The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1899-12-06
HOLDS THE LAW OF 1891 WAS
NOT REPEALED.
RE-ENACTkENT ON SANE
DAY REAFt IRMED IT..
Whether Passenger Rides in Solitary tate O.
With Others Who Pay Makes n,Dif-
ference Under the Law, Says
the Court. Other Cases

The opinion was handed down by the
Supreme Court yesterday in the case OF
the State VS.. Southern Railway, for is
suing a free pass to T. n. HALLIBURTON,
while he was door-keeper of the House
ut the session of 1897. Justice Clark
writes the opinion, which le-
verses the court below and holds
the road liable to the law imposing
a fine of $1,000 for, the offence charged.
The serious contention of the de-
PENDANT road was that the Act Of 1891,
chapter 800, under which the present
ment was made, was repealed, to take
effect on April 4th 1899, and the act
creating the Corporation Commission be-
came operative on the 9th of April,
1889, and therefore that the defendant
could not be convicted ON the charge"
This was the ground on which the
court below quashed the Indictment.
The court holds that it is not neces
sary to charge and prove that ON the
same train and at the same time as
one passenger is carried free that other
passengers paid their fare, but adds
that 1T would have been equally pref
erence and discrimination against the
public if this had been a special train
carrying solitary dead-head, or train
composed entirely of that class whirled
away possibly TO some political conyen-
ton. In fact either of these cases
would be an aggrayation of the of
fence instead of an excuse.
1t declares that the purpose and con-
stitutionality of the statute were ful,y
considered and settled in State VS.. same
defendant, 172 n. g. 1852.
As TO the contention that chapter 506,
Acts OF 1899, repealed chapter 800.
Acts Of 1891, the court says 1t was
held at this term in Abbott vs. Bed
dingfeld that chapter 164, Laws or
1899, creating the Corporation Com
mission, which was enacted on the same
day as chapter 506, in effect re-enacted
and continued in force chapter 800,
Laws of 1881. 1t necessarily follows
therefore that this Indictment has lost
none Of its vitality by IN ne which
merely amended and continued in force
the statute under which it was drawn.
Nor indeed would the condition of the
defendant be any better if the court
had adopted the view presented in the
dissenting opinion in Abbott vs. Bed
dingfeld That went upon the ground
$50 far as this matter IS concerned) that
the two acts taken as whole We're
not the same. But. there was AMI can
be no controversy that section Of
chapter 800. Laws of 1891, under which
the defendant is indicted, is precisely
the same in totidem verbs with Sc
ton Is, chapter 1G3, Laws Of 1899,
which was enacted on the same day
at which the former statute was re-
pealed, and it was held in State VS..
Williams, 1T n. C. 753. as follows:
1.-The re-enactment by the Legislature
of a law in the terms Of a former at the
same time it repeats the former law.
is not in contemplation OF law a re-
peal but it is re-affirmance of the
former law whose provisions are thus
continued without any intermission.'
1.-THE Judgment quashing the indict-
ment is set aside. This will be certi-
fed direct to the Western Criminal
court for Burke county that it may
proceed according to law.
OTHER OPINIONS.
Opinions were handed down as fol-
lows:
Herren rs. Pugh, from Sampson; per
cnriam affirmed.
Bristol vs.. Morganton, from Burke;
reversed.
Powell vs.. Railroad, from Burke; af-
firmed.
Griffith vs.. Silver, from Yaneey; new
trial.
McNeely VS.. 3lorsanton; affirmed
Brackett VS.. Gillian, from Mellow
ell; affirmed
State VS.. Southern Railway Company
reversed.
Henderson VS.. Moore, from Wilkes;
affirmed.