The Union times. [volume] (Union, S.C.) 1894-1918, 1905-10-27

II
a Tux on all of the taxable prop
lertE an certain counties for the
requirement of a general State
law, kpd exempts from levy other
counties placed in the same cir
cumstances and under like condi-
tions as to the dispensary law
and its enforcement. Therein is
violated the section of the con-
stitution which says the General
Assembly shall provide by law
/ for q uniform and equal rate of
taxation.
I'VE say that this act is not
valid, furthermore, because it
provides that any county voting
out the dispensary, shall not
thereafter receive any portion of
the surplus funds that NAV re-
main in the dispensary school
fund, after the deficiency in the
varions county schools have been
made np, as provided by law,
but leaving the said surplus funds
to be distributed among the
countiesretaining the dispensary.
In the surplus funds now in the
hands of the State the taxpayers
OF Union county have property
right of which they must not be
deprived.
Still another reason for the
invalidity of the Brice act, is that
it violates the constitution by be-
ing a special law where a general
law would apply. 1t also denies
people in Union and other counties
that may vote out the dispensary
the equal protection of the law.
hhllere are many effective argu-
no.. 80, : ~, on s1ss nssr r., eide, which I have,
look for developments soon."
The result of this decision is of
more than passing interest, for
it will without doubt have much
weight on the elections that are
shortly to take place on the sub
ject of 'dispensary' or mo dis
pensary." There are several
counties which are to vote on
this question within the next
three weeks and the decision will
therefore be of pertinent and pc
culiar interest to them.
We reprint the following edito-
rial, a sane and clear view of the
recent agitation of the question
I in the higher courts, printed un
:, der the caption, 'The Ballot thu
Last Court in the Columbi;
' Record:
"a new and somewhat uneX
h pected turn has been given tn
dispensary situation by the at
tack which has been made O
: the constitutionality of the Brio
% law in the federal court. Argu
;s ment is to be made before Judg
w Pritchard on that issue Octobe
y :, 81. The main point raise
;s against the constitutionality {
" the law is in reference to it's ta3
70 alton feature, and that questio
ID is, also, to come up before tf
~, 70 next legislature. If the law
/, upheld then these proceeding
o. will have no effect upon election
g. already held or yet to be hel
We If the law is declared unconstit
Ils tional then past elections will
'a of no effect and conditions w
ho be the same as if they were ne
~ ~, er held. Hence, the result is
ND the very greatest Importance
'u IN the people of South Carolir
wv W. Being a matter of so much pre-
w ent pressing concern all citize
he ib will earnestly hope that the COZ
Id or courts will quickly give sol
,nd decision upon the question, so
.U aS that we may know where ;.
,oli eli are at" If the law is consti
~ tional then that is all there is
bot o it, and whatever of more or !
t%s ,ia strong objection there are to
roe roc will have to be abandoned &
ont the terms of the law gracefl
ON on submitted to until it is repeal
nf If it is unconditional, it VIC
oW ~ have been better that we
tho knownit it long before, but if
% IN it must go, and what has b
!, nf f done under it will have to be Wi
,rtv M away just as if no such law
ho- existed.