The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, March 27, 1900, Image 1
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