The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1902-01-17
Chr 4(erala and nen*
jury LAWS NULL And VOID
THE sUPREME 'UKT READEhN
UNANIMOUS Opinions ON TIE SUB
JECr,
Legislature Given an Obj ct LeHson-Ihe
Constitution Must be Given Due re
Sard-Text Of the Opinion.
GThe State, 18th.


unconstitutional, null and void, IN
that they are special and not general
laws as required by the constitution
and the legislature is thus given an
object lesson which should prevent
the introduction of the usual round
of bills that are clearly in violation
of the constitutional provision.
The court renders a unanimous
opinion, the paper being written by
Justice Eugene B. Gary. The case
is that of the State vs.. A. j. Queen,
ct al, from Cherokee county.
The opinion in the other case on
the same subject, that of the State VS..
Franklin, affirms the Judgement OF
the court below-Judge Ernest Ga
RVS decision-and merely states that
all points are covered in the opinion
in the Mcqueen case.
The full text of the opinion is as
follows:
The appellants were tried and con
victed of riot and assault and battery
with intent to kill at the June (l9Ol)
term of court for Cherokee county.
'fBefore the jury was selected, the
attorney for the appellants, made
motion to quash the array of on two
grounds, ~ because there was no
jury law warranting the drawing OF
q jury for Cherokee county, sni ~
because the jury law, if any, was re-
pugnant to that provision of the con-
stitution which prohibits special leg
islation."
His honor, the circuit judge, over.
ruled the motion whereuPon the de
PENDANTS appealed upon the follow
ing exception.
"Becsuse his honor erred in hold
ing that the jury law of 1900, IL
Statutes 515 entitled: An act. to
amend sections 1886 and, 1887 of
the general statutes relating to the
drawing and term Of service of jurors,
in the circuit courts of this State and
to validate the jury lists already pre-
pared is not repugnant to, or IN
violation of subdivisions 8, II and II
of section "a, article 3, constitution
1895, in as much as said jury law
contains special and local provisions
allowing the counties of Greenwood,
Abbeville, Edgefeld, Orangeburg and
Lexington and Aiken to summon and
empanel Jurors in hose counties, and
the county of Charleston has sePa
rate and distinct act at page 32O,
1906. All of which violates the afore
said constitutional provision"
Section l of the act first mentioned
in the exception contains the follow
ing provisions: o ,
"That section 1885 of the general
statutes of 1882 now known as sec
tion 1876 of the revised statutes, be
amended so as to read as follows:
Section 1915. The clerks of the
court in each county in this State
shall, on or before the 9Th day of
January ofeach year, prepare astate
ment and deliver the same to the
county board of commissioners of the
number of Jurors that will be re-
quired to be in attendance fer each
term of the court, to be held in the
county during the ensuing year, and
the county board of commissioners
shall in each year during the month
of January prepare list of such le-
gslly qualified voters of their respec-
tive counties, not absolutely exempt,
as they may think we'll qualified to
serve as jurors, being persons Of good
moral character, of sound judgment,
and free from all legal exceptions, to
be selected from the county at large,
without regard to whether such per-
sons reside in seven miles of the
court house or not; except in the
counties of spartanburg and Orange
burg, the list shall be prepared in
the month of December, and the list
so prepared by each county board of
commissioners shall contain twice
the number as reported by the clerk
Of the court: Provided, that in
Aiken county the jury shall be listed
and drawn as provided by the county
government law: Provided, that in
the counties of Abbeville, Edgefeld,
o,1 GrooouooS tho coiS