The Lancaster news. [volume] (Lancaster, S.C.) 1905-current, 1916-01-07
HOLDS TRUSTEES
NOT ANSWERABLE.
y South Carolina Supreme Court
AbsOlves Clark, Jones and.
Bryan.
RULING BELOW STANDS
Seminole Securities Company is
Described as "Baloon Float
ed by Hot Air"

GU ny ItOt All.
The supreme court of South Caro-
lima rendered decision yesterday
in the celebrated Seminole Securities
case, by which Willie Jones, T. S.
Bryan and w. A. Clark, we'll KNOWN
business men of Columbia, are alb
solved from wrongdoing in connection
with the promotion that had the at
tention of thte people Of the State for
several years. The majority opinion
was written. by Associate Justice
Gage. Associate Justice Fraser filed
a dissenting opinion.
The action was brought in Rech-
land county by j. S. Klugh, T. ],
Crymems, j. l.. Watson and j. f.
Dalton against the officers and trus-
tees of the Seminole Securities com
pany and several banks.
Remotely it is" says the supreme
court, "are the defendants, Clark,
Jones and Bryan, personally liable
to the stockholders of the Seminole
Securities company for 100000 for
found that they were not, "and we
agree"
PLAINTIFFS PROMOTERS ALSO.
The court does not go into q full
history of the defunct company, but
recites only the cardinal features as
affecting the defendants. The COM
pany was chartered January S,19OS,
with capital stock of 100000.
The enterprise ran it's whole career
within IL months. The court says
that the plaintiff stockholders "are
amongst those who undertook to
hoist the enterprise"
"It is true" says the opinion,
that Darlington and his immediate
associates were the initiators of he
scheme, but the plaintiffs and all
the stockholders stood by like Saul
consenting to the death. And they
are those now complaining against
scheme failed"
There is no allegation, the court
says, that 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 concludes as follows:
I'VE conclude that the stockhold-
ers of the Seminole, the plaintiffs
amongst them. got up the corporation
set 1t going and named the directors.
1t was on its face a ballon fioated by
hot air.
"These directors. who made the
contract with the trdustees, had the
power to modify it; to buy stock in
an existing company. and to permit
the trustees to take part and not
all OF the stock of an accident COM
pany.
"If the stockholders in the Semi
mole have been deceived II has been
by the action of the men they put
forward to represent them, to-wit:
"The event proves that those hith-
erto unknown and untried men
hoisted scheme which neither their
stockholders nor trustees under
stood: and which but for the timely
initiative of the plaintiffs themselves
and the bold action of the court to
which they went might have wrought
serious damage.
JUDGMENT BELOW AFFIRMED.
THE judgment of the circuit court
is affirmed
Concerning the alleged effort to
mislead the public, the decision says
That is to say, the president and
directors 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 representatives and the
scheme of those managers was thus
made. possible the act, of the
stockholders. The stockholders
youched for Darlington; may they
now say Clark, Jones and Bryan
could not? II therefore. those
stockholders have been caught, IL is
in trap OF their own setting.
$50 the question Is, ought the
trustees. mere volunteers without
pay, and with no interest in
the Seminole ompany, to be made to
respond to such complaints for s30,-
000 alleged to have been lost by thel