The Newberry herald. [volume] (Newberry, S.C.) 1865-1884, 1882-10-05
Habeas Corpus Proceedings in Case OF
ID. B. Whites, ex-Treasurer.

A. Carlisle and James Packer. Ih'
Sheriff carried the prisoner before tb'
| Trial Justices Thursday afternoon, ant
for return to the writ SGT forth the fac
that the prisoner was detained in custo
dT by virtue of warrant issued to hi1
BIZ Jno. Peter Richardson, State Treas
urer, the 18th of August, 1882 The
State was represented by Attorney
General Yonmans and Solicitor Dun
can; Mr.. Whites By Messrs. o. l.
Schumpert and 7. J. Pope. Tie pa
pers having been read. Mr.. Pope, in be.
half Of the prisoner. read the ~arran'
of the State Treasurer. He then argued
that the i'm orisonment was illegal; be.
cause, lst. if the proceeding be a crlmi-
nal one, it is in violation of that Section
of the Constitution which requires al
warrants to be based upon affidavit
and, 2nd. if the proceeding be civil
one. it is in violation Of that Section OF
the Constitution which prohibits lm'
prisonment for debt. That Section for
bids Imprisonment for debt except IN
cases of fraud, and in that case the proof
of the fraud must precede the imprison-
ment. The Act of 1888 did authorize
the State Treasurer to do what he has
done in this case, and this law was re.
snated in the Revised Statutes Of 1872
and Of 1882; but these acts are uncon-
stitutlonal. He therefore asked that the
prisoner be discharged.
AttorneY-General Yoamans, in an.
swer, read the Section of the. Revised
Statutes under which the State Treasn-
rer issued his warrant, which Is as fol-
lows: Amy County Treasurer who
shall neglect to pay over to the (State)
Treasurer the amount in bis hands be-
longing to the State, or for which be
has made himself liable, as required by
law. shall be liable to be committed to
iail by q warrant from the (State) Treas
urer, which warrant shall be directed to
all the Sheriffs of the State, who shall
be bound in their several Counties to
yield strict obedience to the same, un-
der penalty Of liability for neglect Of
duty: and such County Treasurer shall
remain iE strict custody until he shall
have rendered full! account, and paid
over the taxes for which be is account
able"
There are no decisions to be guided
BY in this case; but the case Of State
VS.. Startling, Is S. c. Reports, is some
what analogous. Prior to the Consti-
tuition os 1890 an act WAS passed giving
to Magistrates power to trv cases under
$40 without a jury; the Constitution OF
1890 guaranteed trial by jury in ali
cases; yet the Courts afterwards held
that the Magistrates still had this pow
or; that the Constitution Of 1890 did not
divest them Of it: By analogy, he ar
gued, the State Treasurer deriving this
power from the act of 1888, prior to
Constitution of 1868, was not deprived
Of it by that Constitution. But the At
torney-General did not insist very earn
estly upon the constitutionahty of the
act; and it was quite evident that he
did not believe it to be constitutional.
He urged the Trial Justices not to un-
dertake to pass upon the constitutional
ity of an act so old, and one that has
three times been enacted by the State
Legislature: first in 1883. then in 1872
and again in 1889; that i IS very rare
thu; Circuit judges will declare az &C;
unconstitutional; it wouid be very en-
traordinary for two Trial Justices to dc
So.
At this point the Acknowledgement
began to read some papers; bat the
prisoners counsel objected, on lie
ground iha: they did not form part OF
the return. TIE JUSTICES agreed with
prisoners counsel. but ordered that
State's counsel could amend the return.
Objection to tue papers WAS then with
drawn; and the Attorney General read
tie rcquisition Of Gov. Hagood. OF
South Carolina, upon Gov. Cobb, OF
Alabama, and Gov. Cobh's warrant fol
the arrest of Whites. But it was evil
dent that these papers did not change
the aspect of the case. Mr.. Whites
had been arrested in Alabama by vir-
tue of these papers, and these papers
had been issued upon warrant sworn
out before Trial Justice Carlisle by Da-
vid Hipp. But the Hipp warrant bad
never been returned TO the ?'rinl jus
tice, and Whites was not confined upon
that, but upon the State Treasurer
warrant. So the Gffdavlt to support
the warrant was still wanting; and the
Acknowledgement asked for an GlSas
warrant. The Solicitor made the afi.
da7it charging breach Of trust and en-
bezzlement; upon this the Trial Justice
issued his warrant; the Solicitor handed
it to the Sheriff, and the Sheriff made
the arrest upon it.
The hearing Of tho Ha6eaS Corpu;
proceeded, but no new points were de-
veloped. 1t was very evident that bott
sides and the Trial Justices were con.
vinced of the unconstitutionalty of the
act under which Whites was restrained
Of his liberty. The effort Of the State
was to impress upon the minds Of the
Judges that this was too grave ques
lion for them 10 decidei the effort O
the other side to impress the Judge:
with their importance and to make
them think that they were equal to any
question, constitutional or otherwise.
The argument having been concluded
Mr.. Packer at once declared the act un
constitutional on the two grounds argued
| in behslf OF the prisoner, and though
! the prisoner entitled to his discharge
Mr. Carlisle said, that while his view O
the act agreed with Mr.. Packers, b.
did not believe that Court constituted
as the present had a right to discharge
the prisoner. The Trial Justices fail
ing to agree the prisoner was remand
ed. He is now confined upon two war
rants: the one issued by the Stat
Treasurer, the other by Trial justice
Carlisle upon the affidavit of the So
! licitoT.
Mr.. Whites will be tried at the ap
preaching term Of Court.
|. Ex-Tressurer Whites has sued on
another writ of Ha6eas Corpus thi
time before Trial Justices. Packer am
Fair. The case came up yesterday, bu
was postponed to tomorrow at 2 l.
| p M