The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1866-12-01
= THE aATFLE Law.

/ - ASW t1SotOASAu& sAS~S ~. 6SoS
Caitls. There seems to Be- misunder-
sssDdiag respecting the decision of this
e9se, dc. As this misunderstanding may
result in a serious injury to those interest
ed ip stock raising, have thought It
would not be improper to give brief
explanation of the, case alluded TO, aud
Ethe point decided. Z "a -s eN
Tits case came up from Justices court
on petition in error. The record show
ed that all the proceedings before the Jus
lice we're based on the 4Ih section of the
Act entitled, ':An act to provide for the
projection of stock from contagious dis
leases" approved May lst, 1861.
I There we're four causes of error as
signed. the first of which was, that the
Justice in refusing to discharge the de-
Ffshdsnts on the ground that the COM
PlaintchaFged no offence against the laws
Fof the State OF Kansas.
Tue second vas, in effect, that whilst
s tate has an undoubted right to pass
Sanitsfys Laws. it is restricted by the
constitution of the United States from
passing laws iplerdic:ing trade and com
merce, DC.
TGg&hird assumed that the law under
which [Ae proceedings were had was uu-
Constitutional. because it refused the
right Of trial by Jury. or az appeal 10
courl Hhere suoh trial could be bad. Is
The fourth assumed the law upon
which the complaint was founded vas
void, 10 consequences of the impossibility
of carrying lis provisions into effect.
As asmalter of fact. the District Court
passed only upon the first of these prop
OsitiOnsi understanding however, that the
case was to go to the Supreme Court. The
decisioaswas s. rendered as to present all
the points to that court.
The District Court decided that the
provisions of The act entitled ''An Act to
prevent the bringing of stock into the
State from the State of Tex1s,' & >, were
not incompatible with any provisions OF
the act of 1861, above referred to, except
those contained in sections and 5. OF
said act; but that it did. by implication,
repeal said sections and 5, being SO
| inconsistent with these that both could
not be enforced. Hence, the provisions
of these sections were superseded by
those of the act of ] 865, and that the
repeal lin 1867 of the latter did not re-
VlVe the former. See comp. Laws OF Kan
sas, page 839; Acts of session 5.b, 1869
| page 1853; sedgwick on State Con. Laws,
| page 1873; ct. seq; Smith on Const.
Laws, page 800; U. s. Digest, vol 5tb,
page $40, Sec. SO. "a. 81. 90. So and
100; BisOhP's Grim. Law, Sec. 2o5; also
Constitution of Kansas, Art. 2, SEQ. Is;
also State vs.. Thompson. 2 Kans. R
page 434; Abyer vs.. State, 10 o. s. R.,
page SGD; State er. al Johnson VS.. Hitch
cock. | -KaLs. R page 176; Pain vs.
Nicholson, g. o. S. R.. psg1 ITO. and
| Lebman2vs. Mcbride, is o. s. R., page
57s. 10 7.0-a
The whole case was very ABLY and
thoroughly argued by Mr. Brown on be-
half of the plaintiffs, in error, and by Mr..
Robinson on behalf of the defends ~
/ desire to say to those who are likely
to suffer from the introduction of disess
ed stock from Texas or anywhere else.
that they should institute their proceed
ings under Sec. Isl of the act of 1861
Complied Laws, page 839.
30 This is your only legal redress until
you can obtain better remedy at the
hands of your Legislature. srol"
Ope of the objects in presenting this
matter to the public is to direct the at
tention of The members elect to the Leg
islaturs to this subject. If the Suprem'
. Court shall pass upon theIvariOus point:
raised ID the case alluded to, twill great
ly assist in securing the passage Of sucl
Al4w as The exige ncies Of the case require
:. Our people should have adequate legs
protection against this danger. Il CANNOT
be expected that they will tameIy stand
and see The fruits Of years of Toll and pri
,. vatiop swept from them. The PeoPl'
have right ODE protected in their prop
!, erty by The law. IfIhey fail to obtain this
they will be disposed to resort tosviolence
and even TO the shedding of blood, if nee
sssary. Any one who will pass over th'
country land witness the devastation
which the Spanish fever is making among
the cattle. as have. vi Il feel that such
state Of things ought not, and will not b
longer endured. let the consequences b
what hey may. Il will be difficult.
know, to trans laW u INSET all the wan:i
of the occasion. A state of panic is not
the most suitable for wise legislation up
on any subject. The fact is the law VI
: had vas very defective ia many Particu
! lars. aud utterly failed to afford the Sc