The Darlington news. (Darlington, S.C.) 1875-1909, March 01, 1888, Image 1
7*l*Sl+.
iTBtDARUNGtON NEWS,
PX7BU3H1I. IVJSHTTHURSPAT MORMIHO
* /
HENRY T. THOMPSON.
proprietor.
TERJI8«*$i Per kmunm In AdraBee.
On* Square, A ret insertion ••••••••••••••• $1.00
qqq Square, **coud insertion.,10
gvery eubfleqent ineertion.60
Contract adrertieemente ineerted upon the
vMt reaaonaWe ter«s.
Karri age Notices and ObitnarIei ( hot
• xceeding sit lines, inserted fret.
rTTfl *
DARLINGTON NEWS.
J| ‘
•FOR 08 PRIRCIPLR 18 PRINCIPLE—RIGHT 18 RIGHT—TESTER DAT, TO-DAT. TO-MORROW. POREYER.
VOL. XIV. NO 9.
DARLINGTON, .3 C- THURSDAY, MARCH 1, 1888.
WHOLE NO 685.
Our job department issopplied with ever*
facility necessary to snabie ns to compete
both as to price and quality of work, with erer
those ef the cities, and we guarantee satis
faction in erery particularer charge uethiug
for onr work. We are always prepared to
All orders at short notice for Blanks, Bil
Heads, Letter Heads, Cards, hand bill*
Posters. Circulars, Pamphlets, Ae.
All job work mnst be paid for
Cash on Delivery.
My Scottish Home
Let tartberna beset their golds* shores.
Or praise their ennay ekiee;
Oi’e me the land where Oteien won
That praise whioh merer dies t
Where Tanow winds her Joyous coarse,
In beauty to tbs tea ;
An’ burnies ria, wl’ Unpin’ din.
My Seettish Home I thro’ tbee.
Pr* be B through Unde baith briehl *n’
lair.
Pro wosdered Runt sad West,
Pro seen their hills an’ gowden rales
In Sami' era gladness drest-
Bnt bill or dale or Wbomln* rpU,
Wboss r beent^rmm!^»utl aace compare,
Anld Caledon ! wi’ thee.
I’re seen the snn in Southern ellmee.
OUat thro’ (be silken eloods:
Prt seen tbe moon steal safely doon,
An kisa the eleepia' wood*.
But tune or meonaor eUhjaboeu,
E’er ibith Me tirietl air ftbe,
Ai when they beam, we’ kindly gleam
My Scottish Home ! on thee
Oh l gladsome is the roiee of spring.
Berne on the balmy air.
An’ sweet is summer', genial glance,
To henfh tad meadow fair.
But winter’* chill* as dear to us —
For then, wi’ mirth an' glee,
We meet agaie our cups to drain,
Anld Caledon ! to ibee.
•
Ob 1 Scotia, K len of my lore!
Briebt be tby wunny gUdes.
An* cheerfu’ b* the (teams that course
Thy banghs an' peaceful shades.
An* was hefa' lEy faithless son,
The 1 Lerd or Lai d b e be,
Wba’ winna prove wi’ me his love,
Lear Caledon ! tor Tbee. J. L M.
Darlington, 8 C.. Feb. 22, ’88.
An Interesting: Decision
A*t!«tcHowin*decMr, recti'
Mtod V» K» PSiiKW,*!* «if COII-
Mid'-nibl'i iuieicMt, it is bcre given
in (nil.
Caroline M. Bitliir.in and U. Kd
ward Saimaa, as A. J. iinliiias
& Bon, idaiutitts,
against “ _
B, CB8l» Paa li J’, Esther P. McClen-
auBan and E.'*f'. PawfPy. A. Syil-
DoyBrnitnami Algernon S. .smith,
Ba A. Sydney Smith & Son. F. VV.
Wagcner and George A. Wngeu
er as F. W. Wagemr 4 Co., L.
Blttn, aeL. Stein 4 Co., uud vV.
C. Coker, defi-ndants.
This is an action brought to fore
dose a mori gage alleged to Iihvp
been given by Mre A. L. Pawley,
deceased,Jto the plaintiff*, upon
OtrtBln estate dexcritied in thr
OOSIplaint. The detendiiiin, the
Paw ley« and AUa. Esther P. Mc-
C!enagh*n|hrwlM*its atAaw ot Mrs.
A. L. Pawley, their mother, and
the other drtendaut* cl.iiui to bold
mortgage* on tbe name land, wade
by M/a. A. b. Pafley, of whieb
they data foreclosure m tbe pres
ent action.
The issues of law and f:ict in
volvedMere referred to Knox Lit
ingston, E*q , as *|iecidl i-efrree, to
to hear, determine and repott hi*
flattings to the court, and the note
eomia before the court at tbi* time,
for olisarmc upon exception* to
the report of the B^lereo made in
pursuance of s»id order of re! • n n'-e.
Tbe r e were uiotions before the
Redpree Jo strike out portion* ot
SO«m; of fte ana wets, and demureis
td (hirisof sOinO ot them Wilioil
were beard by the Referee and de
termined in favor of the de'eudauis;
these have n«o beeu mad- the «ub-
ject of exdp’ionflf>ituf;ifly taken to
this eonrt, but have been insisted
on, to some exten’, in tbe argu
ment here. There was also an ob
jection made to tbe absence of Puul
S. Wiring as a party, for whose
benefit tbe mortgage claimed by
Bteru k Co. was claimed to have
been made; and also it w.is object-
«t that A. ta Pawtev** personal
lepresea totivewasa n-cessary par.
ty. These points were all over-
ruled by the referee, and the court
jo (hat decision.
during the pro
of the reference, many objec-
lade to tbe admissibility of
testimony, nod exceptions a ere no
ted by tbe referee oo the minuses,
to his lutings upon sueit objection*,
aud where they weiu sustametl by
him, tbi sfidpuCe of tta witu s*< s
sought lib be exCiudetf batf*T>eeii re
ported separately to tbe court, aa
required by tbe statu e. These rul
ings were uot made the subject of
, funnsnr, to the circuit
be son*?
uncertainty as to whether, io such
cases where there has been an ex
token before the referee,
kim in his minutes ami
appearing io tbe notes of evidence
token on tbe refMwuqs, it M nebe*-
anry to repeat^lm eTcdptifm iroer
the report has been .MWd, and so
htiafl the point more sp-eifl«uliy
before the circuit court. (Bee Onap
mow vu, Lipscomb, 18 8. C. 223),
. as the questions have.
1 extent, argUed before
court, 1 shall consider and de-
eide upon the point* argued. These
embrace, chiefly, objections to the
t tF'ZPtlJi,!!:’’ ft’-TA-Tf
Blma JKa Ua * l03T| til© IllOrLg3i^(ll|
and of Paul H Waring. The ref-
••gnu exdmied both.
The eojnsel for plaintiff* are cor-
in faying that the deolarati ns
X,
i mortgagor, Mrs. A. L. Paw
ley, may bo introduced to sustain
tbs validity of, tbs mortgages, ns
being against interest, but her de
nude at another time
at which they may have
been brought out hv
defendants to de-
_ plaintiffs can
not be adduced by
feat the mortgage*. When declar
ations are admitted at tbe instance
of one party, the other is entitled to
all that wan said on the same occa
sion, or that may bear u|>on and
explain the same but the rules nf
evidence do not admit of a party’s
impeaching his own ailedged deed
by his subsequent declaration*.
These principles are illustrated by
tbe case of Fllen vs Ellen, 18 8. C.
494, cited at bar. It follows that
Hie declarations of .Mrs, A. L. Paw
ley, sought to lie elicited on behalf
of the defendants, a* qualified by
what has been said, were pi operly
excluded.
Tbere is a difference in the case
of Jbe declarations ot Paul H. War
ing. Be was, or appeared to be, a
subscribing witness to the bon I
and mortgage claimed by tbe de
feudants, Wagener & Co. lie was
uot produced to prove the ex<-cu-
lion of these papers, but bis ab
sence was accounted for by evidence
tending to show that be was absent
from tbe State, and secondary evi
dence was admitted by proof of his
handwriting as a suh-cribing wit
ness to the papers. The prima fa
cie effect ot this was to >( e*tablish the
deed U|)On presumptions ” as said
by dodge O’Neal! in McElwee vs.
Batten, (2 Bail. 127); ‘-1st that it it
had not been so lie wo< Id uot bava
witnessed it;” and 2nd that it pres
ent, ‘‘he would have given all the
evidence necessary to support it.”
These presumptions may i»e rebut
ted, and, as said in the case just
mentioned, “nothing can be more
satisfactory” than to show his own
declarations to the contrary. His
declarations therefore are adini»si
ble when' they tend to rebut the
presumptions arisiug from proof ot
his absence from the 8tate, and ot
his handwriting. Smith vs. Asbell,
2. Btrob, 145,
We came no# to the considera
tions of the exceptions to the re
port taken by the plaintiff* and by
A. Sydney Smith 4 Son, F. W.
Wagner 4 Co., and L. Stem 4 Co.
defendants.
The r-feree has found “that Mrs
A. L. Pawley, the alleged obligor
and mortgagor, did not execute the
alleged bond and mortgage to A.
Sydney Smith 4 Son, nor did she
execute the alleged mortgages to
A J. Sail as 4 Son, F. W. Wag-
Bi r k Co., and L Stern 4 Co.”
Thin is the subject of the first ex
ception. for various reasons therein
sp«citted, ^11, however, amounting
to no more than that the finding
wa« erroneous B«der the evidence.
The second exc-ption was in ef
lect, that the referee should have
lound that the interest of B. C.
Pawlev in tbe laud in question, was
subject to the mortgages in auy
event
Tbe third exception rela’es to the
claim of plaintiffs, that Mrs. iMc
Ciensgban and B. P Pawley are
-stopped to deny the validity ot the
mortgages and charges the rnlings
ol tbe referee in regard thereto to
lie erroneous.
The fourth exception relates to
tbe burden of proof, and the man
ner and sufficiency of the proof ot
the mortgages. 1 shall consider
the last first
It is not necessary to cite anthor-
ities or to adduce reasons to show
that the burden of proving the
mortgages in ’.his case, is on the
parties producing and claiming un
der them. They are required in the
first instance to establish their ex
ecution by proper proof. Wbeu
this shall have been done, they may
rest, and would be entitled upon
that proof to judgment, if nothing
to the ooutiary were shown by tbe
opposing party. The burden is
tiieretore shifted to those who deny
tiie validity of the mortlhges, and
so remains nutil tbe proof adduced
in support of them shall have been
overcome, or at least neutralized.
If that shall nave been accomplish
ed, the burden agtin shitted to
those who MtUrm tbe mortga.es and
they mu*t once more restore toe
preponderance of the evidence
in their favor by retnov
mg the eftictof that adduced by
those contesting tbe validity of ibe
instruments in question. If, after
all, tbe evidence shall have beeu
takeu, the question rein tius only
ou au equal balance, the mortga
ge* will fail to be established and
no recovery can be had on them.
U la not perceived that the referee
meant anything more than this in
Whaf be has said ou th- subject of
the harden of proof, nor that his
decisiou hasbe< n rendered prejudi
cial to the mortgagees on acco nt
ot bts vt“ws ou this subject. As to
tU* manner n which a deed, re
quited by law to be attested by two
subscribing witnesses may be prov
ed, the general rule is that such
witnesses most be called to prove
its axectitioji, or thnr absence ao*
fionffted W. Thf* ts a rule “which
ihe court employs for its own in
i'ractuui, and it is applied irrespec
tive of (be intentions of the parties.
So resolute are the coarts in insist
ing on this rule that in eases where
subscribing witnesses are neoessa
ry, a party’s admission has been held
insufficient tp dispense -with the
sating witness,
admission be
prodootion ot tho
•von though such
made in open court.” 1 Wharton oo
Ev. 723, 725
In King v«. Harrington, Lord
Ellenbdrgh said, “I know of none
tbat is a greater inconven
ience than to depart from a clear
established rule of law, tbat a par
ty, who would prove the execution
of any iiistrainent that is attested,
mast lay the groand work by call
ing the subscribing witness to prove
it if be can lie produced and is ca
pable ot being examined. The rule
therefore is universal (hat yon mast
first call the anbeenbing witness.
* * * Inasmuch as they are the
plighted witnesses, the knowledge,
they have upon the subject is es
sential aud u it can be procured
mast be forthcomiug.” 4. M. and
8.353.
Wlie'her onr courts would go to
the tall exient of this rule as above
laid down I am not prepared to
say, but it does not appear to have
beeu abrogated, bn is stated in the
latest case on the sahject, (McQow
en vs Reid, MSS.) in these words,
“When the law requires more than
one attesting witness to make the
paper valid and there is a real con
test over the proper execution, all
should be produced, if a live and
wiihiu reach ot the court; bat if
huv are dead or absent, proof of
handwriting will be snfficient.”
This is in accordance with what
is said by Mr. Greenleap in his trea
tise on evidence, (vo 1 . 2, sec. 16),
“Where the genuineness of the in
strument is uctually in controversy,
beiugeither put iu issue by tbe plead
ingor actual notice given pursuant
to the rules of court,” the rule ap
plies in all its strnctares. In this
ease the mortgages were attacks in
the pleadings as perjuries.
W r e will now see the several mode*
of proof resorted to here to estab'
lisb these mortgages.
Mrs. A N. Pawley was first call
ed to testify as to the Salinas
mortgage. She testified to her sig
nature as a subscribing wit ess,
apd said she saw Mr. Cash Pawley
sigu tbe bond in her presence. That
*he subscribed the mortgage to Sa
linas 4 Son as a witness and saw
Mr*. A. L. Pawley sign it in her
presence and tbat J. B. Douglas
was. present.
She was then examined in regard
to the mortgage to Wagener 4 Co.
She testified tbat she signed it ns a
witness and that Mrs. A. L. Paw
ley signed it in her presence and in
the presence of Paul H-Waring,
who signed it with her as witness.
She was then examined touching
the mortgage of A. Svdney Smith
4 Son, and said she signed that as
a witness, aud saw Mrs. A. L. Paw
ley sigu P, and tbat she saw J. B
Doublas also sign it as witness,
aud that Mrs. A. L Pawley was
present when tbe paper was signed
by her and Douglas and thought
her hushahd, B. Cash Pawley took
the p tper wht n it was signed, and
that Doaglas was in the buggy with
him. She also said her husband
took the Salinas mortgage wheu it
had been signed.
B Cash Pawley was then; exam
ined as to the mortgage of Stern 4
Co. This mortgage purported to
have heou made to secure a bond
of P. H. Waring to Stern 4 Co.
This witness certified'that k be,sign-
ed it as a witness. That he also
signal tbe mortgage as a witness;
that he witnessed its execution by
his mother, Mrs A. L. Pawley, that
he got her to sigu it, aud that it
was done iu tbe presence of Ed-
wafd P. Pawley, his brother, whose
signature appeared to it as a wit
ness.
There was then testimony by
this witness tending to show tbat
P. H. Waring was absent from tbe
State, and'safficient prima facie to
establish that fact.
J. B. Douglas, Jr., whose name
appeared as a witness to the Sali
nas and .Smith mortgages with Mrs.
A. N. Pawley, was (hen brought
into the presence of the reteree, and
upon being questioned admitted
tha r his signature appeared upon
tbe bond, but denied having seen
Mrs. Pawley, the obligor, sign it.
Counsel then propo-ed to prove
the bond by secondary evidence.
The r-fereo declined to take cogni
z me- of what had been said by
Douglas and refused to receive
> secondary evidence to prove tbe
bond.
J. B. Douglas, Jr, was then
sworn in order to comply with the
ruling of the r-feree, and obtain a
resort to secondan evidence He
admitted his signature to the sever
al p pers but denied having seen
them signed by Mrs. A. L. Pawley.
Sa.\s be supposed they were liens
aud signed them as such, at the re
quest of B. Cash Pawley, and sub
auriiied the probates after they had
been filled up by Mr. McNeill un
der the nnpres-dou that they were
iieiis.
The purpose of this 'coital is
merely to trace tbe method of proof
pnrsAed, aud my eonelasiou is, that
the course pursued was tbe proper
one; that the absence of Waring,
and tbe denial of J. B Douglas, Jr.,
opened the door io the 'admission
ot secondary evidence, aud that
there was saffleient secondary evi
donee addnoed to establish the |
mortgages, prima faoitj if true.
It remain* now to determine
whether this prima Jade case was
overcome or aeotraliaed by the oth
er evidence in tbe case. 1 think it
was. Tbs more 1 have examined
and considered the case, the stron
ger has been my conviction that
these disputed mortgages are not
the acts and deeds of Mrs. A. L
Pawley, n r is anyone ot tDem so
established. Tbe reasons assigned
by tbe referee are quite sufficient
to justify this conclusion, and many
others might be assigned They
will occur to any unbiased miud
upon reading the testimony and
considering the circnmatauces in
tbe light ot the character establish-
ed for tbe principal actors iu this
most unhappy series ot trausac-
tious. The testimouy a* to hand
writing aud the comparison of sig-
nainrea have not served to strength
en the case of the mortgages, the
unfortunate victims oi misplaced
confidence, 1 cm come to oo oth-
er conclusion than that reao'ied,
that the mortgage* claimed by the
plaintiffs, by Wagenei 4 Go., by A.
Sydney Smith 4 Sou, aud by Stern
Co., were uot executed by Mrs.
A. L. Pawley.
The first exception is therefore
overruled.
The second exception is well tak
en. The interest of B. Cash Paw
ley in the mortgaged premises
should be adjudged to the credi
tors and subjected to their demands,
upon pro|>er equitable principles.
The exception claims that it is sub
ject to the mortgages, audit may
be intended tbat the mortgages are
to take the same according to their
several priorities. This question
was not argued ou circuit, at lea-t,
in that aspect of it, ai.d it will uot
now be determiu d whether the
mortgagees are to share in it equal
ly or according to the priority of
the liens the mortgagees were sap-
posed to have. The probability is,
that the division will be pro rata,
but it is not intended to conclude
the patties should they wish to
make the question indicated. The
matter has not been aigned, and it
may be tbat those who were first in
point ot time will be first paid.
1 cannot see any application of
the doctrine of estoppel as against
tbe he r* of Mrs. A. L. Pawley, oth
er than B. Cash Pawley, render the
circumstaqces of this case. Before
Mrs. A. L. Pawley knew anything
of the frauds contemplated by Cash
Pawley, they bad ail been accom
plished, and to speHk would not
have prevented their consuiuatiou.
Tbe same remark will apply b
Mrs. McClenagban and Edward P.
Pawley. Moreover they, as heirs,
bad no present interest iu the land
aud were uot legally bound to
speak. Genoble vs. West, 23, S. C.
154.
This disposes of the third excep
tion. Tbe fourth has beeu already
considered.
No exceptions have been taken
to the decisions of the referee in re
gard to the mortgage of tbe defend
ant W. C. Coker, there being no
contest as to that
It is ordered, adjudged and de
creed, that the report of tbe ref
eree bearing date tbe 8th day of
October, 1887, be ccntirnied in all
res|iects except aa herein modified.
That the defendant W. O. Coker,
have jndgment of foreclosure of bis
mortgage on tbe said laud* for tbe
amount ascertained to be due to
him thereon by tbs report of tbe
referee, and that he be allowed the
snm of ten percent, on said amount
as counsel fee under said mortgage,
as fonnd by the report to be pro
per, and tbat counsel have leave to
apply tor snob order of sale of the
said premises as may be desired for
tbe satisfaction of said mortgage
debt and fees.
That the portion of B. Cash Paw
ley in said land as heir at law of Mrs.
A. L. Pawley, bis mother, after
aatisfying tbe mortgage debt in fa
vor of the said W C. foker as
aforesaid, be subfected to tbe pay
ment of the debts contracted on the
faith of the supposed mortgages in
favor of the'plaintiffs, A. J. Salinas
dk Son, and the defendants A. Syd
ney Smith k Son, F W. Wagner 4
Co., and L. Stern A Co., in such
manner and upon such principles
as may hereafer be determined,
after eonnsel shall have been heard
tn regard to the manner in which
tbe same shall be realised and ap
plied or distributed.
That the costs of these proceed
ings be paid by tbe plaintiff* aud
the defendants A. Sydney Smith A
Son, F. W. Wagner A Co., and
Stern A Co., np to the filing ot this
decree, in proportion to tbeamouot
of their several demands under tbe
supposed mortgages, herein declar
ed nail and void.
Tbat any party to tbe cansebave
leave to apply at tbe foot of this
decree for all orders necessary or
ptoper to carry tbe tame into effect
Notice.
All person* Having claims again*! tbe
eetat* of B C. Baker, Sesessed, will pre
sent lb* Mm* properly attested, sad all
indebud will moke payment to
ADELINE A. BAKER,
Ada's.
Feb. 21st 1888,—At.
Notice.
Having purebased the stock
of goods of our father, Mr. S
A. Woods. Sr., we will con
tinue the business in all its
branches, at his old stand, un
der the firm name of Woods &
Woods, and will endeavor to
merit the liberal patronage ex
tended to him by a generous
public. s, a. Woods,
C. R. WOODS.
Nov. 21, 1887.
&
Mans’: Palace Par.
At the old stnnd en PJCARLE STREET.
Mnnne hoe juet returned from tbe North,
where be was appointed epeeial agent tor
THE NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE’S
PRIVATE STOCK
PURE
RYE WHISKEY,
A* in* nbrnnd ae hae ever bees brought
to Darlington.
He i* nit* agent for
REDMOND’S CORN WHISKEY.
Sep 29, ’87. ly.
mm\ TO LOAN!
—THE—
SCOTTISH LAND
MORTGAGE COMPANIES
Will make loans on Cotton Planta
tions in sums ranging from
tl,000 to 12,000.
Apply to
E. KEITH DARGAN.
Feb. 9, ’88—2t
NEW
Grocery Store.
The nttention of the public la called to
fact that I bnve ranted that desi rabje
stand on tbe Publio Square occupied unit I
recently by A Hausmaon, where I am pre
pared to supply tbe trade with a eboie*
line of Groeeriee and Liquors. Give me n
call. HENRY HENNIG.
Dee 29. '87.
LAW CARDS
i. t. WABD.
I. O. WOOD*
WARD A WOODS.
Attorneys It OouBiolors it Law,
DARLING TON, 8. C.
Wil praetie* is oil State and Federal
Court a.I
4. B. BBTTLE*.
C. t. BBTTLBt
Nettles & Nettles,
Attorneys It Cousolors at Law,
Darlington €. H., 8. C.
• ■*
Will practice in.all tbe State and
Federal Courts.
Prompt personal attention given to
collection of claims.
Sep. 2, ’86 ly.
B. W. BOTD,
OBO. W. BBOWB
BOYD & BROWN-
attorneys and Counselors at Law
Office in rear of Dar ingtou Nation
al Bank.
DARLINGTON C. B., h C.
PROMPT PERSONAL ATTENTION TO
ALL BUSINESS.
Feb. t, *87—ly.
C. T. VAftGAK
Attorney at Law
and Tried Justice.
Practices in the United Stolen Court ond
in tbo Uh aud &ib eiro-'ite Prompt alien •
lion to ol bueiooso entrusted t* him.
Ofloo in Ezobango Btroot, next tbe 4 DAB-
LUOTOB NBWO Ofloo.
The Gash Company.
OANSON & BROOM.
-A.E.E HIJL'VIIfcTQ-
aM LIVELY EARLY
We stand by unr ni-ttto, under-boy aud under*. 11, ami stake onr
t biincc* on liie merit of our values, which ate ami always will be the
veiy la-st. Our wonderful nucces* for the p.ist »ix month* induces ns to
put forth renewed effort* to still further extend and augment onr now
rapidly iueiea-ing business.
We plead not for patronage on account of Friendship, nor solicit ens
oul tinder the worthless oxcu*c ot favor, but with oni money to back us
and our shelves and counter* jammed ,and loaded «ith unequalled bar
gains, we are determine*! to sweep tbe ti« Id.
nsriEw yoirik:
Our Senior Partner
writes that he has fowarded some Land*lide* Pulse quickening bargains
that will *how the cash buyer the differenco between our cash plan and
tbe credit system, the distinction between onr 10 per cent, profit and the
old regulai 50 ami 75 per cent.
NOTICE A FEW MINOS SPECIMENS.
A Ladies State Prison made *hoe worth 81.50 for $1.20. A Gents
$2.00 Gaiter or Lace Shoe for $1.50. All other grade* equally as cheap
a 12| White Contiterpsse for $1.10, cheap at 1.50. And from Sheriff’s
Sale a big line of men’* and youth’s hat* and pnuta at about one h.dt
their actual worth.
LOOK FOR OUR
In a few weeks
Enouncing the arrival of our new Spring and
SUMMER NOVELTIES,
* 7
Very Respectfnil
GANSON & BROOM.
Valuable Information!
GOOD NEWS FOR ALL !
All Preparation for an Immense
Fall and Winter Trade
At the Store of
J,
COMB OF PEARLE STREET
- A3STID -
9
A large assortment in every department to keep pace with
steadily increaeing trade. A complete stock of
SHOES,
CLOTHING,
DRY GOODS,
BOOTS and SHOES, '
HATS
GENTS* FURNISHING GOODS, &c., &c.,
Surpassing that of any previous season in point of excellence
and style. My goods always sold at a low price heretofore,
are now within the reach of all, and the most fastidious can be
satisfied. The stock of
aLOTHUfTO-
. Embraces a full line of
MEN’S,
YOUTHS’,
BOYS’ and
CHILDREN’S
Drees"and business suits.
XJUTST G-0033JS!
This department consists of
DRESS GOODS,
ALPACCAS, SILKS, SATINS, VELVETS, TRIMMINGS
And everything to be found in a first-class establishment of
this kind. The
BOOT AJ2TID SHOE BEBA.BTME1TT
Contains styles to suit the wants and pockets oi all and aa to
comfort and durability are unsurpassed.
H T S
To please the fancy of all classes of purchasers from the low crown ebeap
article worn by tbe laborer to tbe ping hat ot the fashionable Dude.
A ftill line of Groceries and Canned Goods.
In fact my stock is eomple e in every particular and it will pay all to
1 au d examine it before purchasing «l*ewh**re. No troubU to »how
ode. Remember tbe place ami the ouinc,
J, ROSE3SFBEBO,
S w Cornei Pearlo Street aud Public Square.
September 15,1887. 9. .
...