Newspaper Page Text
thelMAcon Weekly telegraph: Tuesday December 22, i^s.-twelve pages.
THE INSIDE OF ATLANTA.
ARGUMENT OK THE PROHIBITION
INJUNCTION CASE.
Judge Hall Conclude* III* Argument-Thi*
Opinion General That Judge Me-
Cay Will Dih*olvo the Injunc
tion—Judge McCay 111*
Atlanta, December 15.—Judge John I.
to
Hall resumed his argument for the re
spondents in the prohibition election in
junction ease this morning before United
States Judge McCay.
He was proceeding to argue that an ordi
nnry is a court, when Judge McCoy called
his attention to the fnct that the Legislature
diil not treat the oi Unary n« a court in the
act as to the prohibition elections, and said
as Judge Tioll was making a very
fine speech, he would like him to
fully explain that, for the cus-
toms in Georgia were somewhat in
conflict with the constitution. Tho Gover
nor hears election contests, examines wit
nesses and hears argument of counsel; and
yet the constitution of Georgia says the ju
dicial and executive departments shall he
absolutely separate. The jurisdiction or
functions of the ordinary nro similar; did
Judge Hall argue in face of the constitu
tion, separating the executive and judicial
departments, that the Governor in hearing
contested elections was in nny measure
whatever a judge, a court?
Judge Hall said that whether a judge or
not the Governor’s action had the effect of
a judge of a court. As to the fact of the
action of the ordinary’s court being tinnl
and without appeal, a court's power is al
ways limited by the Btatnte crest
ing it. ltut even though the
ordinary be not a court in the instance
of this enjoining bill, os the statnte requires
him to count the vote, he cannot he on-
joined, for he has no discretion in declaring
the resnlt, though he may have no discre
tion in his conduct. If after the ordinary
has acted, and obeyed the statnte, hia con
duct lms wronged any man, then there is
ample remedy. Hut until he has acted,
there can he no wrong done, and until the
wrong is done there can be no remedy, for
TUE ORDINARY'S DUTIES
are mandatory. Conceding the right of an
injunction, no court ever granted on in.
junction unless the act about to be
done would do immediate dam _
to complainants. The ordinary has noth
ing to ilo with enforcement or execution of
any act that can damage these people. The
law may never be enforced. The ordinnry’i
act in this cose can in no direct manner
affect the complainants in this bill The
eonrt ought to restrain only on illegal act.
Does any one maintain that counting tho
vote is an illegal act on the part of the ordi
nary? There is no precedent in this country
where nny court ever iasued any injunction
to prohibit managers ot an electic
declaring the result of an election. Here
the ordinary takes the place of the managers
no far as declaring the result.
If you cannot enjoin the president
of the State Sennte from declaring a law
passed.which, having been vetoed, lias been
adopted by a sufficient majority, then can
yon enjoin this ordinary from declaring
tliut tho people have passed or adopted pro
hibition; hut no one would dream that the
President of the Senate or the Speaker of
the House, as the case may be, could be so
enjoined. It is a political matter which no
Federal court can enjoin. The ordinary has
only a mandatory duty to perform, namely,
to declare what the people have done, and
no court can enjoin his so doing.
MILJOBN T. OLENN
followed in a speech of one hour.
He said Judge Hall had arid this is a po
litical question. He is mistaken. The
Legislature has not delegated to the people
to moke a law; it has only allowed the peo
ple to say whether or not they would ac
cept such a law. The people could not
JUake a l&w, and therefore their action in
this case could not be such os Judge Hull
alaims.
The act in question does not make the
ordinary a judge, for the conduct of the or
dinary may be impeached, and three magis
trate. may recount the ballots after the or
dinary has counted them. Ho writ of eer-
Morarl lies against the ordinary, but it does
against a court
It is admitted that that part of the
act discriminating against wines of
of other States, must be inoperative. How,
when a part of an act forms an integral port
of the same, if it is inoperative then the
whole act most fall and be null and void.
This act is a whole and entire scheme, and
if n&T part of it falls, all mask The ob-
jeetof this net is to exclude intoxicating
liquors or wines from the State of Georgia.
This is not a tax net, but a prohibition net,
an act for temperance. Tie custom of in
terpreting a law is that where it has a
scheme, such os to make the people temper
ate, if any part be void of the act for that
purpose, the whole act is void. This act is
for making the people temperate. Wine is
intoxicating; and it is conceded wines may
he sold; and, therefore, the object of the
act is defected, and ought not to stand as a
law.
How it is well known that our damage
lies in the declaration by the ordinary of the
result of this election. As soon as he has
published for four weeks the election, legi
timate business is made a crime; and made
a crime by a law that is not a law because
unconstitutional. Ought not the equity of
an injunction come in here!
In Louisiana, where the lottery hod a
charter, the legislature passed an act making
lottery business criminal. Tin lottery
then in existence asked the court to enjoin
the officers of the law from taking action
against it, because it had
TESTED EIGHTH,
and tho court so held. Well, if Ordinal?
Calhoun is permitted to declare the result
of this election, it will be a direct injury of
vesta- 1 rights of the brewery and others.
As to the registration which did not allow
those who would b* 21 yean old on the day
of election, the Ohio Supreme Court has
held that the Legislature could not deprive
any one of the right to vote granted the
right by the constitution.
Judge Hall said there is nothing in the
law aa to how many ballot-boxes are to be
in a precinct; the code speaks of how bal
lots shall be deposited in the box, not ia s
box, or one box. Con the code mean any
thing if it doea not mean there shall only
be one box? Of the three managers, one
was a wet man, one a dry man and one a
magistrate. Each of these presided at a
separate box. Was not the fetter and the
spirit of the law violated thereby.
MB. T. r. WESTMORELAND.
(aid the three boxes at each precinct were
for public convenience, and no fraud woa
charged even by the complainants. It is
an accepted principle that any irregularity
that does not deprive any one of the right
and opportunity to vote and does not alta*
a result, does not vitiate sn election.
Even though the registration be illegal,
ts is alleged, this Federal court cannot take
k cognizance of that This court can only
consider any unest on that involves Federal
law; and the Federal law has nothing to do
with State registration.
There is no such thing in law as a vested
right to maka and sell bquor. That comes
nndcr the polies power.
Mr. Westmoreland Occupied only thirty-
five minties. Which ho devoted to reading
authorities;
Judge McCay said he was too unwell to
hear nil the speakers to-day, namely, Col.
Mybntt and Judge Hawkins, but if Col.
Mym,tt desired he could speak until 2
o'clock. As it wn* then 1:20, Col. Mynutt,
at Judge Hawkins's desire, said he would
wait till to-morrow.
Court adjourned till to-morrow morning
nt 10 o'clock, when Col. Mynatt will bo
heard an hour for the respondents, anil
Judge Hawkins an hour for the bill.
From questions put and remarks made
to-dny by Judge McCay, the audience gen
erally regard him as opposed to continuing
the injunction. The Judge showed consid
erable mental disquietude, and be confessed
that his health would not permit any men
tal strain.
WHAT IS THOUQHT HBOUT IT.
There is a strong public feeling that the
filing of the bill for the injiuictron in this
case before a United States judge, was a
bad precedent for a people who have al
ways claimed State rights. The idea of
seeking Federal interference on a local elec
tion, has created ‘ a prejudice against tho
complainants.
Should Judge McCay dissolve the injnnc
tion, ns it is now thought he will, a bill is
error will be had to the State Supreme
Conrt. By thnt time other tactics will have
been schemed. The fight will go on. Per-
sonnlly, however, your correspondent is
strongly of the conviction that Judge Mc
Cay will sustain the injunction, and that
cpinion is held in the face of popular be'
lief to the contrary.
Atlanta, December 16.—Mr. Pryor My
natt spoke this morning ia the prohibition
election injunction bearing.
There was a very small attendance of lis
teners, public interest being divided up to
day, over the death of Mr. Toombs, ana the
railroad accident,
Mr. Mynatt sail the bill filed had no
standing in this court Who were the com-
duinants in the bill? Citizens of Indiana
, oined with citizens of Georgia against a
citizen of Georgia; and where citizens of
the same State sne each other, they cannot
sue in tho Federal Court.
Judge McCay—"That was true before the
statute of 18715, which, however, does allow
suits in the Federal Courts, between citi
zens of the same State where the issues in
volved are subject to the Federal laws."
Sir. Mynatt—“Well, that point doea
not amount to much, anyhow.
The bill is defective and de-
denmrruble becauso there are three coin-
J dainauts whose interests are entirely (lif
erent. They have nothing in common;
and their being joined in the one bill can
not stnnd.”
Judge McCay—“I don’t care to hear you
further on that point. They hod no right
to join thrgymen in a suit against one man
why may have injured all three of them.
That is very clear."
Mr. Mynatt—“It may he true that the
complainants are damaged as alleged, bnt
they are not exceptions.
THE i .aw is uniform. •
“It does not discriminate against these
complainants as compared with all other
dealers in liquor in Fulton connty. If
there is danger of inittry, all those interested
will be affected alike, although one may
suffer more than nuother, and in such a
case no one has a right to sue.
“Suppose this court should concede that
West End and other dry districts voted
without right, and that those votes must
not bo counted, would thnt hnTe any effect
unless it should be shown that sufficient
such votes were oast to have changed the
resnlt of the election."
Judge McCay—“Could I do anything
more in this ease than to enjoin as asked,
only in so far os the rights of the individ
uals named in the bill may be affected.”
Mr. Mynatt—“That would be a very
qneer state of affairs that theso complain
ants should be exempted from the workings
of n law, as protoje* of a Federal court,
while all other oitizena would bo obliged to
obey the law, and suffer the injury. Thnt
would be contrary to the fundamental prin
ciple of this government”
Tho word “domestic" In the bill does
not discriminate against other States' wines
being sold in Georgia. Domestic wines
means wines not imported; end the courts
will so hold. Ask any dealer for domestic
wines, and ho may as likely offer California
wine as Georgia wine.
The main point however, in this is thnt no
court in this country con prevent an elec
tion. Elections are tho basis of the gov
ernment; stop them and the government
foils. To enjoin the ordinary from count
ing these votes, is virtually to prevent the
election; and there is no judicial power in
America to prevent an election.
wn.ua A. BAWXtS*
this point, and ho immediately desisted,
saying he would file a brief this evening
with the Judge covering two points in the
case.
This olosed all argument and Judge Mc
Coy then announced that he would give
his decision at ten o’clock to-morrow morn
ing.
M’CAY DISSOLVES THE INJUNCTION.
The Principal Grounds on Which He liases
His Action— Progrummo of the Li
quor Men ns to the Matter.
Atlanta, December 17.—Judge McCay
this morning dissolved the injunction re
straining Ordinary Calhoun from counting
the votes aud declaring tho result of the
rohibition election which occurred in
Hilton county on the 26th instant.
The court-room nnd bar were packed with
eager, interested listeners. The Judge oc
cupied an hour and a half in reading his
opinion. It was very diffusive and went
into » number of points that were not in
volved in the question of the injunction.
It was only at the end of the lengthy opin
ion thnt he declnred in so mnny words that
he refused the injunction. All through
the decision he would take first one side
and then the other, until the audience was
so puzzled that no one knew haw ho would
decide until ot the end. When he did
announce his opinion there wns a loud out
burst of applause, which was not rebuked.
Mr. Julius L. Brown asked the judge not to
have filed the order dissolving the injunc
tion until Monday next, so as to allow com
plainants time to consider an appeal or
other procedure. To this the judge had
ngieeu, when oil an objection by Mr. My
natt, Judge McCay reconsidered.and granted
the order at once.
said this was an application for an ad inltrim
injunction until the Circuit Conrt shall
meet, which is in February next. To delay
so long the action ot the ordinary can do
no wrong to any one; whereat if he bo per
mitted to aet now, great wrong will be done
to the complainants. That is the
ground of this application. The
United States Court of equity will grant
in every caae an injunction where the appli
cant is in danger of some wrong or injury.
Now the complainants here had no remedy
except by coming her* to this court, and
asking not a permanent restraining order
bnt an ad inltrim injunction only till Feb
ruary, and that, too, when the injunction
ci n do no harm, but a refusal of it would
work irreparable injury to the complainants.
This is a qnettion of equity and will not
equity atep in here?
This law will invade the rights of these
complainants unless the strong arm of this
conrt prevent. There is certainly a case
here. The gentlemen on the other side
concede there is a cose. Well if there be a
esse, shall there be no tribunal to Hear it
and defend the people threatened with de
struction of their property?
In regard to restraining a judicial officer,
it cannot be successfully maintained that
the ordinary is judicial in all his acts as
counter of the votes and
PUBLISHER or RESULT,
for the act is mandatory oa to the publiah-
ing of tiie resale The act docs net become
law until the result of the election ahull
be published. Advertised four successive
weeks, the act ia a law. The publishing
of the result ia certainly purely ministerial,
and that is what is asked to be
restrained, for that is the one act of
the ordinary that makes the act a law.
It ia no particular matter that the ordinary
shall count the vote, and even hear aud de
cide contests, for none of those make the
act law. So the ground set up here -hat
this court cannot enjoin the ordinary ho
es use bis acta are judicial, must fall.
Coni|fiainantB have no common law rem
edy, and that is another reason they are
seeking the intervention of this court.
Take the complainants here, suppose they
go before the ordinary and say they
desire to maho a contest, what
would be his reply? That only
oue-tents of the voters can make a contest;
and that the complainants from Iudiana
could not wake any contest at oil. These
complainants have no sufficient remedy
except in this court
The time of Mr. Hawkins expired at
THIS DECISION.
The judge, in his opinion, ruled that he
had jurisdiction under the act of Congress.
1875.
That the ordinary is no court in the du
ties prescribed by the prohibition act, but
that he has such discretiouarv powers os
make the duties quasi judicial, aud is,
therefore, not subject to injunction against
the discharge of those duties.
Thnt even though the registration might
have been illegal or irregular, thnt could not
vitiate tho eleotion, and that iu bis opinion
the oath is legal which is (1< m inded when
registering, that deponent is 21 years
old, although it may deprive some
who come of age between tho closing of reg
istration and election of the privilege to
vote.
That West End and other dry districts in
the county had a right to vote in this nnd
all othor connty elections. Their being dry
does not disfranchise them. They aro
affected by liquor being sold in Atlanta,and
had a right to vote on the question whether
or not it should continue to be sold here.
Thnt the plea thnt complainants'property
is about to be injured is not sufficient to
warrant an injunction, because while they
may be damaged more than others in the
community, nevertheless they are not dam
aged differently. The damage is to a cer
tain extent a public damage, and only tho
Attorney-General could sue in the matter
That part of the act exempting domestic
wines is clearly contrary to the conntitution
of the United States, because it discrimi
nates against wines of other States. Whether
because the act is void in one part, it is void
in all, is a delicate question.
About the samo point was
raised in the Texas case. The Supremo
Court decided that the void part did not
vitiate the whole. In this particular cose,
however, there is to be considered tho fact
that the object of tho act was “to increase
temperance." How temperance could be
incrcnsed by excluding whisky and setting
wine shops up at every street corner, as
may be done under this bill, is difficult to
be seen. That men inny wallow in the
wine beuniiriily brought about by wine, be
cause it is domestic, while whisky is pro
hibited, does not seem to be a good wev to
“increase temperance.” The section seems
to stand in the way of tho object of the bill,
as for It not to bo pruned off, without de
feating the object of the bill; so that, as it
is unconstitutional, it is not very clear that
tbs whole bill is not curried by that exemie-
tii a section. There are few or no coses
precedent to guide iu lutming a definite
opitdon on the point, nnc one dislikes to
take his own will and judgment in a matter
of so grave importance.
That an injunction may lie Issued only on
a certainty of imminent injury or wrong.
Now, who knows, knows legally, that any
wrong or ininry is imminent, for the resnlt
of the eloction is not known. Until that
was known positively, legally, it was impos
sible for a hill for injunction to have good
standing. For this cnao to have had stand
ing it was necessary for the complainants
to buve ascertained through the action of
the ordinary what they au the ordinal
shall be restrained from ascertaining,
canvass of ths vote* in this election may
prove that the complainants are not and
never were in imminent danger. It is re
membered that even careful canvassing of
votes did not decide tho election between
Hayes and Tilden. This court for two days
last fall was thoroughly convinced that
Blaine was elected President, and only the
closest canvass of the votes decided the
issue, and then there were only a few hun
dred votes difference in the enormous vote
of Hew York State that settled the Freni
dential eleotion.
That although three boxes at a precinct
may not have been legal as no fraud is
alleged or pioven, the fact con only be con
sidered an irregularity that does not vitiate
the election.
TO BE CONTESTED.
Formal Notice of Contest Piled with Ordi
nary Calbonn.
Atlanta, December 17.—Mr. Julius L.
Brown and Mr. Alex King, as attorneys on
behalf of 1*. J. Kenny, Herman Werner,
Philip Breitenbucher, John Domini and L.
B. Folsom, ibis afternoon at 3:30 o'clock
filed a notice of contest of the prohibition
election with Ordinary Calhoun and peti
tion him not to declare the result ot the
election.
The petition says that the said pretended
election was not in favor ot the prohibition
of the sale of liquor for the following
reasons;
1. Because the election waa held for the
whole of Fulton county, when by terms of
the act authorizing the election, “no elec-
be held i ‘ '
all of which were illegal and void, and
which were sufficient to, and did, chunge
tho result of said election.
5. Because all votes cast in Atlanta by
persoua who had not lived in tho city six
months were illegal and void.
6. Recites the point about three ballot
boxes at each of the Atlanta precincts.
7. Alleges the whole election nn'l aud
because not submitted to only those quali
fied to vote.
8. Becauso tho proper publication of no
tice of the election was not hud.
9. Reiterates the attack of the eujoinder
bill on the registration.
10 Covers another point on tho registra-
tion.
11. Because tho ordinary did not order
the election for only such parts of Fulton
county ns were not already dry.
12. Attacks the constitutionality of the
law as a general law; also becauso of dis
crimination in fuvor of domestic wines;
also that the law is contrary to the federal
constitution, which says no State shall
impair the obligation of contracts.
Petitioners pray that the matters and
things set forth aud averred will be duly
considered and determined, together with
such other matters and things as they may
hereafter object by way of amendments.
In eveut the whole election of November
25, 1885, should nut be declared void, that
tho ballots cast at such election will be ex
amined, and all those voted by persons who
did not live in the city of Atlanta will be
rejected, pnd that all ballots otherwise
fraudulent or illegal may be rejected; and
from such ballots as shall be shown
valid anil fair, the result may
he declared. Anil that all such other
action may ho taken in tho contest of such
election as the ordinary may bo by law au
thorized to perform.
Tho petition is signed by John T. Glenn,
A. C. King, Albert II. Cox, Julius L.
Brown, attorneys for the contestants.
Tho ordinary set to-morrow nt ten o'clock
forn preliminary hearing. It is under
stood that a demurrer will he made to the
form of the paper served on the ordinary.
There is considerable difficulty about the
form of contest. The net only says the
ordinary is empowered to hear
contests. The general law as to
contests in other elections
require notice to he served on the other
party. Now the difficulty is as to who is
the other party.
The antis feel aggrieved nt Judge Mcpay’s
going out of his way to decide matters ns to
the three boxes, tho West End vote, and
other points that may come up in tue State
court, for he refused the injunction solely
on the ground that there was no imminent
danger to any one of the complainants, as
no one could know the result
of the election until the ordinary should
hnve canvassed the votes, and thnt no court
would interfere to stop an election. It is
true that the other points were mnde iu the
applicant’s bill, but they did not weigh in
the refusal of the injunction; and it is felt
that Judge McCay was unnecessarilygratui-
tous in volunteering opinions on the other
points, for they are merely opinions and
cannot have tho weight of decisions; but
they do carry prestige.
ANOTHER INJUNCTION.
States
lions shall I
I under the provisions of
this act, for any connty, city, town or any
this State,
other place in
sale of
when by law the
spirituous liquors is already pro
hibited, either by high license, local option
or other legislation, so long as
these local local laws remain
of force;’’ there being
prohibition of the sale of said liquors
throughout the whole of said county by
Uw on the day of said election, except
to the territorial limits of Atlanta.
2 Because totem living in said connty,
outside the city of Atlanta, were allowed to
register and vote at such election, to the
number of about 800, all of said votee being
illegal, and which, if not cost, wonld have
left the prohibition, or “against the sale"
ticket largely in the minority. Raid voters
Are named on the register lists.
3. Because there was no authority of law
to hold an election in the said precincts oat-
side of Atlanta.
4. Because 2511 votes were cast by persons
or voters at the voting places outside the city
Atlanta, December 17.—Messrs. Julius
L. Brown, Alex. C. King nnd John T. Glenn
P resented a bill in equity in the name of
ohn W. Clayton, a wholesale liquor denier,
to Judge ^Marshall J. Clarke, asking an in
junction against the ordinary counting the
votes of tho prohibition election,
Tho bill was presented
10 o'clock to-night. Judge Clark granted
the restraining order until next Monday,
when ho will hear arguments in the case.
The restraining order was served on Ordi
nary Calhonn abont half-past 10 o’clock.
This prevents any hearing by the
ordinary of the contest to-morrow morn
ing. The reason the case wns
originally tried, so far as the injunction is
concerned, before Judge McCay, is that the
restraining order had to be had on Novern
her 30. Judge Hammond, a confessed pro.
hibition partisan, wns then on the Superior
Court bench, oh his term did not expire until
the night of thnt day. In view of this,
Judge McCay was the only resource left.
However, the tiling of the trill before Judge
McCuy wns only a preliminary side skir
mish to draw the fire of the enemy. Now
thnt they have shown their strength the
real fight will be begun in the State courts.
A new point in the bill filed to-night is
that tiie law gives no adoqnsto instruction
for a contest before tbe ordinary, although
it says he may bear contests. Where tbe
antis will bob up again
caso tbe injunction before
Jndge Clarke should be dissolved on argu
ment, is a mystery. It is known tbut
Judge Tompkins ana another of the antis'
counsol ore in New Orleans laying the
matter before Judge Pardee, United S'
district judge.
Content Withdrawn,
Atlanta, December 18.—The anti-urohi-
bitionista have withdrawn their petition as
to contest of election before Ordinary Cal
houn.
Judge Pardee Grant* an Injunction.
Atlikta, 18—A telegram wi* received
here today from New Orleans saying that
Judge Pardee U. B’ district Judge had this
morning passed *n order in each of the
eases of L. Cohen X Co. vs. W. L. Calhoun
ordinary and Frank M. Potts vs. same de
fendant ordering Calbonn to show ca useon
the 4th day of January why the injunction
prayed for shall not be granted.
IN SPITE OF PROHIBITION.
How Whisky will tie Sold In Atlanta at lie-
tall and Openly.
Atlanta, December 17.—Collector Cr$n
shaw, if prohibition obtains in Atlanta, will
have quite a monopoly in the sale
whisky. Tbe custom bouse is ceded to tho
United States government, end the State
can have no jurisdiction over it. Tho col
lector is obliged from tirno to time to sell
the iiqnor seized, after advertising it He
must sell it at pnbiic outcry. It is
duty to sell it as he thinks
will briDg the highest price;
and he may sell it iu any quantities he may
seo fit. Of course, it will bring the highe«t
price in quart bottles. After July next
will probably be no unusual sight to sec
Collector Crenshaw retailing whisky by
quart to the highest bidder, from the steps
of the United States court-house. Even
next Saturday the collector has advertised
for sale so small a quantity as two and
three-quarter gallons of whisky. When
wagon load of whisky is seized it is often
all contained in small jugs. Of course the
jags are sold in single lots.
Here is a chance for the t
tie from Georgia in the Unite'd
ate to have an act of Congress passed
prevent the sale of whisky by Federal offi
cers who have seized the same, in any town
or county where prohibition prevails. Un
less this is done, tbe custodian of the cus
tom house might rent out a room to some
enterprising saloon man who wonld open
bar there and defy the Utale authorities.
Tbe "TelrcrapbV White Light. .
Atlanta, December 16.—The expoeure
in the Telegraph this morning of the con
duct of Deputy United State* Marshal Rufus
Crass in Macon, caused that officer’s dis
missal to-day by Marshal Net me. TheTsL-
?* "“Sf . soeapu's White light works well both
sided in territorial limit* outside said city, | 3Uc 0 n and AtlautaT
i-in FRANCE.
JCrATHlffiNO-GRAPE* FOR MAKING Crcam orTAPrAr?'
It. • DrPrice’S Cream BakingPowdef
For This Week !
Wo arc running altogether on bargain schedules. Bargains
in everything.
CHBISTMAS G O OBS !
Wo made a big hit on these goods the past week. A new
and beautiful assortment to arrive Monday. Don’t buy else
where until you have seen ours. You can save money by
doing so.
IVotioiiffi*! Motions!
A full line of handkerchiefs in plain and fancy borders
from 3c up. Ladies’ and gents’ Hemstitched, in souvenir
boxes, tho very thing for a present. Extracts, Colognes and
Toilet Waters 20 per cent, less than regular dealers sell them.
GLOVES I GLOVES!
Wo always carry tlio best stock of Gloves in the city, all
sizes and late shades always in stock. Wo make a point of
keeping this^stock up to the requirements of tho trado.
I>1 •ess GJ oocIs. Dress Cn oods.
Aro being sold at cost, Our stock is very seloct but too
largo and we wish to rcduco it,
HOSIERY! HOSIERY!
A largo lot will bo sacrificed for a fow days longer. A
very choice lot still on tho bargain counter.
A BOOM
Wo are selling them at cost, and will continue
Now is the timo to buy.
.T. W. MCE & CO.
In Carpets
to do so until Christmas.
A. B. FARQUHAB, York. Pa.
HOBT. H. SMITH, Maoon, Os
A. B. FAKQUHAB & CO.,
MANUFACTURERS or AND DEALERS IN
STEAM ENGINES.
BOILERS,
8AW MILLS,
GRIST MILLS,
BELTING,
STEAM FITTINGS,
HANCOCK INSPIRATORS,
and£a full line of
BUFFALO SCALES
NAILS'
AXES,
PLOWS,
SHOT,
CUTLERY,
WOOD WARE,
DOMESTIC AND IMPORTEDII AUD WARE
Order* solicited and goods and prices always guaranteed satisfactory,
A. B. FARQUHAB & CO.,
octlilAmAwtf
MAC OX. OEOBOIA.
NOW IS THE TIME!
Don’t Waste Your ilqncy on Third-Class Machinery.
Thousands wasted every year by not coming to Head-
quarters to buy Machinery.
OVER FIFTY ENGINES SOLD.
Come and read what tho planters say about them We
can show tho strongest certificates of the best planters in
Georgia. The repairs on fifty Engines aro nominally not h-
mg. Tlie simplest, strongest and most durable Engines in
the United States. ° '
M. J. HATCHER & CO.
General Agents.