Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

Richland county to establish its claim against the said Richland Distilling Company and the property which it holds in said county.

This agreement is entered into pursuant to authority given by the Attorney General of South Carolina to me to make such settlement, including the settlement of the criminal proceedings, by his letter of date November 6, 1911.

[blocks in formation]

I accept the above proposition and agree for my clients to carry out the terms thereof.

A. & N. M. BLOCK & I. BLOCK,
By their Attorney, Malcolm D. Jones.

The within agreement contained in the letter of Mr. Abney, attorney for the commission, to Mr. Jones, attorney for the Blocks, and their acceptance thereof, is hereby approved by the commission, and our said attorney is authorized to carry the same into full force and effect. JAMES STACKHOUSE, Chairman.

22d February, 1912.

EXHIBIT “B.”

Columbia, S. C., October 31, 1911.

To the State Dispensary Commission, Columbia, S. C.

Gentlemen: On the 19th day of November, 1910, the Attorney General of the State, J. Fraser Lyon, Esq., B. L. Abney and Stevenson & Matheson, of counsel, commenced an action in the Court of Common Pleas for Richland county, S. C., against the Richland Distilling Company, a corporation organized under the law of the State of South Carolina on the 9th day of May, 1901, to recover the sum of five hundred thousand dollars due the State by reason of certain transactions had by said company with the old State Dispensary and its Board of Directors, and for the appointment of a receiver of certain real estate and machinery located in Richland county. On the same day the Hon. S. W. G. Shipp, presiding Judge in the Fifth Circuit, appointed Mr. A. M. Lumpkin receiver of the property, and he thereafter duly qualified and took charge thereof. The summons and complaint was served upon the distilling company through an employee of that company then in charge of the property. The defendant company has never made any appearance, either to answer the complaint filed in the case or to set aside

the appointment of the receiver, or to take any other action whatever in the premises.

Mr. Lumpkin, as the receiver, has been in charge of the property ever since his appointment, and has employed a man to give personal attention, care and protection to the machinery, which is thought to be of considerable value, and which was contained in the buildings located on the land belonging to the company.

At the time of the appointment of the receiver, and subsequently, no encumbrances of record have been found, either upon the real estate or personal property. There is, however, due for State and county, and possibly city taxes, about five hundred dollars, for a part of which executions have been issued, but there are no funds to pay the same. I was advised, while of counsel in the case, that the receiver had been unable to obtain insurance upon the personal property.

On February 14, 1911, an order of reference was made to Mr. A. D. McFaddin, Master of Richland county, to take testimony and determine all the issues of law and fact, and report his findings to the Court. Soon thereafter Messrs. Stevenson & Matheson, and myself, withdrew from the case, and no further action, as I am advised, has been taken under the order of reference. Mr. Lumpkin, the receiver, is still in possession of the property, but he has no funds either for the care of such property or to pay the taxes, State, county and city, thereon. It is evident, therefore, that action of some kind should be taken in the case.

Prior to and at the time of the commencement of this action Messrs. Anderson, Felder, Rountree & Wilson had, or claimed to have, a contract with the State Dispensary Commission for the collection of the claim against the Richland Distilling Company, along with other claims. Some time in November or December, 1909, that firm employed Mr. Stevenson and myself to assist them to bring certain actions in the name of the State against these parties. About fifteen suits were brought between January 21st and May, 1910. The suit against this company was delayed, pending an investigation and conferences, until November 19, 1910, when it was brought, as above stated.

As this action is brought in the name of the State by the Attorney General, and as the Acts relating to the dispensary specifically state that counsel for the commission shall be approved of by the Attorney General, and the contract with Messrs. Anderson, Felder, Rountree & Wilson specifically associated that firm with the Attor

ney General, before consenting to become of counsel along with these other gentlemen, I conferred with the Attorney General upon this matter, and at his request, as well as with his approval, became associated as attorney in these cases. When the State Dispensary Commission put an end to the contract with Messrs. Anderson, Felder, Rountree & Wilson, this severed my connection with the case also. I understand that there has been some communication between the commission and the Attorney General with regard to continuing this action. I am now asked by the commission if I will take up the case and conduct it to judgment or bring about a settlement of the claim of the State against the Richland Distilling Company. It is very apparent that, whatever may be the law as to the matter, on account of my former association with the case I could not now take up this matter and become professionally connected with it, as counsel or attorney, except upon an expression of willingness for me to do so by the Attorney General. His name, as Attorney General, is of record as appearing for the State and subscribing to the complaint. I could not put myself forward in Court as the representative of the State, therefore, without his acquiescence therein, without feeling that I had not offered to him the courtesy due to a former associate, whatever may be my legal right to represent the commission in the case. If, however, the Attorney General has no objection to my doing so, I am willing, in the interest of the State, to undertake to proceed with the case brought against the distilling company, or, under the powers vested in the State Dispensary Commission, if such is desirable, to bring about a settlement and end of this litigation with the Richland Distilling Company and its directors and stockholders.

Involved and complicated as these transactions have been, difficult as it is to get the proper witnesses to testify, it is apparent that this case cannot be treated upon the same footing as an ordinary case, when it comes to fixing reasonable compensation for the services to be rendered therein. Much information, testimony and records. have already been obtained, but it is only fair to state to the commission that this testimony and other matters cannot be handled without proper expense incurred in producing them before the Court. The commission, therefore, must have it in mind and consider that it will be necessary for me to properly conduct this case to have the aid of Mr. Stevenson, one of the associates, and any agreement I may enter into with the commission must be upon the distinct understanding that I may be at liberty to employ him or

such other attorneys in this State as I may see fit, their compensation, of course, to be fixed and arranged for by me out of the commissions to be paid by the commission. It is also but equitable, should I go into this case and utilize the efforts of counsel rendered prior to this agreement, that I ought to see that their services are not rendered to the State without proper consideration, and, therefore, I will have to, in some respects, provide for this in order to have a proper and professional regard to the situation. Considering, therefore, all of these matters, I would not be willing to proceed with the case except upon an understanding that I should be given fifty per cent. of the amount collected by the State, either as the result of a judgment or of a settlement made in behalf of the commission by me. Of course, out of this fifty per cent. is to come the expenses above alluded to, which, when deducted from what will be properly applicable to me, will leave only a reasonable amount for my services, even if it were not contingent upon success.

In conducting this case of course it would be necessary that I should be given full and free access to all records of the commission and of the old State Dispensary, and the concurrence and assistance of the commission wherever they may be of assistance and service in the conduct of the case. Further, as it would not be professionally proper for me to advance money in the conduct of the case, that the commission would advance such costs and expenses as are ordinarily attached to proceedings in Court; no other expenses to be paid by the commission. In the event that a settlement of the case should be deemed advisable, it will be expedient and proper that I should, at the very beginning, be clothed with full power and authority to effect such settlement, and that I should have control of the time and manner of conducting the proceeding.

I believe the above answers the inquiry you made of me as to whether. I would undertake the proceeding against the Richland Distilling Company, its directors and stockholders, taking it up where it was left off when you terminated the agreement with Messrs. Anderson, Felder, Rountree & Wilson. I am,

Yours very respectfully,

B. L. ABNEY.

It was "moved that the commission employ Mr. Abney on the terms and conditions stated in the letter, and that the Chairman, or acting Chairman, and Secretary do enter into a written contract. in behalf of this commission with him on said terms and conditions stated in said letter and embodying such details as may be necessary

to carry on to full effect his power and authority to conduct the case against the distilling company and its directors, officers and stockholders, and any other persons who may be chargeable with liability to the State by reason of the transactions with said company out of which the State's claim arose; and containing, further, the power and authority to settle and adjust the claim for this commission."

[blocks in formation]

Jan. 3. Cash balance on hand.....

Mch. 15. Amount received, interest account

Newberry Savings Bank..........

$26,993 49

.$70 31

25 98

Bank of Bishopville ...

[blocks in formation]

Amount paid for per diem and expenses of members of

[blocks in formation]
« AnteriorContinuar »