University of South Carolina Libraries
ET. A BILISHEI) 1865. NEWBERRY, S. C., TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1900. TWICE A WEEK, $1.50 A YEAR. WEOP rt , .ver before ha: there may bE n for Our Cu, ICES SELl There has they can be bough cases cheaper tha Prices K aris Styles, and to sell the ladies t We wante ices, if you can b ness, we know v hAM'S SOLDIERS GUARDING THE JUDGES L LEXINGTONIANs COME TO FRANKFO1T. Trials Will Begin Today-Heckhan Is a AddreseN Explaining Why he Call ed on Miltlla-' aylor's Men atill Hold State House. rankfort, Ky., March 22.-State ops recognizing Democratic Gov. ckham are in possession of the unty court house and jail tonight d will do military duty here under ders from Gov. Beckham during o examining trials of Republican ecretary of State Caleb Powers, .3apt. John Davis and W. II. Culton, rhich are Pet for hearing before 'udge Moore tomorrow. The mili ~tary is also reonforcod by 75 special deputy sheriffs sworn in by the civil authorities this aft ernoon. The Lex ington company of 70 mecn, under Capt. Longmnire, arrivod hore at 0.15 o'clock. In proceeding to the court house the line of march did not pass the State house square, where Gov. Taylor's soldiers~ are quartered, and the dual militia did not come face to face. Longmniro marched at the head of his company, carrying a re volver, while each of the men carried two guns. It is understood practi cally the entire contents of the Lex ington armory were brought here. The indications tonight are that the trial of some one of the defend ants 'will be entered upon tomorrow. The commonwealth will demand that the defendants be arraigned separately. County Judge Moore today issued an order to Sheriff Sutor directing him to exclude everybody from the court house tomorrow ex cept attorneys, witnesses and mem bers of the press. There has beean no confirmation here of rumors that armed bodies of citizens from the mountain section are. coming to Frankfort, and the rumor is not generally credited. Democratic Gov. B3eckham issued an address tonight relative to hii calling out the troops. Antons other things, he says it is his chied desire and intention always to rely more -upon the law than upon the bayonet, but that Frankfort count: authorities having shown him threatened condition of lawlessnesi with which they are unable to deal he has, in compliance with their cal for assistance, ordered here certai, State troops to be completely undo the authority of the sheriff, to pro toot the conrelfrom thatedA intmi PI EN THI Co ~)ry Goo such a Stock bE two or three st( Htomers to Buy Fran . sell it, vel ANY THIN( been a big advance in tnow. We aretheonly Ln the manufacturers arf iled in MILL1 will do everything poss heir hats at a saving of E very man,woman and c uy goods anywhere in tl /hat we are talking abot dation, as well as the prisonera, see ing that justice is done all parties. He announces his regrot that any should seek to interfere with the judicial tribunals. He says: When the situation is such in your capital city that the judges in your courts and other officials need per sonal protection from bodily harm and threatened interference with their action, then I deem it my duty as governor of the commonwealth to give them protection, they may need. Such is the situation here now, and I intend, so far as I have the power, to protect the courts, in my earnest efforts to uphold the law, and to pro tect the constituted tribunals. I call upon the good and law.abiding people of our commonwealth to aid and assist me, not by physical force, but by moral support. We have placed our cause in the hands of the law and we must continue to rely Iupon the law. Let no act of vio lence or lawlessness be committed anywhere and let our people who have shown such patience and con servatism heretofore, continue to showv it. My great trust and reliance is in the strong common sense and integrity of the people of our State and trusting in that, I believe that out of our present difficulties there will soon come peace, order and res toration of law. (Signed.) J. W. BEoKHIKA, Governor of Kentucky. C. 0. D. Shipmnents Are Not Contraband THlE ASSUMPTION HREITOFoRE IIAs IIEEN OTHEIc sE8I. Mansy Seizure. Haye flon Made--An opin ion From. L,ha Attorney General'. Omoo0 on nua Imnportant Matter--Liquor by Express. [The State, 17th.] -Ever since the State dispensary law weont into effect those in charg< of its enforcement have been pro ceeding upon the assufuption that li quor shipped into the State by ex press 0. O. D. was to be considerei liquor sold in this State and wae therefore liable to confiscaiton by the constables as contraband stufi The conistables have always beer a seizing liquor so shipped, and i ,seems no one raised the point. Final 1 ly the Southern Express company i on account of the number of confis r cations, determined to instruct it -agent-s elsewhere not Jo take sucl mh1nments for Sonth Cnrolina point' r VI I Mo l =SEASC . . . IN NE ds, Cloti 1en shown in this res in the State i We are Second tc I we are not afrail ) AND THAT all cotton goods followii concern in Newberry th a selling the goods now. MERY The finest .one of the be; ible to plcase the people i0 per cent. Our first sec hild in Newberry Town a he United State for less i it. But the legality of this the company doubted, and a few days ago the mat ter was presented to the governor in proper shape. Gov. MDlSweeney re ferred it to the attorney general's of fice and Assistant Attorney General Gunter got to work on the law of the case with the result that he yeBterday filod the following opinion, which shows that C. 0. D. shipments do no violate the law and that all the confis cations heretofore made have beon without legal authority: His Excellency, M. B McSweeney, Governor. NEWVS ANOTHER QI FOR THE P1 New springGoods ....GR EAI T Our line of Spring Suit low figures at w~ our customers. Clothirig as the a values that are n SHOES! - Our Shoe Department is up-to-datoei lines of Shoes have been se] and quality, and wve confide> finoe display of theochoicest. Neckwear in an Our customers fit of our careft jwhere we pic< i!priceS will aSt< you. We arelb ability, and as favors, we soli J a )N I W AND DESIF ling, Shc section of South with more goods, None. Now the d but what we ca IS WHAT \A ig the rise in the price of at bought before the rise MILLINERY DEPARTV )t Milliners ever come S( of Newberry County anc ison in Millinery. No olc nd County to visit our stc money than we sell then MiA UI Dear Sir: You desire to bo advised whether, under the liquor laws in force in this State, packages of liquors shipped from outside this State and to be delivered in this State C. 0. D. is in violation of said liquor law, Inasmuch as my conclusion is some what at variance with the custom pre vailing in this State in reference to such shipments. I have doomed it ad visable to cito some of the authorities upon which I base my conclusion. It has been clearly settled by a long line of decisions of the United States court, beginning with Bowman vs. PRING EASON OF SUPASSI BOPLEi OF NE such as you can only fin s is the greatest we have hich we have pricedither We place forward the ttraction of the hour, in i rbost remarkable. SHOES! i all particulare. We have Shoes for s ected with a distinct knowledge of the atly declare that a better stock of Shoei mnd most popular, the useful and servic Surmshmns bundance of stylt ~, as heretofore, v I buying in the N( ed up some big be >nish you and ag kere to serve you i we appreciate yol cit a continuance H'S H $30,i ?ABLE . . . . oes, and Carolina. Our a but when it corr it we have the SI n sell this enorm< TE ARE GOIN cotton, we bought our ,and will go right on se ENT in the State. I ha )uth to take charge of thi I City. Don't buy your - i last year's styles to shc re and see our stock. ( i, bring the goods back Railway Co., 136 U. S., 465 to Vance vs. Vandorcook, 170 U. S., 438, re. viewed in decision in our own court in the State vs. Holleyman, in 31 S. E., 862, and 33 S. E., 867, that no penalty attaches to the importing of liquor into this State for personal u se. it is also well settled that in ordinary consignments a delivery to the carrier is a delivery to the con signee. Hence when a dealer in an other State receives an order for liquor from this State the sale is con suninatod in the other State at the place of the consignor, and as such [EIODS! NG VALUES WBERRY AT d in our great line. .OT HING.... ever shown, and the n is agreat surprise to iisplay of our Spring vhich we have arrayed , SHOES H I arvice and in all latest styles. Our wants of the people both all to style is not to be found anywhere. A sable in our line of r Goods. as and Colorings., nill get the bene )rthern markets, trgains. Our low reeably surprise ;o the best of our ir past generous of the same. 300 IN\ Milliner ;tore to-day is es to Quality a :ock the next thi )us stock . [G TOGIVET ,oods in October and go [ling cotton goods at th te employed Miss Ella ( s department. She has at or bonnet until you sE )w. Nothing but Up-to .,ome in whether you wai and we will refund the rr a transaction is interstate commerce, when the liquor is for personal use no action lies either in personam or rem. Now tuo question presents itself is a shipment 0. 0. D. governed by the principles above set forth, or is the fact that the money must be col lected by the carrier on the delivery of the liquor a sale such as is con templated and prohibited by the laws of this State. The authorities are by no means uniform on this point but I think a review of some of the authorities leads us to a safe conclusion Black on Intoxicating Liquors, sec tion 434, lays down the following doctrine: "A licensed dealer who re ceives at his place of business an order for liquors from a place in which he has no license, and fills it by selecting the liquor from his stock and delivering it to an express com pany or other carrier to he carried to the purchaser does not violate the liquor license law, although the carrier agrees to collect and return the prico: for the sole is made at the place where the goods are sepa rated from the general stock and de livered to the carrier, such delivery being delivery, to the consignee." Numerous authorities are cited to sustain this proposition. The following is found at page 511, Vol. 21, American and English Ency clopoedia of Law, under the subject of sales (which article was nrepared under the supervision of tne whole of the large and able staff of editors of that publication): "Under a statute p)rohibiting the sale of liquor within a certain locality, it haR been made a question whether the statute was violated when the liquor was sent (1. 0. D. to be delivered within the limits of the prescribed locality. In some cases it is held that the sale is consummated at the time of delivery to the express agent to the consignee, and that the sale is, therefore, in vio lation of the statuce. B3ut this is not the correct rule, and is opposed by principle and the decided weight of authority. The sale takes place at the place of shipment and not at the place of delivery to the con signee." A large number of author ities are cited to suBtain this con clusion. In a recent case before the court of criminal appoals (Bruce vs. State, 85 S. W., 888), that court after reviewing the authorities, Bays: "We understand that the weight; of author ities holds that if goods, such as liquors, are ordered to be shipped from one point to a buyer at another C. 0. D.- by a common narr'ar. thE (ESTED r 3 3 3 3 ;econd to none, nd selection ng is to 'HE PEOPLE. t goods much cheaper e same old prices, in )'Rourke, of Baltimore, brought with her the e our line. lam deter Date Millinery. it to buy or not. Now ioney. We understand, sale is considered as completed at the point of shipment." The following cases support that conclusion: 48 Ark., 354; 83 Iowa, 194; 46 N. H., 240; 50 N. H. ,253; 06 Pa',St., 449; 71 Ala., 368; 65 Wis.,171: 20 Fed., 357. Also the following recent cases confirm the views above announced 42 S. W., (Kentucky), 1,107; 18 Atlantic Rep. (Pennsylvania), 622; 17 S. E. Rep., (West Virginia), 792. On the other hand, the contrary view is taken by some of the courts, notably in Massachusetts and Ver. mont. In the O'Neil (58 Vt., p. 100), the supreme court in a very able and ingenious opinion held that a party shipping liquor by express from a point in New York to a point in Vermont (C. 0. D.) was guilty of violation of laws in referen~ce to the sale of liquor in Vermnont, inasmuch as the sale was consummated at the time of delivery by the express agent to the consignee. From the decisien of that court an appeal was taken to the supreme court of the United States (144 U. S., 823), The appeal was dismissed upon the ground that no Federal question was before the court, and the question now under discussion was not cosidered by the majority of the court, but three of the judges dissented (Justices Field, Harlan and Brewer), and Judge Field in the dissenting opinion did discuss this very question and came to a conclusion contrary to that reached by the supreme court of Vermont, and in accordance with the above views above cited. From the authorities cited and quoted the contract relationship be tween the seller and purchaser is manifest. Upon the receipt of a 1.0O. D. order, if accepted, it becomes the duty of the Belier to delhver the goods to the carrier with instruction to the carrier to collect the price at the time of delivery to the purcha. er. It is thea the duty of the purchas er to receive the goods and to pay the price to the carrier; when the seller has delivered the goods to the carrier he has performed his whole duty. If the purchaser fail to receive the goods he is liable to the seller for the purchase price and the pas sage of title to the purchaser Is no more essential tha~n any other con tract of sale, whether the seller com plies with his agreement to deliver a certain article at a certain time and CONTINUED ON PAGE F'OURI. C.A. U *E 28.. Beas he Ie kind You|81 HAlW Mwj