. Watson adm j. F. Dalton against
the officers and trustees of the Semi
mole Securities company and several
banks in the State.
Remotely it u.s." says the Supreme
Court, ARE the defendants Clark,
Jones and Bryan, personally liable to
the stockholders of the Seminole Sc
curities Company for $4,000 for a
breach Of trust. The circuit court
found that they were not, and we
agree"
The court in its decision does not go
into a full history Of the defunct COM
pany, but only recites the cardinal
features as affecting the defendants.
The company was chartered January
8, 1908, with a capital stock of $780,
600. The enterprise ran it's whole
career within twelve months. The
court says that the plaintiff stock
holders are amongst those who under
took to hoist the enterprise. 1T is
true." says the opinion. Darlington
and his immediate associates were the
initiators Of the scheme. But the
plaintiffs and all the stockholders
stood by like Saul consenting to the
death and they are those now COM
planning against Clark, Jones and
Bryan, because the scheme failed"
The court says that there is no al
legation that Messrs. Clark, Jones or
Bryan held any stock or took any
hand in the suggestion or direction of
the Seminole Company or received
any compensation. The opinion con-
lcludes as follows: 1--WE conclude,
1.-THE stockholders of the Seminole, the
plaintiffs amongst them got up the
corporation, set it going and named
the directors. 1t was on it's face, q
balloon foated by hot air. These di-
rectors who made the contract with
the trustees had the power to modify
1T, to buy stock in an existing COM
pany, instead Of organizing a company,
and to permit the trustees to take a
part. and not all of the stock of an ac-
cident company. If the stockholders
In the Seminole have been deceivers,
1T has been by The action of men they
put forward to represent them to wit:
Darlington and his confederates. The
event proves that those hitherto un-
known and untried men hoisted a
scheme which neither their stockhold-
ers nor trustees understood and which
but for the timely initiative of the
plaintiff themselves and the bold ac-
ton of the court to which they went,
might have wrought serious damage.
The judgment Of the circuit is affirm
|cd.'
Concerning the alleged effort to
mislead. the public, the decision says:
That is to say. the president and di-
rcctors of the Seminole Company, the
managing officers. put forward Clark,
Jones and Bryan to mislead the public
but the stockholders put forward the
managing officers as their representa-
tives and the scheme Of these manag-
ers was thus made possible by the act
Of the stockholders. The stockholders
vouched for Darlington. May they
now say Clark, Jones and Bryan could
not If therefore those stockholders
nave been caught. it is in trap of their
own setting"
CAMDEN LIBRARY OPENS.