The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1899-07-26
Gonstables Cannot Garry
Weapons Concealed.
TIE SUPREME COURT SO
HOLDS.

Ever sinee the establishment OF tae
State liquor cens.abulariy it has been
the custom OF she coastables to carry
concealed weapons under the belief
sha. the comraission gave them the
r;;ohs TO do 60. The effect of the prac-
s;se has been seen in number OF
hloody affairs occurring here and there
abous the State. It is a strange coin
aeuce that the supreme court hands
deWn 40 opinioo 10 which it is held
tha. such of6oers have no right to bear
corceaied weapons. in case in which
w r. Crawford, the constable ~ho
killed Mrs. Stuart in ,his city, is the
respondent. The case is entitled, The
uisy Of Laurens, appellant. VS.. W. Il.
Crawford, respondent . and the opinion
Is written by Associate Justice dary
/. is Interesting to note also that the
op;aion leaves DO !oopholes oy which
sheriffs or any other officers may bear
concealed weapons. The opinion reads
as follows
The record contains the following
ssssement of facts Ga July %. 1898,
the defendant, W. r. Crawford, named
above. was tried before the mayor of
the civ Of Lauseos. charged With the
violation Of &C ordinance Of said city,
on July %, 1898. by having concealed
about his person pistol
The defendant admitted that he did
have a pistol concealed about his person
in said city on the Esd day OF July,
1858, but conteoded that he was State
constable and had right to carry bis
rissol concealed about bis person.
The defendant was State constable.
bus the mayor overruled the contention
OF the defendant, convicted min CT the
crime charged aud sentenced him to
pay fne Of IS or be imprisoned 10
days.
The defendant appealed to the eourt
Of general sessions for Laurens county,
npon the grounds that he was an officer,
q State caustabie, and had right to
carry his pistol concealed about his
person. TIE appeal was heard By his
honor, Judge Townsend. at the Osto.
ber, 1898, term of court of general
sessions for Laurens county.
His honor, the circuit judge, ordered
s.shat the appesl-bs and is sustained.
aud thas the entire proceedings herein
be and are hereby dismissed, aud thai
The defendants bond on appeal be
discharged and cancelled"
The city of Laureus appealed from
3 the order upon exceptions raising orao-
ticaily the single question OF laW
whether State constable is exempt
f.on the operation Of the law Forbicdiog
the carrying Of pistol concealed about
the person.
The frss act oa this subjec. was
passed ia 1880 (17 Stat. Al, the
fourth section Of which was as follows ::
..No,hapg herein contained shall be
construed to apply to peace officers
while 10 the actual discharge of s6eir
duties as sech officers, ror to persons
carrying concealed weapons upon their
Own premises"
In 1897 another act was passed az
Stat, 423), in which, without referring
20 previous legislation, the language Of
ebe former act was substantially repeat
ed With the important exception that
part of ehe act declaring what persons
shall be exempt from its provisions,
peace oficers. ar entirely omitted.
The language of the las: act is as
soliosa: "Nothiog herein contained
shall be construed to spply to persons
oarryiag concealed weapons upon their
Own premises
The act concludes with the usual
repeating clause.
The drss question. therefore, to be
determined is whether toe provision in
the previous law exeupting peace
cficers while 10 the actual discharge Of
their duties as such from the operation
Of the act is repealed by tae subsequent
scs Of 1897.
This turns Upon the iaquify whssher
the provisions Of the latter act are
inaoneis,sn. With those Of the former
set for. If they are, then, by the
express terms of the lass section OF tie
acs of 1897. the previous provisions
rot reenacsed are repealed.
The rule is we'll settled tba. when 8
statute exemp,s Two classes Of persons
from the operation thereof. and sub
sequeps statute 90 precisely the sane
subject exempts only one Of the two
cIasses named in the previous statute,
the provisions Of the TWO statutes are
inconsistent With each other ard such
inconsistent provisions are repealed by
the latter statute.
=,