Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

\ . ? J iVOL XLV NO. 20 NEWBERRY, S. 0., TUESDAY. MARCH 10. 1908. TWICE A WEEK. $1.50 A YEAR hub ?? I' 'i ' ii II ?? in i?^% I RECEIVERS ARE NAMED FOR DISPENSARY FUN! ARTHUR, HENDERSON AND M< CULLOUGH ACCEPT. Commission Refuses to Recogniz Pritchard's Jurisdiction and Will Decline to Turn Over Funds. Judge I'rit eh aid on Sal unlay i the United Stales circuit court o ; petition of the Wilson Distillin Company, a general creditor's hit appointed' Hon. Joseph A. MeCu lough of (Ireenville, S. ('., C. K. He! derson of Aiken, S. (\ and H. I?\ A S5 thur of Union, S. C., permanent n ceivers for the .$800,000 South Ca ? olina dispensary fund now in tl j> hands of the commission. A hon of $2"),000 each was fixed. Messr Arthur and ITenderson are menibei of the commission now winding u the al fairs of the late Slate dispei sary. In making his order for a pe ^ manenl receivership, Judge IYitel ard said: " I'he court on yesterday, on II application of counsel in the case < the Kleischniann company vs. \\\ . Murray et al. and the Wilso.i Di tilling company el al. vs. \V. J. Mu lav el al., entered an order appoiu ing the defendantse W. ,J. Murra John MV'.S\veen. ('. K. Henderson, I I 1'. Arthur and Avery Patton tempo P ar.v receivers. These parlies were m tilled oif their appointment and r plies from four of them have bec 10C0,VCM'' J. Mu \$v ray and John McSween decline I 'he defendants P?. F. Art In **11 ^ lv. Henderson accept the aj HfflFpointment and indicate (heir willim *? S0|,vc. response has bee ,;'w'e(t''Vt'(' from the defendant Pat ton "These gentle-men were appoint! j^^^'eceivers upon the theory thai tl WHrt was anxious lo adopt the ii ^^'ruineiitalitv provided by the Slai tais instance for the administn '1 us' their hand f inasmuch as I lie majority of tl iftmmission have either declined < use<l lo indicate a purpose lo si; Mfce. the court has decided to appoii 'Joseph A. MeCullough an ||?>Messrs. C. K. Henderson and P. ] *Arthur permanent receivers for a lap*110 fmu,s 1111,1 property in the ham ?|0f> l'10 ^(^on(^an's constituting tl IBfeState dispensary commission. "The court regrets exceedingly Hu f>^ these defendants should ha\ Pl^J0{>,'"ed to accept lite appointment n* it does that their aeeep nnoc would 'nave been in liarmon I with the Slate under which they wet ||p! appointed." |j|| Mr. Ifountree of Albania, on hi iWr, hall ol the dispensary commissio drew the al lent ion of (he court I [ & ^''e fact thai on Friday the commi Ifv sion had made checks for a sum a; gregalin?- $150,000 lor the paymei of claims which had been adjudicate on a compromise between the ered tors represented by Lawrence Ma: well and the commission. The juiU stated that these checks would n< J| come under the receivership at should be paid. Mr. Hoiutlree in tl ? opening argument staled thai lliei J had h-'cn an effort on the pari of II JL: 'defendant commissioners to do noil f.-X in'-': whic'n would be a waiver ol* ol & jeetion to I lie jurisdiction of tl I court and lhal on Thursday in li mailer id' llm interventions present! by Mr. Maxwell, t|jt. order present! S hv him lo lire court had been so a l| iei'!'d as I i make ii appear lhal l! | order direct in*/ payment of cerlai | claims had been made on lite applici | tion ol Ihe commission, while in ll V original papers signed by members i J the commission, there was express r ij j> servation of objection to jurisdietio IITc therefore asked that Ihe con either strike out the "application, or make an order, that the same wi not to be taken as a waiver of obje tion. The judge replied lhal a I tl former hearing he had slated that 1 would not direct payment of chain unless application therefor be n>a! by the commission and therefore 15 Amendment was made to show Ilu there was such application and llu the application speaks for itself hi should not ho construi'd at this time. ' Mr. Stevenson for the commission Q then read the return to the rule to show cause why there should not be a receivership, and this, reserving objeclion to the jurisdiction of the court, set up ttint wo cause for the relief prayed for was shown and that the ;e suit was owe airainst the State, that ! the Stat*- is an indispensable partv to I the suit and is n'i.i before the court, that the commission is a court, that uo <>rouud of equitable jurisdiction is n shown such as insolvency, tligt the ' dispensary commission had wo entity save as an ayent of the Slate, that ' t!ie liquor was sold to the State and ' on the credit of the State, that the sales were void because of fraud and violations of the State law by the creditors. l_ Frank Carter, for the Wilson Dis,e tilling company, stated that an at'" fidavit was beiny prepared by Cloorue s* H. Lester which would allege that the 's attorney i>eneral had employed T. B. V Felder to resist the payment of claims and to prosecute criminally on a commission of It) per cent, of the amounts so deducted from the claims. Mr. Alfred S. Laniard asked that 10 all the papers in the \Vilson bill be >1' considered in the Kfeisehniann bill. J. and vice versa, and llij^ was i'inally s- aiiiecd to. r- Mr. Stevenson argued briefly that t- as complainants and court had e.\v, pressed confidence in the commission, L and as there was no charge of insoLj r- vency. receivership was unnecessary. l)" Mr. Stevenson stafed that he and L'" not Attorney (Jeneral Lyon was ros1,1 ponsible for the mandamus proceedin?'s before the South Carolina su-' 0 preme court stating that it was iw11 tended to provoke no conflict but to | afford protection to the commission, lie was referring to the $l."j,()00 ex'n pen so account, and added that an appeal in an orderly way to the supreme 'd court of the I nited States would setie tie the question of jurisdiction. The' ?- court replied that the statement wasJ to entirely satisfactory. l" Mr. L. .\. Wittkowskv of Charleston presented the clnnn of John Mc10 Smyrl for SS1.1M. which had been u approved by the commission and ask1" ed thi' court to make an order for its payment. !' Mr. Stevenson, on f)ein<j asked if jj the commission would apply for leave . t?> pay it. replied that it would not. Flint the commission desired to pay tho claim, and was ready to do so, but was required by the statute to do so, and this court had decided that tt. 0 oujrlit to pay the claims as rapidly as possible, but the commission dedined to have the soverii?n State of South ('arolir.a ask per.mission of this l,% or any other court to pay its debts. When they were reac*y ?*?r finyiiion? r>- aiitl the money was ow hand (o pay ii- I hem, that any time t he commission 1? assented to anything or that an ors d r was passed ?ivinr any relief to 1'- the situation, attorneys on the other it 'side claimed that it waived the quesl(l lion of jurisdiction and while the i- most casual consideration of the law k- refuted that position, the cominission would decline to participate in asking for any relief for any ercditor. and if the duty imposed by the " statute ami emphasized by this court j IV to pay tli.'' just liabilities as soon a< 1(1 practicable was not carried out, it ! I would be for the reason that the I con:'t declin *d to allow '.hem to he ! 10 (paid and not because the commission j i was unwilling to do so. ''J I Mr. Stevenson expressed the desire] ' of tIn* defendants to have the two ' applieal ions for a receiver considered I to :th. r and lo that end he waives the in Mew days' notice in the I'Meischmann i j case, with a proviso, however, that u> this should not be construed as a I waiver of the objections to the jnr-! isdidion of the court. , i n* dudj?e Pritchard then read his de- i cision appointing' permanent receiv- ' ers for I he South Carolina dispen- ' sar.v fnwd. Mr. Rountroc, on behalf of | f- the commission gave notice that the ; te commission would refuse to recojf- ; ><* ni/e the jurisdiction of the court and j is would refuse to turn over the dispell- ] le sary found to the receivers. Tn the , ie event of the refusal of the commis- I it sion to recognize. tire jurisidiction of 1 d the fedora' court, a rule for con- J it I tempt of court will probably issue a.ul si hearing bo hail ,either at (iroen- j 11 villo or Spartanbin! McOullougli Accepts. Greenville, .March 7.'?Joseph A. 1 MVCullouiih announced lliis afternoon tlint lie liatl aeco]>lod the appi iutmcnt jP is coreceivcr ul' the South Carolina; Stal<? dispensary fund. the otlice hav- | ing beo:i I?*:i>Ivred liim ??y I'liiled Sta- A tos Circuit .Judge Prilchard this morning*. Mr. McCul lough said that the appointment had come In him <pifo unefc peetk'dly, 1 l!i* had not hoard that li*? was being* considered in this capacity until lie received a icle- t* phone message from Ashcville this t' morning*. It was then that Judge h Prilchard asked Mr. MoCulloug!i " personally iI* In* would accept the ap- e poininienl if it were tendered. Mr. ;tl McCullough considered Iho matter ri j soiine time and then told the judge P [that ho had decided to accept. At lirst s lit was understood here thai Mr. M*c- ' Cnllough would hi' the sole receiver, r but later it was learned that Mr. C. t! K. Henderson and Mr. Arthur, both o of. the Stale winding* up board, had c accept id and Mr. McCullouiih will g servo with those "rentlemon, it is pre- g sumed. .i Mr. McCullough stated positively c that the recoi vership apopintmeut < would have no oil eel on his campaign d I'or the 1'nited Stales senate. <' | ATTORNEY GENERAL'S VIEWS. < I Mr.J[jyon Declares That Appointment I of Receivers for Dispensary I Funds is in Direct Disregard of the Rights of the t State. o Augusta, (Ja.. March 7.? When At- t lorney (len<*Val Lyon of South Car- c olina, who is* hero tonight, was shown the Associated Press dispatch from Ashevillc. X. C.. announcing Joseph d A. McCullouiih's acceptance of a re- a coiverstiip of the dispensary ai the s hands of Judgv Prilchard. he said: t "T roarer exceedingly t'nat there is / a person in the State id" South Car- e olina who would accept the appoint- ii moid as receiver at the hands of e Iinitio Prilchard.' I Then taking up Iho general situa- ' tion. Mr. JjVoii said: " So far as Judge Prilchard's undortaki lg to enjoin any one from bringing* suits |o in any way interfere with the fund involved is con- (* corned. I will state that 1 have in- ' stitnled a proceeding in Iho supreme court of South Carolina for (ho pur- v pose of compelling-t he commission t > ! disregard .Judge Prilchard's injunc- ' tion and to pay into the State's troas- ' ury lor the use of the attorney lienor- ( al's ollice Iho sum of $1 ">.()( 10, whicii n was appropriated for the ]>urpose of ! certain criminal proceedings and pro- 1 j seditions of persons connected with ' the late State dispensary. "Judge Prilchard's order will most ^ certainly bo disregarded by me ill it j undertakes to in any wise restrain or direct me in this or any other pro( coding's I may doom it advisable lo institute. . " T regard the entire proceeding1 as i without precedent and as a most outrageous disorgard of (he rights of I the State of South Carolina. II is founded upon no sound authority. | | His conduct in appointing* receivers j I on the day before the motion for I lie i I appoint mont of receivers was to be ,i | heard in accordance with the formal I ord 'i* which he passed was a most wil- 1 | ful disregard of the rights of the a Stale, and wo were thereby denied i our day in court. I "As lo his criticism, in his former j decree, of my bringing- Hie mandamus s proceeding- in the supreme court of " I South Carolina to compel the com- i mission lo disregard his injunction ?' and pay into the Start; treasury Iho 'appropriation made for the prosecution of the criminals, f wish lo say ^ that I he same had no proper place in his decree and was purely gratuitous ? on his pari. The proceeding* in the f South Carolina court was in accord- > 'mice with the practice and the law in v South Carolina and if this hail not ! u boon so tiie court would have refused j to assemble and hear the same. The',, result of I his proceeding can nol be l foretold. 11 would iro doubt be as |' useless to explain the purpose of this | proceeding* to him as it was to ox- ? IAY HOLD LYON FOR CONTEMPT OF COUR1 RITCHARD MAY TAKE NOTICI OF HIS STRICTURES. I Sensation Has Been "(Caused in Asheville?Judge Pritchard Declines to Make Statement in Regard to Ma.tter. Asheville, N. March S.?The al ick made on Judge I'ritchard by Al irnev (r'.'iK'ra! Lynn at Augusta, (!a. ?>l :iiiili 1 and published by the morn lg papers, wherein the attorney gen ral severely critici/.ed tin.' action o] lie judge in appointing pomianen i?ceivers for the Smith Carolina dis v'nsary Inn 1, created a profonin ensation in this city, the judge'; omc. It is stated tonight that rep esentatives of (he suitors will cal lie attention of the court to Mr. Ly II 's attack, ami will ask Judge I'rit hard to attach him, the attorne; eneral, for contempt of conrl. on th. round that while i " fleet ions on tin udge's personal character are no onUmpt, tin* advice of Atiorne; Jen.'ral Lyon to (he commission l< isregard the orders of the federa onrt directing the deliverance of (hi ispensary fund of ^SOO.OOO lo the re eivers does in itself constitute con enipt. in that il tends to actually in erf.'re with the administration o he court and to nullify its powers. .fudge Pritchard, who left this af ernoon for Richmond. with a stop ver at Washington, declined to mak< iy slat anient before leaving, savin; hat it was not his practice to dis nss cases in his court. Liquor Lawyers Active. Two local attorneys who represen l-islillitu>- companies in the suit gainst the South Carolina dispell ary commission issued a slalenien o the press, wherein they handle* Utornev fleaeral Lyon without glov s. resenting what they termed u, real injustice done to .Indue I'rit hard." They also declare that Mi .yen's slalunents are "wide of th ruth." Sta.tus of Case. The present status of the dispell ary case is as follows: When the dispensary commissio ivated by the South Carolina legishi ure to wind up the affairs of the di? >ensary failed to agree with creditor kilo sol I liquor to the dispensary, a 0 amounts due, charging swindlin iv creditors, (leorgv T5. Lester o Cew York, attorney for Fleisdiman: onipany. came lo Asheville a mont go, filed with .Tudsre Pritchard o lie PnilvMl Stales circuit court a bil 11 equity, asking receivership for th nnd of ;fvS0(l,000 left by tiie dispell ary. and a few days later, Fran barter of Asheville and T. Monltri dorleeni of Charleston tiled a hi! or the Wilson Distilling compan, ind others, on which Judge Prilcli ir?l issued a temporary reslraiiii.i uder, forbidding the commissio Yom disposing' of (tie fund or I urn ny il inlo 1 lie State treasury. Three weeks ago both cases wer irsrned. the judge then declining ro da in the law and the fads in Ihe c;b ? which lie lias assumed jurisdic ion. I am not carefu* as lo th ipinion the learned jn.L.- may enter ain with regard lo this proceeding 1 i- not surprising I hat in- regard ii- !p.'v? 11)it111 llic pari < !' tiie Slat 0 piofee* rights against the wli i.ii'l.i Je-poil 1 i - r : .? ii'iwa rratitcd. ' Ill- conduct has been most mi e.mly and the State "I South I ar 1 i11a must look lo llie I'uiled Slate uprenie (ourl lor the procrvatioi f its sovereign powers. <ll am extremely gratified to knov bat M'em's. Murray. Patton am IcSwecn, members of 'he Slate dis x ivuiry commission, have refused b tccept the receivership offered their ml liint their patrioti- can nut b liak'ni by tiie hope ol any ivwan rhich may come al the hands of : isurper. "I believe we will fte finally sue essl'ul in the defense of Ihe Slate ml. whatever the result, we will de end her to Ihe last extremity of l ii aw. Knowing Ihe righeousness o Hi) cause. 1 believe we. will succeed.1 i I ivivits ami takinu under advisement I] the ipieslioa ?i|" jurisdiction of (he conn. raised h\ (hx> commission throuuh Attorney (leneral Lyon ami (counsel for tin' commission on (lie ! .nr. ninl that i'"- <ni! was auainst tlio V | State itself. | On his return from Richmond, l jdudue I'i i! chard. iiiii< n-eek auo, an- M nounced In- would lake jurisdiction and hearinu on application for receivership by tin' Wilson company was set for Saturday lust. Ou I'Yiday - counscl for the Wilson company and - J I'leisehinaiin company presented , j the affidavit of (ioorue l?. Lester that <'1 - the governor of South Carolina urued ?'* - tiic legislature to take action to de- ' f feat the jurisdiction of the court and I that tin- legislature wouUL interfere ' - with the court's powers,igpplicivupou l< I I). \Y. Uountree ol' Atlanta, counsel ? j J'or the commission, beinu here, was - notified and was present at the hear- o< 1 i11ii", other counsel not having arriv- <> - od for the next day's hearinir. The 0 - court timed all the meinhers of the el r commission as temporary receivers, s. and yesterday (Saturday) dudu'e b .* Pritciiard announced the appointt ment as perinanent receivers of .Jos. A v A. McCnllouiih of (1 reenville, S. ('., ) l>. l*\ Arthur of I'aion, S. ('.. and ('. <i I I K. Henderson of Aiken. S. ('. n e I Attorney (ieueral Lyon, on hearing - of this action, denounced .Indue I'ril- 1' - chard and particularly his action in I - | naiuinu' receivers prior to the date set C f for argument on tli(? question of < whether receivers should he appoint- I - ed. .Indue l'rit chard declines to r - make reply, hut local attorneys is- < i! sue statements to the ell'ect that Wottii- a > tree was .trivett notice of hearinu' on d - tin* appointment id' receirvers Fdi- a day, and that they are "Southern He- A inocrats and that no State rights are t< t involved." !s To Go to United States Court. ^ W. l'\ Sicvensoii and 1). \V. U'oun- ^ t tree of counsel for commission slat- ' ed tiiat the question of jurisdiction '* will he taken to the supreme court of ^ the 1'nitcd States, contemlin.tr that the " suit is really one auainst the State id' ' ' South Carolina, which is immune - from suits unless it consents ; ' ;u 1 ' ed. | I ! . " "?st jon of whet I : . : ' ~ " th" (..urt !... /itrisdiclion i< to he 1 rais.'d is not y t settled, Mr. Si 'veil- > II son sayiair that this would he deter- ' " mined later, hut lie thought it would ! he I y writ, ol' error which could reach ^ tin! ) re-eat term of (lib supreme court, ' * altlu .;,!i habeas corpus proceedings ^ I'ollowiu : .fusal to ,.b? y an or-lt r ' of the fec-.'/t! court v.ouio lie more M expedition.-. I!' .Indue I'ritchard ' should tine i !' imprison a commission- ' I" 1 .|i er for failnr. . ? o'n v ord- r<. :it?i?!:< !- ! I | ' 1 lion inuiM l)v? i ir at Wj.sliin jf nn I'm" i 0 a writ of Iiah(.".< corpus ; i ! inline ' diate liearin had. prob.:*>iv ' .Tore 1 Chief Jus!!-. Kuller. Tin ; rt.;vdi?r* i would 1 atve a i: i Mr. srs. ' " \\?>od a.i.! ' i.;: ;o .Indue y I'rilchar i!;: \vr:! i decision | (| was imim '! . da t..il: *r hand. | ' the writ ol tiro:- is more "'jui.ir and i II the ohjcctioa to it is d< !av involved in . iu a deei : ... I .To: o ap-.... Yet. I ^ . .. >r:i. . ''. r :' c.-n.! "i ' v cl > th '\ !: )' ( : t m- 1 :i11 th'dr ! j, weapons i.i fedm'al court. There is i ^ ( now pendinu before the supreni j a j court of South Carolina the niiinda- jy (inn- case which involves a decision i . !< : tin- <|iie.-l ion of who ha.- the ens- j i . 1 tody of the I MM I fund, ihe mean- j | .. i it": of i!i ae| creaiiau the new coin- I, 1 . . t i ( i('ui!>-io.i maintains that the I niled ^ ISi;il(s sitpr.ine cnu;t a!w.ay> follow-) ? T! ? i ut' i pre I a! ion place I hy J he h iu h I 1 . c mi of the State tin laws nf thai j s i Slate and if the Slate >np.-. me court < , j.-!i >nId hold that that fund was in ihe j I immediate cu.-tody of the State itself then the I niled States supreme court I would adopt this decision, and there fore llii- circuit court would have no [, juricdiction hiM'anse it can m?t enter- j lain a suit auninst the State without U . a its consent. . I (1 I j li 'l I \\'.> may fail a thousand times; hut ; as louir as we are ashamed of our I' - ' failure, as loiiu' as w<- do not help- c h'Hslv acqniesee. as lotur as we do ( - j not try to comfort ourselves for it by s .> la care-f'ul parade of our other virtues, s f I we are in the piluriin's road. - Arthur I ' I ('hristopher 1'ensoii. I v [ON. FRANK B. GARY IS U. S. SENATOR HO SEN ON FRIDAY ON SEVENTEENTH BALLOT. [r. Gary Led Through The Session ?Represented. Abbeville in General Assembly. A Tier seventeen ballots by I he yen* ;il assembly, Representative Frank . Cary, of Abbeville, was on Friday lose 11 railed Slates senator In suovd I lie lale Senator Asburv ('. Lamer. I'l I lie Herald and News <>|* Tucsay were yiven in detail the ballots iken on \\ ednesday and a summary, I the ballots taken on Thursday lorniny. The joint assembly ballot-' I ayain on riiursday afternoon and ' ii I hursday ni.uhl. without result. (n Friday mommy Mr. Gary was lecled on the fourth ballot, briny tlio 'veuleenth taken by the joint assemly. I lie liaal hallo! in detail, on w hich I r. (Jury was elected, was as follows: For (la ry? Senator?. Karle, Kfird, |rill'm, Harvey, lloiiub. dohu^on, Laey. Toide. Represent a t i vrs Arindd. Bailey. allentinc. I >< i hniie. Doyd. Brantley, '. S. I'rice, Camion. Carey, Carson, 'arwile, Clary, < 'nun ney, Croft, idler. Derhani. Din-!.'. Dixon, .J. B. >oild, Douglass. Dowliny, Fpps, Caris, .1. |'. (iibson, W. .1. < iibson, ( Hassock. (iood win, llall. Hardin, liarion, Harris. Ilinton, lluyhes, llyrick, Johnstone, Kirven, Lester, Loiter, Little, MciColl. MeKeown, Mann, I'.ley, Miller, Morndl. Nichols, Nor"H. Dallerson, Richards, Richardson, live, Scarborough, Scruyys, Sharpe, diipp. Slant-liter. D. I,. Smith. ). F. "lit 11. St ill well. Stokes, Thomas, 'odd. Tompkins, Verier. Wade. Walcr. Wanuamaker. Wiinberley, Voods, Wye lie, Yeldell. I'W alkei^?-'Senators Appell, <a;e>. 1!ai*iIi.i. MeCowan. Townsen.l. Representatives A. G. Briee, \V. I). 5r'';i'i. ''1; -e:i'"-. Coy. Dick. Dear. . C . C 1 ?. Kellahan. 1 .ear1. Niver. Darker, lawyer, Yander"iVe.re. ^ <nu:i;;::s. Ft..* M .'.n' l:.: a:..r "' ' e, (rooks. I'epr-'seii: at ives Boaffie, Cot limit, Ircer, Jlarloy, Harrison, Hemphill, esbiI.' Nicholson, K. D. Smith. !*'? .' Wilie .Jones?(Senator Weston. Rcpr:?enlativ? Rurker.. I'or Ira B. .Jo.ios?'Senator \YilillllS, Reprcsent a I i ve< Cosyrove, Jones* J obinson. 1 For Cokcr?Represent a I ive Aver. g For D. T. MeKeit ban?'Senator Hoi- f day. ' For Mid.eod? Senators Da -. Bivn?\ Dlack, Bleasr. ("arli-le. Clr.vMeni'ii, ( Ii I tun. Crouch, (iilxon, (Iray iii. K -1 ly, MeK 'ithan. Otts. Ro.ers, 'inkier, Sullivan, Talbert. Raysor, Represent at ives Anil. knaiB.I MHj I.'., i'.-eiiiatives A:11!. Banks, I'. M. lr\au. Carriyan, ,1. II. Dodd, Fra-er, [crs! a'.v. I awson. McMWter, Reave.*, M -r . Sj-iv.-y. T. . i:i:. \"onKo]:i:u, \ \V* ..*;?iy. r.c.\?.pitn:r,tion. lary 70 IcLcod .'52 Valker 'J I 1 ;l li) d i n II. Vilie .lo.ies 2 r;i D. ~ 4 "- ke.- ]. IcKeitiian 1 Total I.*. I N reo-ai'y t (i a < ii : ei , < . Mr. I inn wa> therefore declared lei ltd a id the joint assembly <lisul ved. There were four ballots taken in int assembly in the two hours' sesion, makiinr a total of 17 i:i all, and ii the last ballot Mr. Gary, with a lajority of one vote, was formally ecdared elected and the joint asscmily dissolved. When the lirsl ballot 'was taken "inlay moriii iir ther."> seemed no liance of a break in the deadlock. Mr, iary lascked 10 votes of the neees- . ary number and the opposition ecmed well organized. Draclically he same candidates were voted upon .hen the roll was called and tln.ro