The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1901-05-21


coded to be applicable to the argu,
gument herein and the other points
therein decided, l am impressed with
the idea that the other parts Of the
decision cannot aid us in this inves-
tigation.
After enumerating, exhsustively
we must presume, the subjects con-
corning which the Legislature, under
no circumstances, was to enact "ocal
or special laws" the section in sub.
division NJ provides that "ln all
other cases, where general law can
be made applicable, no special law
shall be enacted" Inasmuch as it
must be conceded that the subject and
purpose Of the act is not included
within the ten classes, then, IN order
to affirm that the act of 1893 is un-
constitutional, we must be satisfied.
first that it is Especial law" and
second that "general law can be
made applicable"
In the absence of further light
from our own court, we turn for gui-
dance to the courts of last resort of
other States.
The A. e. L. Ency, of Law (Vol.
10, 1st Ed. 07S) says "The constitu-
tions of many of the States provide
that no special or local law shall bo
passed when a general law can be
made applicable. Under such pro-
visions it is question for the legis-
lature exclusively whether a general
law can or cannot be made applica-
BILE in a certain case; and it is only
where the Legislative discretion hos
been grossly abused that the courts
will intervene. About rs decisions
are referred to in the note to sustain
the general principles announced in
the text and two of these are quoted
from as leading cases, to wit: Car
penter vs. People e Col. 420.), in
which it is said, "every question of
doubt, in such event, would be prop
erly resolved in favor of the validity
of the act challenged and due weight
would be accorded to the considera-
tion that the legislative judgement
was required to be exercised in the
case by the very restrictions imposed
by the constitution" andin the State
vs.. County Court of Boone Go. $50
Mo. BID Adams, j., said, "But who
is to decide when a general or spec
ial law will answer the best purpose ?
1t strikes mo that this rule, IN rof-
erence to general or special laws, is
laid down for the guide for the leg
islatur', and the Legislature is to
judge of the necessity of the partio.
ular case. The Legislature is quite
as able to do this as the courts. The
Legislature must, in the first in
stance, exercise their discretion as to
the necessity of special instead of
o general act. How can the courts
control that discretioni If a dis
cretion be conceded at all, in my
Judgment the courts have no right to
control it.
cit is agreed that there is no dis
cretion in regard to the passage OF
certain enumerated laws. They are
inhibited by the letter of the consti-
tuition. When the legislature un-
dertakes to pass these inhibited laws,
it is the plain duty of the courts to
declare them unconstitutional. But
here we are asked to pronounce upon
the necessity of a law, and whether 1t
oan be better supplied by a general
law than special act. This is an
exercise of the discretion of the court
to control the discretion of the leg
islature. lam not saticfed that this
can be done. In the State vs., Hitch.
cock q Kan. 17S) it was held II
their constitutional provision that, in
all cases where a general law can be
enacted, loft a discretion with the
Legislature to determine the cases ir
which special laws should be passed
and this discretion could not be in.
terfered with by the courts. This
doctrine, it seems to me, is supported
by reason and the weight of au.
thority."
| In the constitution of Nevada
| 1860 in Art. ". there are these
provisions: "Section 20. The legisla,
turo shall not pass any special laws
IN - 4. +