University of South Carolina Libraries
<EI)e f mucus ^V?ucrti?er. PiBLinflKu uramr tumday. buborii?tion *i ?<? phh yiar. DISPENSARY LAW SUSTAINED. THIO Sll'KKMK COURT ltKVKKHKH A FOKMRK DKCISION. The l,? w Is a Police IteiculAtloii?Buy ing und HulliiiK Incidental to iIi? Main I'uriMiHO of Regulating the I.lqMor TrutHo? Ohler Justice Mclver. DiMHcntH?Opinion by Eu X gene B. (Jury, Associate Jnatloc. The opinion of tho Supreme Court was rendered last wook upon the Dis pensary Aet of l"!'.'!, and declares the law to be constitutional, roversing the formor decision of the Court. Justices Gary and Pope agree upon tho consti tutionality of tho law, whllo Chief Jus tice Mclvor has lilcd a dissonting opin ion. The great length of these opin ions will provont their ontire repro duction Incur columns, and only tho Chief portion of Justice Gary's decision is tflvon herewith : Tho State of South Carolina?In the Supremo Court?Aikon County?Tho Stato vs. ex rolationo J. V. Georgo ? and G. T. Holloy, appellants, vs. the elty council of the city of Aikon, re spondents. The issues involved in this case are far reaching in their consequoiioes and of greatest moment. An Act of the Legislature, which has for Its objoct the solution of tho voxod question t f tho liquor traffic, Is boforo this Couit for review, and its constitutionality is contested. Tho scheme of tho Act ie novel In Its features, und tho Court is not able to got much light from adjudi cations bearing direetly thereon. Wo aro therefore compelled from nocosslty to read? our conclusions upou a con sideration of tho genoral principles of law on which it is founded. Wo trust that wo outer upon tho consideration of tho principles involved in this case with a proper sonso of tho responsi bility which rests upon us. Tho con clusions at which we have arrived wore reached after maturo delibera tion and careful consideration. Tho issues involved heroin will ho seen more clearly by a short statement of facts, out of which the ouao arose. A STATEMENT OF THE CASK. Tho rotators, who wore opening a dispensary by State appointment and authority under tho Aet of the Genor al \8sombly, approved December 211, it?'..1, and Known as tho Dispensary Aot, having been summoned to an swer boforo tho town-council of Aikon .for violation of an ordinaneo prohibit ^ itig the sale of vinous or malt liquors without u license, applied boforo his Honor, Judge Aldrioh, for a writ of prohibition restraining tho town coun ell from interfering with thorn upon said ehargoon the ground that tho or dinance was a nullity, and tho council in sooking to euforco It was attempting to exercise a power with wbieli it was not vested. Tho town council in an swer to a rule to show cause justified its proposed action by an assertion of tho validity of tho ordinance in ques tion, and by the claim that the Dispen sary Aot of 18t),'l was null and void us vioiatlve of Sections 1, 2 and 41 of Ar ticle 1 of tho Constitution of the Stato, of Scotion 8, Article 1, of tho Constitu tion of the United States, of Amend ments 4, ? and 14 of that Constitution, and of the national laws regulating Inter-State commerce, it also urged that tho rotators had ample remedy at law for tho corroetton of their alleged grievances and that the writ on that ground should not issuo. Judge Ald rioh held, under the authority of Mc Cullough ct al vs. Brown otal. It) S. E. R., 190, that the Act of ISM was vlola tive of the Stute Constitution, null and void ; that tho Act is not in violation of tho Constitution of tho United States, tho amendments thereto or the Inter-State commerce laws of the United States; but that the ehartor of tho city of Aikon does not sustain the ordinance, and that tho same was ille gal and void. He further overruled tho objection that tho rclators had ample, remedy at law, and ordered tho writs of prohibition to Issuo. Both iso lators and respondents appealed ; tho Jirst on the ground that tho Judgo erred in holding the Aot of 18M null and void, as vioiatlve of tho State Con Ktitution and in permitting respon dents to question tho constitutionality of tho Act, and tho respondents on tho grounds that tho Judgo erred In not holding tho Dispensary Aet null and void as vioiatlve of tho Constitution of tho United States and of tho national Inter-State commerco law: in not holding tho rolators had ample reme dy at law, and so aro not entitled to the writ, and in holdiug tho ordinance in quostion to be without Huppert of law, null and void. In the light of these cases wo pro coed to a consideration of tiio Act of 181V.1. Boforo proceeding to a consider ation of tho spocitlc objections urged againstUbho constitutionality of the Act we desiro to stato ut tho outset tbut in our opinion tho following pro positions omhody tho principles gov erning this ease : FOUNDATIONS OF THE COURT'S OPIN ION. ist. That liquor in its nature is dan gerous to tho morals, good order, health and safety of tho people, and is not to bo placed on tho same footing with the ordinary commodities of life, such as corn, wheat, cotton, tobacco, potatoes, etc. 2d. That tho Stato under Its police power can itself assume entire control and manugomont of thoso subjects, such as liquor, that aro dangerous to tho poaee, good order, health and morals and wolfaro of the peoplo, oven when trade is one of tho instruments of such ontire control and mauugemcnt on thepart of tho Stato. :ird. That tho Act of 1RIK? is a police inoasuro. Wo aro frank to say that If wo aro wrong as to oitber of theso proposi tions tho Act should bo declared un constitutional. We will now cite au thorities to sustain theso propositions. \Vo think dlfToroneoH of opinion as to constitutionality of this Aet nriso from tho attempt on tho part of somo to ap ply to it tho law applicable to tho ordi nary commodities of life. Tho salo of an article may bo lawful unloss ro stralned by law and yet it may bo of such a naturo as to endanger the peaco, safety, health and morals of a people. Wo do not suppose that there is a moro potont faetor In keeping up tho neces sity for asylums, penitentiaries and jails and in producing pauporism and immorality throughout tho ontlro -country than liquor, and yot it is ar gued that it is to bo placed on tho same footing with tho breadstulTs and other ordinary commodities of lifo. MAIN FEATURES OF THE ACT. We como now to an examination of tho Act of 181KI as to its main features. It has been shown in the case of Mug lor vs. Kansas. 12*1 U. S., that what are known as tho police powers of tho Gov ernmental to dotormlued primarily by tho legislative dopartmcnt. The in tention of the Legislature is to l>o gath er^ from tho words of tho Act. Tho titlo of the Aet is " An Act'to declare tho law in reference to Und further regulate tho uso, sale, consumption, transportation and disposition of alco holic liquids or liquors within the State of South Carolina and to police tho same." Tho Act provides that "all sueh liquids, liquors, except when nought from a Stato officer authorized to soli the same or In possession of one, Aro declared to be contraband ami Against tho murals, good health und eiifety of the State, and must he Helped ?whorevor found." etc. Tho Governor, Attorney Genoral and Comptroller General ?hall ox-offlclo constitute a .StaU> boaroW control to carry out tho visions ofcihl? A ?? \;Th?s Act pro _? .d?? for tbefpp "'"' >, WNHKIm sloner, who shall, purchase all liquors for lawful sale under such rules and ' regulations us may ho mado by %The Stato board of control, aud furnish the sinne to such persons as may be desig nated a* dispensers thereof. All liquors shall h.- tested by tho chemist and de clared to be pure before sale for tho county dlsponsors. The State board of control shall ajrpolnt a county board I of control, composed- of three persons who shall appoint certain officers known as county duqwuuors. The dls | ponsors oan only soil by the package, whloh cannot be broken nor the liquor drunk upon the premises where sold. The Aot shows that tho Legislature bad in view the protection of the mor als, good health and safety of the State. In doaling with this question many safeguards are thrown around the sale of liquor. Tho eommlBSloner is to bo an abstainer from Intoxicants ; the liquor is to be tested by tho chem ist ana deelarod to bo pure; the liquor is to be sold only in packages and can not, be opened nor drunk where sold; tho sales can only bo mado In day time; pejrseus cannot bo appointed on tho county board of control who are ad dicted to the U6e of intoxicating liquor; no person can be appointed a county dispenser who has ever been adjudged guilty of violuting the law rotating to intoxicating liquors, nor who Is keeper of a restaurant or a place of public amusement, nor who is addioted to the uso of intoxicating liquors uj a bever age ; tho county disponsor shall exe cute a bond in tho sum of $3,000 upon which suit for damages may bo brought tor violation of tho provisions of the Aot by a wife, child, parent, guardian, omployor or other persons : a majority of the voters in a township may pre v mt the establishment of a dlspon s ay ; tho county disponsor shall tako au bath therein proscribed ; a printed or written request must be prosonted for permission to purchase; tho sale shall not bo mado to a minor, a person intoxicated, a person in tho habit of drinking to oxcess, nor to a porson un known to tho disponsor: it prevents tho establishment of club rooms where liquors are used. One of tho beneficial results of tho law is brought about by soiling only for cash. It lias boon argued that thoro was no necessity for this regulation by tho Stato, that'the samo results could be accomplished by allowing prlvato Indi viduals to carry on the traffic, and for this reason tho Act is null and void. Tho necessity was a question exclu sively for tho legislative department as shown by tho foregoing authorities, pai tlmla-lV town council vs. Prossloy, 33 S, 0. The judiciary "cannot run a raco of opinion upon points of right, reason and oxpedioney with tho law powers." Tho State has tho right through its own otllcors, In fact It is tho primary duty toonforcoits police regu lations, which right inheres in govern ment Itsolf and is paramount to any right inherent in citizenship. Hut referring to the foregoing objeo tlou. us matter of faot it would not bo as efficiently enforced by private indi viduals, because thoro would bo tho constant temptation to mnko as largo prollts as possible. Chief Justice Mc lver, in MoCullough vs. Brown, says: " By its profit foaturo it holds out un induoomout to ovcry taxpayer to en courugo as largo sales as possiblo aud thereby lesson tho burden of taxation to tho extent of the prollts to bo rea lized." THE OUTGROWTH OF DISSATISFACTION The dispensary uet itself is an out growth of a .dissatisfaction on tho part of tho people with tho manner in which tho police power, when delegated, was abused. Tho law was enacted In self dofonse, and vindicates tho wisdom of our forefathers in allowing wide legis lative discretion in tho exercise of the police power. There is nothing in tho uet showing that, its primary object is tho raising of revenue. Tho sales aro to bo made undor rules adopted by tho county board of control, and approved by tho Stato board of control. It is certainly possiblo for tho objects of the aot to bo carried Into olToet under proper rules adopted for that purpose It is within tho power of tho boards of control to ellmlnato tho profit foaturo altogether. It is presumed that public officials will discharge the duties of office in u lawful manner, until tho contrury appears. When a case is brought before this court, contesting tho legality of tho rulos adopted by tho boards Of control, it will no time enough then for this court to pass upon tho revenue feature. Suffice it to say no such question is now boforo us. Objection lias been urged ugainst tho act that it is repugnant ? ? tho pro visions of tho Constitution is to taxa tion. This objection could only bo sustained in case it should bo decided that tho object of tho aet is not the exorcise of police power. Police is a public purpose and tuxes levied to en ahlo the government to enforce a law construed to bo in pursuance of tho police power has never boon declared unconstitutional. Thoso interposing tho objoction abvo mentioned as sumed t bat tho act is not a police meas uro aud thus arguo against its con stitutionality. If tho aot is a pollco measuro a tax levied for its enforcement would bo as lawful as a tax to raise funds to build a Stato Houso, or railroad, which it has boon determined beyond contro versy, tho State always does undor this power of police, inherent in tho govern ment. Boforo this objection can pro perly ariso it will have to bo determin ed whether tho actis a police measuro, which is always a public purpose. Objection is mado us to tho consti tutionality of tho act on tho ground that it ereatos a monopoly. Thoso in terposing this objection, likowiso, as sume that it is not u police moasuro. Tho objection is fully mot by the de cision of tho court in the slaughter house cases supra, in which the court says: "That wherovor tho Lcgis laturo bus the right to accomplish a certain result, and that result is best attained by means of a corporation, it lias tho right to create such a corpora tion and to endow it with tho power necessary to olToet tho dosirod lawful purpose, seems hardly to admit of de bate." Tiedman on limitations of power, 318, says: "If it is lawful for tho Stato to prohibit a partioular busiuoss altogether, or too make ? government monopoly of it, tho pursuit of such business would, If permitted to any one, bo a prlvllogo or frauchiso, and being lino any other franehiso, may bo mado exclusive. This is but a logi cal eonbquonco of tho admission that tho State has tho power to prohibit a trado altogether. Suoh an admission is fatal to u rosistanco of tho power to make it a monopoly." The doctrine of " monopoly " cannot bo applied to a Stato in exorcising its governmental functions. SELLING LIQUOR IS NOT'AN IN ALIEN AULE RIGHT. Tir.e first objection sot forth In re spondent's return to the Writ of prohi bition is that tho aet is in violation of Seotlon 1 of Article 1 of tho Constitu tion of this State, which Is as follows : "All men aro born free "nd equal ? ondowed by their Creator with cor tain inalienable rights, among which aro the rights of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property and of keeking and obtaining thoir safety and happiness." Tho act h not in violation o* this cation unless It has deprived tho respondent of an In alienable right. it will bo observed that tho respond ent is a municipal corporation, but waving all question as to tho right of Mich corporation to claim tho same i "inalienable rights" as a citizon, wo do not soo that any " Inaltonablo right" has boon invaded. Tho caso of Crowley vs. Christiansen, 137 TJ. S.. and other authorities herolnboforo cited, clearly show that a citizon has not an Inalienpblo right "J to soil liquor, but on tho contrary t/at lawn aro constitutional that pro/iblt tiie 1.0 seconj objoction I? thiVj. thn ?<?! Is 1" violation of Section 2 of Article 1 of tlto Constitution of South Carolina, which is ua follows : "Slavery shall never exist in this State: neithor shall involuntary servitude, except as a punfohrociit for orline whereof the party shalt tiuve been duly oonvioted." Counsel for the respondent did not i argue this objection, and as it has no bearing whatever on this case, we are constrained to think there must have been a mistake in its insertion. I'UK i.ix:iKr.A'l'l !<!?: rOWBR OF* THK STATE. The next objectionlnterposed by re I spondent la that the act la in violation of section 41 of article 1 of the consti tution of this State, whloh is as fol I lows : " The enumeration of rights in this constitution shall* not be con strued to impair or delay others ro talnod by the people and all powers not heroin delegated romnln with the people." This section was construod in the caso of State against Hayne, 4 S. C, 420, in such a way as to be in accord with the establiBhod theory of the I State government and of the power of the Legislature. Chief Justice Wil lard, in delivering the opinion of the court, said: "Section 1, article 2, I dociares that the legislative power of I this State shall bo vestod in two dis tinct branches, the one to bo styled j the Sonate' and the other 'the House of Representatives,' and both together the Gonoral Assembly of tho State of South Carolina." Although tho particular ofllco of this sect ion is to fix certain important feat ures of tho body through which the function of legislation is to be exer cised yot it describes in an authorita tivo way tho nature of the power in vested. It is no loss than tho legisla tive power of tho State. It Is not suoh and so much of tho legislative power of tho State as wore intended to be used by that particular body, but it was tho whole logislatlvo power of this State, Its whole capacity of making laws and providing the moans for their enforcement. It was not intended that tho Legislature should exorciso I this power without limitation and re straint, for the constitution that usos these words of grant Imposes many such restrictions and limitations affect ing tho extent to which it may be offootivoly oxorclsod. Tho form of expression hero employed shows that tho peoplo of South Carolina onter talu tho same vlow of -tho nature of logislatlvo powor that is accepted by other similar communities and intend ed that it should recelvo, in this re spect, tho construction ordinarily put upon grants of such powers in other similar instruments ; that is to say, they intonded a gcnoral grant of that brauch of governmental powor and faculty described as tho legislative powor of tho State, though subject to many restrictions affecting its ex orcise. But it has boon arguod that section 41 of article 1 narrows this from a grant of gonoral capacity to one of limited power. It is said that tho powers of tho Legislature of South Carolina must bo hold to he spoolal and enumoruted powers, liko those of tho Congress of tho United States, and that such as aro not in terms granted must bo regarded as withhold and re tained by the peoplo, and that such Is tho forco and effect of section 41 ar ticle 1. After quoting the soctlon ho pro ceeds: "Tho truo offoot of this de claration is that it rcsorves to the people whatever is not granted by tho instrument ; as for instance, the right to make changes in the form of government is not granted, and under this clause remains with tho peoplo, capable of exercise when they may seo fit so to do. As the legislative powor is granted in express terms im porting a grant of gonoral powers, such general powor of legislation can not bo regarded as reserved to tho peoplo, undor this seotion. Such general language as that contained in section 41 artielo 1 cannot bo allowed such forco and effect as to chauge en tirely tho naturo of logislativo power and to introduce anomalous ideas In the structure of tho government." Tho very definitions of taxation,, making it clear that it must bo for a publio purpose, showed that there was no necessity for resort to tho doetrino of reserved limitations to declare null and void a tax for a private purpose; and that the court would havo been compolled to rondor tho decision It did in that o?se, oven if section 41, artielo 1, had not boon roferrcd to at all. A roforeneo to soction 41, article 1, was incidental only and cannot bo regarded as authority to show that thoro arc reserved limitations whon there was nothing in that case calling for au adjudication of such quostion. Tho oasos eited in support of tho doctrine of implied limitations upon tho legislative authority wore in re gard to taxation, as to which it was neoofesary to resort to such doetrino for tho simple reason that tho very definition of taxation shows it must bo for a public pvrpose, and thereforo an act of tho Legislature attempting to raiso monoy for a privato purpose is null and void. Mr. Tiedman, In his limitations of police power, says: " A tax is in tho most eomprohonslvo sense any chargo or assessment levied by the government for publio pur poses, upon tho persons, property and privileges of tho people within tho taxing district or State." Black, C. J., in Sharplese vs. Mayor, &c, 21 Pen, St. Reps., 160, which is ono of the leading cases against the doetrino of reserved constitutional limitations, shows that taxation neces sarily means tho ruising of revonuo for a public purpose In tho casos he says: "Tho Legislature has no con stitutional right to lay a tax or to authorize municipal corporal ions to do it in ordor to raise funds for a mere privato purpose. No suoh authority passed to tho assembly by tho gonoral grant of tho legislative power. This would not bo legislation. Taxation is a modo of raising rovonuo for public purposes. When it is prostituted to objects in no way connected with tho publio interests or welfare it ceasos to bo taxation and becomes plunder." BUYING AND SELLING AN INCIDEN TAL FEATURE, It is contended that the foregoing soctlon prevents tho Legislature from embarking tho State in a oommoroial enterprise. Wo havo no doubt that If such was tho object of tho act, and it was not intended as a police measure, it would bo unconstitutional oven in tho absence of section 4L artielo 1. As wo havo said, if tho act is not a police measure it is unconstitutional. It is quite a difforent thing, howovor, when trado is simply an incident to a polico regulation. Buying and soiling on tho part of tho Federal, State and municipal gov ernments takes place every day, apd as long as tho buying and soiling aro in pursuance of polico regulations, they aro ontlrely froo from legal ob jection. Tho Federal government soils liquor and other articles that havo been soizod as contraband, articles aro purchased by tho Stato to koop up tho penitentiary, and asylum and othor public institutions and ontorprises; we seo it buying a farm to utilizo tho 0 evict labor of the State and soiling the products made on tho farm: mu nleipal government * hayo the right to buy and dispose of property ip admin istering the governmental affairs. Tho vory distinction for which wo contend Is pointed out in tho case of Mauldln vu. City Council, 3SJ ?, C, I. In that case ; tie court showed It was not wrong for tho city tp buy and sell for a pub lic purpose, but that tho act. only bo came illegal when it was for a private purpose, Wo think tho peso was pro perly decided and that' ?he decision rested upon this distinction. Tho case of State vs. Bee bo, ft Ind., was upon tho construction of a statuto of Indiana somewhat Aimlliar to the act in question, and is relied upon as an authority to sustain the proposition that tho Stato cannot take direct oon Irol and management of the liquor traffic. In that case the court uses the following language : "The busi nesss (the management and sale of liquor) was at and before the organiza tion of the government and la properly at all times a private pursuit 'of tho people, as much so as the manufacture and sale of brooms, tobacco, cloths and the dealing in tea and rice, and the raising of potatoes." This case is in conflict with the distinction made bo twoen liquor and the ordinary com modities of |life a?i enunciated in the case as Crowloy vs. Christiansen, U. 8., supra ; Hlaok on Int., Lig., supra; Stato vs. Turner, 18 S. C. and othor authorities hereinbefore mentioned. If liquor is to bp placed on the same footing with the articles mentioned in the Indiana case, then that decision was right. But if there is that dis tinction for whioh we contend, then the ease is valueless as an authority, being decided on orronoouB prlnolples. The prinoiples upon whioh that case was decided would have forced tho court that rendered it to havo deolar ed null and void a statute ontiroly pro hibiting the traffic in liquor, although there is no longer any doubt as to the constitutionality of such statutes. A ST ATI'. CAN PRESCRIBE CONDITIONS. Respondents next objection are that the act is in violation of tho 4th, 5th and 14th amendments to the Constitu tion of the United States. Thoso amendments havo no application to this case. In Smith vs. Maryland, 18 How., tho court says: "If rested on that clause in the constitution of tho Unitod States, which prohibits tho issuing of a warrant, but on probable cause sup ported by oath, tho answer is that this restrains tho issue of warrants only under the laws of tho United States and has no application to Stato pro cess." Chief Justice Fullor delivoring tho opinion of the court in Wilkorson vs. Ruhrer, 140 U. S., Bays : " The power of the Stato to imposo restraints and burdens upon persons and property in conservation a promo tion of the public health, good order, and prosperity, Is a power originally and always belonging to tho States, not surrendered by them to the general government nor dirootly restrained by tho constitution of the United States and essentially exclusive. And this court has uniformly recognized Stato legislation legitimately for police pur poses, as not in tho sense of the con stitution, necessarily infringing upon any right, which has been confldod expessly or by implication, to the national government. Tho Fourteenth Amondmont in forbidding a Stato to make or enforce any law abriding tho privileges or immunities of citizens of tho United States, or to doprivo any person of life, liberty or property with out due process of law, or to deny to any person within its jurisdiction tho equal protection of the law did not iwest and did not attempt to invest Congress, with power to legislato sub jects which are within tho domain of Stato Legislation * * * in short, it is not to bo doubted that tho powor to make tho ordinary regulations of police remains with tho individual States, and cannot bo assumed by the national government, and that in this respect it is not interfered with by tho Four teenth Amendment. Mr. Justico Harlan delivering the opinion of tho court in Muglor vs. Kansas, 123 U. S., sustains this viow and quotes with approval tho following from the case of Barbier vs. Connolly : " But noither tho amondmont (14th)? broad and comprehensive as it is?nor any othor amondmont was designed to interfere with tho powor of tho Stato sometimes tormod its polioo powor to [irescribo regulations to promote the icalth, peaee, morals, education and good ordor of tho people and to legis late so as to ineroase tho industries of tho Stato. develop its resources and add to its wealth and prosperity." Under tho docislon of tho Supreme Court of the United States liquor was hold to bo subject of coin mo reo and national in its character. It was set tled at an early date in tho history of tho national government that tho Stato under its polioo power eould leg islate upon thoso subjects of local na ture until Congress saw lit to intorfere and supcrcode tho Stato law. It was, howovor, a vexed question for a long time in tho courts of tho Unitod States, as to tho right of tho Stato, under its police powor, to subject to its laws thoso subjoots of intcrstato commorco whioh wero national in character, In tho absence of Congressional legisla tion upon tho subject. In tho ease of Leisy vs. Hardin, 135 U. S. tho court had undor considera tion tho aot of Iowa, whioh forbade any common carrier to bring into tho Stato of Iowa, for any person or per sons or corporation, any Intoxicating liquors from any othor Stato or Terri tory of tho United States without first having boon furnished with u certifi cate undor tho soal of tho county au ditor of tho county of which said li quor was to bo transported or was con signed for transportation, certifying that tho consignee, or porsons to whom suoh liquors was to bo transported, convoyod or delivered, was authorized to soil intoxicating liquors in such county. By a divided court it. was hold that such act was unconstitutional; that tho police power of a Stato is subordi nate to tho commercial power, and consequently that a Stato could not proscribo conditions upon which li quors could be transported into sueli btato from anothor State; and also t bat liquors transported into a Stato from another Stato could bo sold in tho original packagoB, oven whon the laws of tho State, Into whioh such liquor was transported prohibited tho sale. Tho decision in this caso causod the passage, of the act of Congress of 1890, nnd the reason londing to its adoption aro well expressed in the dis senting opinion of Mr. Justice Gruy (concurred in by Mr. Justico Harian and Mr. Justico Browor) in that caso, in tho following words : WITH YOUR HANDS TIED by nomo chronio M fe male complaintm or weakness, what ean you expcot? There's nothing you can ao oompliah ? nothing you can en joy. And no ?;ood reason or it. Dr, Pieroo's Fa* vorite Pre scription will oure yon, safely And certainly, if you'll give it faithful use. For every ono of these womanly troubles, this is the only remedy so sure that it oau be guaranteed, In periodical pains, bearing-down sen sations, organic displacements, and every kindred ailment, and in all tho nervous disorders caused by func tional derangemonts?if it ever fails to benefit or oure, you have your pioiioy b,ack. it's a potent remedy for Chorea or St. Vitus'* Dance?for Insomnia or Inability to 3leop and to avert threatened insanity. It regulates all tho natural functions, bunds up and invigorates the entire female system, and restores health and strength. Nothing else, though it may be better for a dealer to sell, can be ** Just as good M for you to buy, There wouldn't be any oases of Chronio Catarrh if everyone used Dr. Sago's Remedy. There's $500 reward for an incurable owe. "How for tho protection of tho pub lie order, health and morals, demands restriction or prohibition of the sale of intoxicating liquors is a question pe culiarly appertaining to the Legisla tures of the several States, and to be determined by them upon their own views of publie policy, taking into con sideration the neods, the education, tho habits and tho usages of people of various and origin ; and living in re gions fur apart, and widely differing in climate and in physical characteristics. Tho local option laws pre vailing1 in muriy of ihe States indicate the judg ment of as many Legislatures, that the sale of intoxicating liquors does not admit of regulation by a uniform rule over so largo an area as a single State, much loss over the area of a conti net." t It Is' manifest that tho rogulation of the sale, as of tho manufacture of such liquors, manufactured in one State to be stored in another, Lb a subject whicb tar from requiring hardly admits of a uniform system or plan throughout tho United States. It is In Its very naturo not national, but local, and must, in order to be eithor roasonablo or effec tive, conformed to tho local policy and legislation concorning tho Stato or tho manufacture of intoxicating liquors genorally. Congress cannot regulate this subject because that powor has not boon conoeded to Congross and re mains In tho several States ; nor undor tho commercial power without oithor prescribing a general rule unsultod to the naturo and requirements of tho subjects, or olso departing from that uniformity of rogulation which, as do clarod by this court in Kidd vs. Pier sou, it was tbe object of tho commer cial elauso of tho constitution to se cure, but an intention is not likoly to be imputed to tho framors of tho con stitution or to tho Congress of the United States to subordinate tho pro tection of tho safety, health and morals of tho pooplo to tho promotion of trade and commerce. Again, "Tho statutes in question were enacted by the Stato of Ohio in tho oxoroiso of tho undoubted power to protect its inhabitants against tho evils, physical, moral and social, at tending tho free uso of intoxicating liquors. Thoy are aimed at Interstate commerce, thoy havo no relation to tho movement of goods from one Stato to another, but uporate only on intoxi cating liquors within tho territorial limits of tho State. They include all such liquors without discrimination, and do not ovon mention whore they are made or whence thoy came. They affect commerce much more remotely and indirectly than laws of a State (the validity of which is unquestioned) authorizing the erection of bridges and dams across na"igable waters within the limits, which wholly obtruct the Course of commmorco and navigation : or than quarantine laws, which operate diroctly upon all ships and merchan dise coming into tho ports of tho Stato." Tho intention of Congrcsss was to doprlvo liquor of its national character as a subject of commorco, make it local in its nature, and subjects to tho police powor of tho Stato until Con gross boob ?t to logislate upon it. It was tho Intention of Congress to sub ordinate tho commercial power of tho national government to tho police powor of tho Stato on tho subjoct of liquor. Such being thoroasons that actuated Congress in pussiug tho act of 1890 wo cannot think that in tho absence of a plain expressslon, that Congress in tended to subordinate only a part of its commercial power to tho police power of tho State on this subject, but on tho contrary that tho sale as well as tho conditions upon which the liquor should bo transported after it was in troduced into tho territorial limits of tho Stato should bo loft to Stato legis lation. To give a different eoustruo tlontothoaot would subject liquor to two powers?t ho commorieal and po lio? within the territorial limits of the State. Wo cannot think this was the intention of Congress when it de prived it of it nation character. The DISHOiitliiff Opinion of Chief ?Jus tice Me Ivor. Tho opinion tiled by Chief Justico Molvor, in which ho dissents from the decision of the majority of the Court, declares that tho dispensary act of 1803 rusts upon tho same principles as tho old aot whioh was declared uncon stitutional. Also be refers to "the well settled ai d wholesome doctrino of stare denials and the will of not adher ing to the former decision of tho court. He declares that until it is shown? which never can be?that trade is one of the appropriate functions of civil government, and statutes purporting to embark the Stato in any trading en terprise .s altogether beyond tho eom peteney of the Legislature, because it exeludos tho limitations upon tho leg islative powor necessarily implied from tho express terms used in tho I Delicate 8 Or I Debilitated . SHOULD USE . BRADFIELD'S {Female Reouiator. ? Pvery ingredient possesses superb Tonio properties, and exerts a wonrtur $ fill influence in toning up und strength ening her system by driving through ^ $thc proper channel till impurities. B Health and strongiii ore guuruutced to fj> result from ha uso. (5 My wife, who wm hnrtrhlilon f.n- eltfliltteil JS month*, .'ifici using it it a email's KBMAI.K .; Itici'iA. i i.i- two imoiiIIih. Ih KellliiL'well. W <|P .I. M. JOHNSON, Mulvorii. Ark. ?f? $ Sold by all UrUKKlsts at 11.00 |I?| bolll?. .j'] 1 BHADFIELO'S REGULATOR CO., Atlanta, Ga. 'k SMITH'S VULCAN OINTMENT, SURE OURfi FOB Piles, Rheumatism, Catarrh, Neuralgia, Corns and Bunions, Burns and Old Sores.} Scald Head and Ringworm, Caked Breast and Sore Nip ples, Weak and Sprain ed Backs. A special ointment is made and sold for Itch and Itching Bile's, which is guaranteed to givo satisfaction. Evory box -if SMITH'S VULCAN OINTMENT is told with tho under standing that tho money will bo re funded if not satisfactory. Highest testimonials furnished as to its efficacy In Pilos, Rheumatism, Neu ralgia, &c. Sold by doalorB In modioino ovory whero at 25 and f-0 cents per box, or ?nailed to any address on recoipt of prico In post ago stamps or currency. Sample boxes froo. W. J. Smith, Sole Proprietor, J Oroonvllle, S. Cs. t?TMontion this paper In ordering^ ^ .... . >?^wB,nir m?,ii,w*<i?ieii..2w Highest of all in Leavening Power.?Latest U. S. Gov't Report Affit^OLUTECV PURE constitution. The Chief Justice de clares it a very dangerous doctrine, as serted in che former ease, and again insisted in this case "that the polieo power of tho Statu is limited only by the wiU of tho Legislature." He thon takes up tho argument, whieh, it will be remembered, was made from tho bench by Judge licet In Columbia in his churgo to tno jury, that tho courts buve no right to In quire whother acts of tho Logisluturo aro po-.co regulations. M I can't subscribe to any suoh doc trine," says the chief Justice, " for it would Subject the rights Of the citizen 8eoured to him by constitutional pro visions to tho unrestrained will of tho Logislature. and would render abso lutely useless all the safeguards pro vided in the constitutum for the pro tection of his rights against invasion by tho law-abiding power of the gov ernment." Justice Mel vor holds that the dis pensary is not a legitimate exoroiso of tho polieo power, as this power cannot bo bo extended as to authorizo tho Stato to engage in a trallle forbidden to a citizen. Concerning tho argument that when a Stato Issues lieenso to a saloon keep er it delegates to him tho exoroiso of t ho polieo power, he says : ''I do most emphatically deny the power of tho Legislature to delegate any portion of its legislative j>owei? polieo power or otherwise?to a pri vate citizen, and, so far as I am in formed, neither this Stato nor any other has over undertaken to do bo. Tho Justico says that tho provision allowing the Statoito sell liquor out side of its limits "shows very clearly that tho whole scope and intent of this legislation is to enable the Stato to monopolize the liquor traffic, to tho ontiro exclusion of tho elti/.cn, with a viow to tho profit of such traffic.". Ho says that the dispensary legislation is neither tho regulation of the traffic nor a prohibition of tho sumo, but, on tho contrary, is a schomo by whieh tho State proposes to monopolize suoli traffic to tho ontiro exclusion of tho citizen, and to foreo every consumer who may desire to obtain spiritous li quors for any purpose to purchase the same from tho Stato authorities at suoli a profit to tho Stato as may bo fixed by tho designated State authori ties, and. hence, such legislation can not be regarded as a legitimate exorcise of tho polio power, and any legislation which, like the dispensary law, under takes to embark the Stato on trado, Is without constitutional authority. Tho Chief Justice eonoludes by de claring that tho law is a violation of tho Stato and Federal constitutions. It is understood that a vigorous warfare wilt now begin against the blind tigers, as the law is finally settled, unless modliied by tho Legislature. A STRANGE CASE. How an Enemy was Foiled. The following graphic statomont will be road with intense-Interest: "1 cannot describe the numb, ereepysensattonthatexlsted in my arms, hands and logs. I had to rub anil bent thoso parts until they were soro, to overcome In a measuro tho dead feeling that had taken possession of thorn. In addition, I had a strango weakness la my hack and around my waist, together with an indoscrlbablo 'go-no' fooling lu my stomach. Physicians said it wan ereopltiK paralysis, from which, accord ing to tholr universal conclusion, there Is no relief. Once It fastens upon a person, they aay. It continues Its insidious progress until it roaches a vital point and tho sufferer dies. Such was my prospect. I had boon doctorlug a year and a half steadily, but with no par ticular benefit, when I saw an advertisement of Dr .Miles' Itostoratlvo Nervlno, procured a bottle and began using it. Marvoloua as It may seem, but a few days had passed before evory bit of that croopy feeling had loftme, und there has not boon oven tho slightest indication of Its return. I now feel as well as 1 ever did, and bavo gained ton pounds tu weights though I haa run down from 170 to 137. Four others bavo used Dr. Miles' Itostoratlvo Nervine on my recomen datlon, and It has been as satisfactory in tholr cusou as in mine."?James Kane, La hue. O. Dr. Miles' Itostoratlvo Norvlno Is sold by all druggists on a posltlvo guarantee or sent direct by tho Dr. Miles Medical Co., Klkluirt, Ind.. on receipt of price, 11 per bottle, six hot ties for fo, ex press prepaid. It is f r?U from eplatee ox dangerous drugs. Sohl |by Carpenter Bros., Dtuggists Groenville, S. C. MACHINERY I ?food Working Machinery. Brick and Tile " Darrel Stav# ? (tinning " Grain Threshing " Kaw Mill '! Klc? Uniting ? 1NUINIS AND II O I T, E It ft. filtat* Agency for Talbott it Sons' Hn tftnos and Boilers, Saw and Orisl Mill*; Brewer*' brick Machinery, Double ?crew Cotton Pressaej Thorn a*' Direct Acting Si AH in (no In Its i; Thou a?' A*?<t Cotton Elevators] {{?II A Lummae' Ohm: Knuleberir Klee IItillers; ti. B. ,8mlth iV po.'s Wood Working Machin ery, Planer?, Hand Sawn, Moulder*, Mor tiscrs; Icnenors' Comprising eouapiet* equipment lor ish. Door and W?c?r PefttoripHj peLoaolte's Planiati*n ?.?w MM*, varial'le lecdt BELTING, FITTtlfGft AJfD MACHIN ERY SUPPLIK?. \Trlle mo for prices. v. 0. BAUIIAM, M-?ri?g??r, Columbia, 9. 0. THOUGUITS OF AN OLD FOOY. I used to think when 1 wm young And my heart was free fr<im guile. That there was grief in every tear, And jov in every smile, Hut thinking now'of what I thutik, I think 1 tl imik a lie. I used to think about invself. And think that I won ft be, A Oovernor or a President, Or a Uenernl like I.ee. But I have waited long in vain. whilst venre rolled slowly by, And 'Ionium- now of what I 'thunk, 1 think I tliunk a lie. The honest tiller of the soil. When marketing Iiis crop, Takes paiua to put tho ripe and best, Always upon the ton. 1 used to think those honest men, Would never cheat, or trv. Hut thinking now of what I thunk, I think 1 thunk a lie. The dry goods men are honest too, They swear thev sell at cost, I used to think thev told the truth, And. all their profit lost. I thought a yard was full three feet, Don't ask my reason why, Hut thinking iiow of what"! thunk, I think 1 thunk a lie. The editors, a lordly set. Who live on milk and honey, They've nothing else on earth to do, Hut write and rake in money. It was that way I used to think, Hut now it niakes me cry. To think of what I thunk," And now 1 think I thunk a lie. The lawyers too, I used to think, Oh ! Ood, forgive the thought, That their convictions of the right, COuld not by knaves be bought. That thev woiild not a client rob, Or " sell " him on the sly, Hut thinking now of what I thunk, I think I thunk a lie. The nigger, too, I used to think, If once they were set tree, Would make good honest citizens, Like white folks DBBD to be. Hut they have wandered far from grace, The chickens still roost high, And dunking now of what I thunk, I think 1 thunk a lie. Suspending Militia Officers.? A dispatch from Columbia says : Gov ernor Tillmau spent today considering tho report of the court of inquiry ap pointed to consider the refusal to obey orders by a number of companies of tho Stato during tho Darlington trouble. The results of his consideration wus the issuance of a general order sus pending General T. A. Iluguenin and all tho stall and general officers of the Fourth Brigade, also tho captains of the following named companies : Gor man Fusllors, German Artillery, Mont gomery Guards, Cordon Voluntcors, frsh volunteers, Gordan Light Infan try, Palmetto Guards, Catawba Hilles, Sumtor Guards, Governors' Guards, Carolina Rifles, ami Columbia Zouavos. Captains J. K. Alston, of tho ltich land Volunteers. Edward Anderson, of the Carolina Hi firs, and J. 10. Cogswell of the Washington Light Infantary are not suspended. It is further ordered that tho non commissioned officers and men com posing tho above companies are for bidden to exoroiso any of the functions of militiamen, until further orders from tho cotnmunder-in ehief. Smith's Vulcan Ointment for P.houma tism. Head the following testimonial from Hon. W. L. Mauldin. of Greenville, as to tho great merits of Smith's Vulean Ointment, which is advertised in another column : Mr. VV. J. Smith ! In response to your inquiry, I lake this occasion to .-ay that I have on soveral occasions used your Vulcan Ointment, and al ways with satisfaction. 1 am satisfied that it is a very valuable remedy in acute attaoks of rheumatism and if used freely and persistently will bring great relief. I trust you may get this Ointment generally introduced to the people, as I know it has great merit, and ur.liko many of tho nostrums im posed upon the public by extensive ad vertisements only noeds to bo used to convince one of its superior efficacy. Yours truly, W. L. MAULDIN. O. L. Rice, Mendola, 111., writes: " Have used your Japanese l*llo Cure and found it a sure and permanent euro." Sold by Carpenter Bros.. Greonvillo, S. C. English Spavin Liniment removes all hard, soft or calloused lumps and blemishes from horses, blood BpftViUB, curbs, splints, sweenoy, ring-bone, stilles, sprains, all swot leu throats, coughs, etc. Save $50 by the uso of one bottle, Warranted the most won derful blemish cure over known. Sold by Sloan Bros., Druggists, Greenville, S. C. THE LAU RENS BAR. ii. V. simpson. ('. i). bark8dai/s SIMPSON ?fc RAR KS DALE, Attorneys at Law, la urions, SOUTH carolina Special attention given to the investi gation of titles and collection ofslalme B. W. ball. I.. w? simkiws. W. W. BALL, BALL, SIM KINS A IIA LL, Attorneys ut Law, LaURisNs, South Caiioi.ina. Will practice in nil Stale and l'iiilsd States Court. Spocial attention given collections. t. jfoiiN.hon. w. a. aionur JOHNSON Jt lt|CIIICT, ATTORNEYS at law. owie??Fleming's Corner, Northw?? side of Public atquars. LA URINS, SOUTH CAKOLIMA. W. U. MARTIN, Attorney at ban, Laukknh, - South Carolina. Will practice in all Courts of this Ntat* Attention given to enlleetioBS. ?WHO J?JR.1? WEITESTER & MARTIN? They Are Our FASHIONABLE HAIR CUTTERS and SHAVERS ,. it..-... .? i - ? ? ?David M. Hill will stump New York and luako it a lively campaign on the airu iv--i v.' from start to flaieh. W. P. Drop, Drups/iel ^nrlngfiold Mii'd., writes s " (i>it:ui - > rile Curo hu-cured lm'\ T vearv aflli. ted : could not walk half mile in lust ? years now walke any distance. Sold by l.'nr pen tor Bros., Greenville, s. c. I'itnplos, blackheads, moles, freck les, tan and sunburn removed by John son's Oriontal Soap. Medicinal. Sold by Carpenter Bros., Greenville, S. C. Call for the Horse Brand of Johu son's Magnetic Oil. It has no equal for the diseases of horses and cattlo. Sold by Carpenter Bros., Greonvllle, S. C ?BEFORE - MAGNETIC NERVINE. It soU Nlth written auamntM to <uo. 1Wervous??rQ'*tr?. ton, rrtt), Dir.' ooa,Headnoh.. ana leunugta amiWi ko? fuliii>?H,cBU-r*l by tu ". ???? ? !n ???! '?>.>!?; . Tobaeoo auil A'.. 1 J> Spit Moital l)eprc? vr-icrs* ?ion, Softenlns '? Ihn Rraln, cnuMnff Mlaary, Inannltyaud Doj Bjoronoes, Im potency, Lo?v power In cither i ? \, Pror.ne uro Old Ah*, luvoluntary cine .? I by ovcr-iudulcenoo, ovor-oxoi tlon or tho Itrnln Ami Errors of Youth. It Kites to Wwk Oivnn^ Uwlr Nnturnl Vigor and double? tho Joys ol lifo; our. ; Lucoi rhroA imil Vttmslv WonknitsH. A lnitnth'* I refit ment, In plain pnckOK*, by Wait, to uny n.l.ln . j <?! I-..i, * box? *%.\ Witt) every V> order we l/ivi Written Uunrante* to ? uro or refund the nionry, Clrrulnr.i fmo. Uiwranteu issued ouljrby our r\ ?lu? tvo agaata Carpenter Bros . Greenville, s c SOUTHERN RAILYY \Y CO. ^Ea^a3aaSL> (PIEDMONT AIR LINE.) Route of tho Great Vostlbulod Limited. gOKliBNBKD SeUKOULJi OT PABSKNQEn Tl A1HR, In Kffoct Ansaat lat, 1804. Northbound. vep. L.tm No. 3a Dally 1240 N'n l.oo pm 8.1? Mil I.v Atlanta o tluie ?? AttaiitaKilme " Nororaiu). " Hutord. (.tali es. illo.. ?' r.tiln . " Cornells. " Mt Airy. " To. ton. . " Westminster. Senorn. " Ceil nil . " Greenville.... " ?p;irtanbury.. ?? Uaffnuyri. " Biti' i si nr>?... " Kin t'sMount'n " tlastoula . Ar. Onnrlotto. Ar. Danville. Ar. l.'iu in i iT Ar \Y?s ili'Rt?n . ? ttultlni'e p.ii.h " Philadelphia..I 10.40 am " N v? Vurlv.i 1.23 pin F st Mull No. 30 Dally 9.00 piu 10.00 i 'ii 10.37 pin 11.0?; pm 11..11 pm 11.63 pm 4.4ft piu 5 30 pm 0:s> pm T.ll pm 8.90 pin 12.27 am 6.27) am 7.l3"nrai 8.20 urn 12.4V nm I. 21 am i.io nm 2.10 urn 3.00 nm 4.01 am 4.42 urn .'?.00 sui 6.23 nin 6.46 am 030 nm II.48 am _4.fio pm 8 J6' fun 1136 pm 3.0>) Hill 0.23 urn No. 1* Rally 8.00 am 9.00 am 9.44 am 10.20 nm lit.M mn Hi' urn 11.45 urn 12.10 piu 12.40 pm 1.14 pm 1.3;. pm 2.? 6 pin 3.1? pm 4.11 pm 4 ?'?:< pm 6.10 pm 6.35 pm .''.:<". pm c.40 pm 12.40 am 0.2Q am Houthwnrd. liv (tew vork r.H.U ** Philadelphia ** uulilmore ? " Wasblnuton. """Richmond..... m u?nvillo. " Charlotte.._ Gnslenlo. ?? K lib. siltount'n " BlnokMburg_ * GntTno.VM. " Spartanburg.. " Greenville. " Central. '* Sl'IllH'U. " Westminster. " Teccou. " Mount Airy... Cornel in. Luln. M Gainesville_ " Buford. " Norcross. Ar Atlanta tittrae Ar Allnnta 0 i inn ves.id in No. 3 7. Daily rut Mull No 36. Daily 12.16 n't 7.20 nm 9.42 urn 4 30 pm e.:>o pm 9.20 pm 10.48 pm! 11.91 nm t2.5ou.in! 12.40 n n No. 11 Daily SIR Vim 935 am 5.40 ami 6.65 pm] 7.00 nm 1 10.60 pm 12.20 n'n 11.96 pm 1.02 pm .I 1.25 pm 12A5?.m i.M pm .] 2.iiTi |im 12.67 am; 2.60 jun 11.37 ma 12.28 pin 1.16 pm 331 pm 4.56 pm 3.65 pm 1.62 am 2.40 am 3.01 an. 4.42 am 4 .'.a nm 0.20 am 6.2n urn 4 lo pin 5.20 Jim r>.Y> pm e."5 pm C.I6 )im 7.36 pm 7JH pm S.95 pm 830 pm 0.03 pm 939 pro 1030 pra 9.30 pro Pullman Car Sorvloo: Nos, S5an<180, liloh mond and Dam lllo E^ast Mall. Pullmon sleeping Cars betwoon Atlanta and New York, Nos.37 and 3S WuaMiiKton und Soutliwcatora Vostiiuiimi Lilmltod, between NewVork and Now Orloans. Tlirougti Pullman Sloopors bo twoon Now York and New Orleans, via Atlan ta nnd Montyowory, and also betwoon Waahlng ton nnd Momphla, vln Atlanta und iiinnlu^hum. Nos. it und 12. Pullman Sleeping Oar between RU'imionrt. Danvtlloand Qroonaboro. For detailed infonnntion as to locul and through time tables, rates uud l'uiimitn sleep lntf oar reservations, eoiifor with local OKento, mr address - W.A.TURK, 8. H. HABDWICK, Uen'l l'uHM. Ap't. Ass t Goneral 1'ns^ A Wash i no ton, D. C. Atlanta, G. J. A. DODSON, Superintendent. Atlanta, Om W. H. OKEKN, J. M. GULP, Gen'l M gr., Trafllo Mn'gr. W Ai'.toNo io?, D. O. Washlnvtoa DA SOUTHERN V CO. Ooa(ttiiii?<l HeJieitole. Ul Kn*Mt Ang, let, *94* Trains run by 7r,t'i Meridian ilnn. ?T?T? >x ?;. f lSiTiy _I No. ib Lv c"...n:i'sii.o .*..I 7 i.Vinn ?' Columbia .11.40 a in " Prosperity.'.12.65p m Ar Nowborry. ? .1.10 p m Ar. ('Union .(Kx Still).12.3? p ni _Laurena_iKx smo._|:t i0p m " ^.S'lnety Six.IS idp in *' (i reeuwoihI. 2 62 p n> " llodjfi ?.3 16 p us " Abbovtilo...T...".. ?.I 3 .v, p rn " lielion. ...,,,,,.i i.o? p m " Audcraon.4.83 n td " Sen. pu . .6.40 pal ^ " \Val lalla. _..18.15 p rrj " "At!ft"t?.,?.':..ir?.3$pg| STA'i i' 'NS. I l>ally I n'o. [a " Greenwood. '< INInoty-SUs... .., '? L?i.rcns i ki Sunj " Clin'.cn (Kx Sun).. ' *? Nevtjterry., " Proaporlty. Ar. Colianbla. ?' Clmrleston. I.t. Wiillmlla. .1935 witi " Seneca .[10.00 an] " Anderson.11.15 am' " Hol ton.111.46 am Ar. DQnalfl'a)...,.112.16pm feyAbboVflio..".~... ii a am llovVes..'..|12 :?" pin 12.66 pra 1.38 pm 10 10 nn? U. 10 air 2.39 pm i * pro 4.16 pnr 8.4.r> pin Hot?crn Amlemon, Helton and Greenvlllc. Dally. No 11. STATIONS. Dully. No. \'* 5.OS p. in I.t.Anderson .Ari'.'U, pm a.or> p. nij '? .Helton." n 4;, ura 4.2ft p. ml ".williainstoa."ni 09 mo 4 8i p. in ".Pelzer." 111 ot mo ?JB^p. ni Ar.Greenville.LwQ.lft u;o iiei\?.-en Collimlila nnd Aahcvllle. l-nilv' Da.i7, No. 16 No, I?. Dolly. 1 Dailv. I NO. 13 j N'o. 16, I STATIONS T.lfto.in. |I.v Churlcatbn x\ .... d 4.'? pr? . ,vr.(0 a.mjLv Jaok'vllle Arlio 16am!.,. ....... IJ 4'ot ni " Suvi'niiab ?' i 6 :t0.iin. 1..1ftim 5.10a id l,\ .?'o'iiiiiniuAr' T. .0 mi >? rA|,ia t.iopm 6.r0aml" Alston.. "l&PCpm 3.miho 1.20pm 6 6lam' Santuc_"U.:?iim iouvm i.A.pm 7.10 a ml" 'Union. "11 lopm i. io m 1.13pm 7:??p to? ? ..Jonefvlue "|10 I8pn>jl2.40pm 2?.pui 7.43pm!" . Huooiot...' I0.33pml2.2lpui 2.60iiin 8.10pmlArHpnrt .<i.v lO.or.pinii.dv. ira |.0T>pm 8 i:> p m|LvSoar t Ar ie.00pinlt.30am 120;im ii,^ii prtvAr Ashnvllio i,v. 7.i)0nm H.iiium Nos 11 nnd 12 are solid trains between Ctiarloo^ ton und Wullinllu. Trains leave SparUliib.iru. A. nnd C. Olviadva. northbound, 4.01 n m., t.ll p. m., 6.2-.?p. m? (V^s tfbuled l.imltetli: aoutbbound. 12 67 u. m. 2.:^)p. ui. 11.37 a in.. (VesUbulcd Mmlted); we*V> i o n.I W. N. C. lilvlsion, 8.16 p. in. for lleinlor so l> lllo und Ashevil'.e. Trains leave Greenville, A. und 0, Dl via loo, nortni ound, So m.,3 06p.m., umi .".,:,o p.m..i\'es iliml'd Limited,; Routnbound, 1.6'ie. m,, i.iop. m. 12.28 n m., (Vratlbuled Limited). Trains leave Sonoca, a. andC, i>i\ talon,nor'.W Ixiund. Iii u. in. und l.Xip. m.i soutlibounil, 3.0i a. m. nnd 6.45 p. in i i i i.M AN brry1cb. rullman Pulnoa Sleeping cars on Trains 15 and SO, 37 and 38, on A. and 0. Division. Trains l.'i und 10 enrry Pullman Sloopors bft tween Savoonon nnd Hot sprimot. W. H. OKKKN, J. M. dir.*, Gen'l M?'r. Truftle'Msn' Washington, D. C. 1ft, iwiYDKH, Supt., Columbia. 8- 0 Aat't Gea'l i"