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

ishod On the FIRST day Of February,
.>'S'>, by virtue of the act of lS9S;
aGd there being no such Office, there
AN ur 10 officer, either de facto or
!, ,luCe. rs eIcaLbent thereof.
:. Your exce.lency has no warrant
IN i@@ statute law, as ii now stands,
toE making lie appointments asked
f,T.
:. Tie county Of Charleston has
10 legally constituted "board of com.
l.:-S'uue.s."
The legal position has been urged
Nr-H III" by brother lawyers, who
have been kind enough to comply
with the request to submit their
views, that all the acts referred to,
passed since and affecting the act of
.e,j, arc in violation Of Section 81,
Art. Ill, Of the constitution of 1895
au1, therefore, null and void and
should be disregarded. l do not feel
Authorized to take that position nor
to advise your excellency to that
cllect Tor many reasons.
he acts, rs arc all others to be
found on the statute books Of our
State, are presumed to bo constitu-
tIon"l until the supreme court di.
rectiy, or by unquestionably implica-
ton, declares them to be otherwise;
and executive no less than ministe-
rial officers should abstain from
questioning an act unless there be
sJmo irroconcilablo and evidence
conflict between it and other acts, or
IL conflicts with duties plainly i'm
posed by tho constitution.
None Of these acts have ever been
tested before our court and l know
OF no decision emanating from it
which would Justify us in saying that
that tribunal has announced anv
opinion throwing doubt upon the
conotltutionality of the acts.
1t has been suggested, by the
Charleston Legislative delegation, that
the supreme court, having I'm the re-
cent cases of the State Vs. Higgins
(3l S. G. 81 and Dean VS.. Spartan
burg Co. (37 S. E. Rep.) construed
certain portions of the section of the
constitution referred to, and has
practically and upon principle de-
ciared against the constitutionality
OF the acts now in question. With
great respect and reluctance 1 must
differ with the gentlemen as to the
necessary force and effect of the de.
c'slons referred to upon the question
Low under consideration. In the
section, which it is contendcd must
be considered, in the construction of
the statute, the constitution specifies
tea "anhjects" or "purposes," con
cernlng which "the general assembly
Of this State shall not enact local or
special laws" and among those spe-
cited arc, "VII to provide for the
protection of game" and "X. to fix
the amount or manner of compensa-
ton to be paid TO any county officer,
except that the laws may be 80 made
as to grade tho compensation in pro
portion to the population and neces-
sary service required" AS 1 under
stand it, tho Higgins case decided
that an act, then under consideration
by tho court and which was intended
$50 provide for the protection OF
game" was inimical to Section 81
because, in that it applies but to &
limited number Of counties, it was
not general law, tho court saying
"Ihis is conclusively shown by the
tcrms Of the first section of this very
"ct, which, if it stood alone, woulc
have been a good general law; but
when the legislature saw fit, by the
provision in tho third section, te
limit it's operation to certain speci
fled localities, tho act was deprived
of its character rs general law, and
became special law concerning {
subject, and for purpose expressly
forbidden by the constitution" The
two other points considered and de.
cided IN that case can have no appli
cation to this subject, as a careful
examination will show.
In the Dean case tho limitations
of tho section with regard to sub di.
vision x. were considered in connec
ton with a statnte fixing the amount
of compensation to be paid to the