The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1902-01-17

''"nS or NillrE"S, or rhAuE", nlnrnd
or extend the chatter thrrruf / TO
Incorporate educational, rp}iEinus,
charitable, social, manufacturing or
banking institutions not undrr con
troll Of tho State, or nmrnd or rXtona
tho charters thereof. =. TO incor.
poratr school DISTRICTS & To an
thoriZo tho adoption or lcgi,imation
Of children. 7. To provide for tho
protection Of gnmo. s To sum
mon and ompaurl grand or pctil in
rors. 8. TO provide for the age at
which citizons shall hc subject to road
or other public duty. 10 To fix
tho amount or manner OF compnnsn
ton to hr paid to any county officer,
except that the laws may hr so madn
~ to grade tho compensation in pro
| portion to the population AMI nrcrs
snry service required. IL. In all
other cases, where u general law can
be made applicable, no special law
shall hc enacted H.. The general
assembly shall forthwith enact Ern
er"l laws cNurr:uinG said subjects for
said purpr SECS, which shall hr uni.
form III their oIrrat.Nrt,: Provided,
/ that uNthiIE rnutHiurl In this section
shall prohibit ,hr general assembly
from rnactinE special provisions in
general laws"
In determining the constitutional
lty uf the foregoing Act il will hc
necessary I" ron>,rnr the words so
summon and rmparrl jurol$."
1t is cNntrndrd hy the respondent
that they do tot iurludr the listing
an drawing OF jurors
III reaching Il conclusion upon this
question, We MUS: look to the evil
which the constitution wished to up
root.
Tn" jury laws throughout, the State
wer" various and wrr" productive Of
great confusion and uncertainty.
The object o! the constitution was
to mnkrth he jury law uniform through
ont tho entire State, and this can only
br accomplished 10y interpreting the
words "summ"n and rmpp ,rl" to in.
cludr listing and drawing Of Jurors.
Having reached this G cluslon we
will next consider whether the act
can be considered rs Il special proyis-
ion in II general law.
While tn" act pu,por,s to he only
an amendment it is, in effect, Il sub
sutut" for tn" law then 10y forcc ON
this subject, and deals with thu on.
tire question Of listing and drawing
Jurors. Ii must therefore he con,
strued rs AN independent act, and can
not he regarded rs special provision
IN Il general law.
The nrxt question that will he con-
s'dersd is whether it can he construed
to he valid general law.
In Dean W SpartHuburg, 50 S. G.
! no, the c.urt says: "In order that a
law INA! he general it must be Of
force III every county in the State,
and while ii may contain special pro.
visions making its effect different in
certain counties those counties can
not he exempt from its entire opera
ton"
The provision Of the act that "in
Aiken county the jury shall he listed
| and drawn as provided by the county
government law" shows that it was
not intended 10 be Of force in that
county.
The provision that in the counties
of Aobevllle, Edgeield, Lexington
aud Greenwood the jury list should
be prepared0in the manner therein
set forth shows that the operation of
the act was not unif rm throughout
the State. But constituting the act
as an amendment it cannot be de
| cIHred to be constitutional, for the
reason that it substantially changes
the general law as to jnr,es, and pre-,
vents uniformity in al the counties
OF the State upon that subject. Even
If Ii should be contended that this is
special provision in general law,
It could not be construed to be con
stltutlonal, as it prevents in sub
stantlsl manner uniformity in the
jury law throughout the State.
he appellants also contend tha,
h county Of Charleston has a sepa
rate and distinct act at page 800,
1900, which violates the aforesaid
constitutional provision"
Even contendiDg this to be the
fact, 1t could not have any effect in
determining whether the first act
- ,.,l