The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1900-03-22
SENATOR BUILER'S2 SPEECH
Continued from LIST page. J

ny to It's provisions, yet the parts OF
sections two and three Of the act OF
1897 being unconstitutional and void,
1t follows that those parts OF sections
and 3 OF chapter 116 OF the acts of
1885, which levy the amounts Of capt.
taftion and property tax, are unrepealed
and are I'm full force and effect.
Now, how does the law as set forth
in those cases, which Is the rule follow
ed by the court, apply to the present
case?
IL there ever was q case where Sec
tlons were severable, surely this con-
stitutional amendment presents that
case. Section Is not dependent upon
any other section, nor Is the remainder
OF the cat dependent upon any other
section, nor Us the remainder OF the
| act incomplete in any sense without it.
Indeed, section attempts to do one
thing, while all of the remainder Of
the act attempts to do just the Oppo-
site. There are two different purposes
attempted by the two different sections
and | take it every one will admit that
the authorities are uniform that where
that is so, there ds no question but the
section which is invalid will fall, and
| ard work on constitutional limitations
| or constitutional construction Is along
the line of these decisions, and show
| clearly that in a case like this section
would fall, leaving the remainder Of
| the amendment to stand.
GARBLED EXTRACTS FROM A
GREAT AUTHORITY.
| would not consider it necessary to
| dwell further on this matter had not
| the Senator from Mississippi (Mr.
Money! read some extracts from Coo
ley Constitutional Limitations, which
he claims Is authority to the contrary.
| | regret that the Senator Is not in his
seat, for l would much prefer for him
TO be present while read this author
ity, because the Senator's quotation
misrepresents the text. l do not want
to believe, and will not charge, that the
Senator intended wilfully to misrepre-
sent the text; but his quotation does it,
and l must call attention to it in the
| interests of truth, so that the law may
| go into the Record correct The Sena-
| tor objected to me correcting him
| while he was speaking, so / must do it
| now.
! uhl. tUtuS IL WuldI StIldtOF is the
Senator from North Carolina refer
ring?
Mr.. Butler The Senator from Mis-
sissippi (Mr. Money!. shave in my
hand the Congressional Record con-
tanning his speech, in which he quotes
from Cooleys Constitutional Limita-
tons. read from the Record:
The constitutional and unconstitu-
tional provisions may even be contain.
led In the same section and yet be per-
fectly distinct and separable, so that
the first may stand though the last fall
The point is not whether they are con.
tanned in the same section, for the dis
tribution in sections Is purely artificial
but whether they are essentially anC
! inseparably connected in substance Il
when the constitutional portion j:
stricken out, that which remains il
complete in itself and capable of beins
| executed in accordance with the appar
ent legislative intent, wholly indie
pendent of that which was rejected, il
must be sustained.
But in the text there are two sen.
tneces between those read by the Sen
ator which he skipped Now, why
should the Senator skip them wher
they bear directly on the question a
issue and state the opposite contention
from what he read in the next sen
tnece? I submit 1t is not fair pre-
sentation of the authority. The Sena
tor surely did not himself examine tn,
text. He must have been misled b,
some one who made the extracts fo
him. Here are the sentences tina
were skipped:
The difficulty is in deite,rminin.
whether the good and bad parts of tn
statute are Capable of being separate
within the meaning of this rule. If
statute attempts to accomplish two @
more objects and is void as to one, j
may still be in every respect conrplet
and valid as to the other
Mr.. President, the significance q
that sentence Is that 1T applies directl
to the case under discussions: and
the Senator had put that sentence i
between the sentences he quoted, b
would have been quoting a direct au
thordty for my contention and not fo
his.
MIR. President, we are all camilla
with how the late Bob Ingersoll quote
the Bible 10 prC,e that there was n
God. We are also told that the dew
quotes Scripture to justify his cours.
But 1t is also we'll known that whe
they do they garble the text by select
ing am extract here and there and lea1
ing out the qualifying and essentis
par5t important and necessary for
correct construction. Quotations mad
in this way can be gotten to prove thu
black is white, that wrong is righ
and that things that are unconstit,
tional are constitutional. g.
MIR. President, in order that no ON
may be misled and that everyone ma
know the law exactly as laid down b
this eminent authority,I ask permi.
sion at this point to put into the Re-
ord everything that Judge Cooley sa,
ON this question, beginning On pas
214, under the subhead, Statutes III
constitutional in part" down to pas
219, where the discussion under thu
subhead ends.
he quotation referred to is as TO
lows:
STATUTES UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
IN PART.
1t will sometimes be found that a
ACT OF Une legislature IS opposed
some OF its provisions to the constit,
ltion, while others, standing by then
selves, would he unobjectionalble. S
the forms observed in passing it ma
he sufficient for some OF the purpost
sought to be accomplished by it but i,
sufficient for others. In any such cas-
the portion which conflicts with til
constitution, or in regard to which tt
necessary conditions have not lice
observed, must be treated as a MULTI
Whether the other parts of the status
must also be adjudged void because I
the association must be depend upon
consideration of the object of the la,
and in what manner and to what g,
tent the unconstitutional portion e
fects the remainder.
A statute, it has been said, is jud
cially held to be unconsstitutfonal b.
1 -