The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1910-06-15
TARE ACT VALID
Important Decision to Farmers Readered
by Judge DeVore
ABOUT BUYING COTTON

a .
Counsel for Defense Announces Case
Will Be Appealed :" the Supreme
Court.-Action Test Of Constitu-
tionality Of 1910 Act.-Law Pro-
vidcS Six Per Cent Reduction.
Judge DeEore has handed down
on order sustaining the magistrate
in the cotton tare case. brought to
test the consttutionality Of the Cot:
ton Tare Act Of 1910. Messrs. Lyies
and Lyles. attorneys for W. G. Null
lins. Of Columbia. who was charged
with violation Of the Act. state that
they will appeal the case to the
Supreme Court.
The Cotton Tare Act provides that
per cent. Of the bale OF cotton
sold shall be deducted for tare.
Heretofore the amount Was twenty
pounds. as is the case In other
States.
l. Tha; the Act Of the Lecisla-
ture deprived the defendant OF the
equal protection Of the laws.
>. That the Act Of the Legislature
deprives the defendant of his lib
er,y and property without due pro-
cess Of law.
Judge DeVore Gays as to the first
| point: 1T is well settled that the
Legislature has right 10 make dif-
ferent classes. and so long as all
members Of the same class are treat
&c s.ike. il the classification be reas-
enable. the Courts will not declare
such legislation unconstitutional.
Citing case. Judge DeVore conclud-
es: The defendant. being engaged
In the bushes Of buying cotton.
comes within the classification made
by the legislature. and. in my opin-
| ion. is not deprived OF the equal pro-
/ lection Of the laws
On the second point Judge De-
Wore says that the test seems TO be
whether the regulations OF the Legis-
ilatu-e are reasonable. IF they are
unreasonable" he says. then such
Legislation is unconstitutional: If
they are reasonable. then. in the
exercis- Of its police power.
the Legislature has the right
TO enact the law. In the absence Of
a statut. on the subject. the reas-
onablenesS OF a contract Is ques-
ton for the judiciary. but II there
is legislation on the subject. and the
Legislature had the power to pass
such a law. then the statute con-
trolls.
Citing several cases. Judge DeVore
concludes:
The cotton buyers and cotton
sellers differ as to the amount Of
|
ed on a bale OF cotton. The Legis-
lature interviewed and established a
scale Of cotton tare. and. so far as
am able to judge. the legislation is
reasonable.
Cotton is one Of the chief pro-
ducts Of this State. There are a
great many persons and great deal
OF property and number OF organi-
cations engaged in the cotton bust
ness.
What the tare is IN this State.
what it is in Liverpool or what it is
in New York. are not matters for this
court 10 consider. This Court will
presume that the Legislture took
into consideration the conditions con-
trolling the marketing Of cotton and
enacted the proper law regarding the
tare But this is not new QueS-
ton in this state. A law fixing tare
on cotton seems 70 have been enact
ed as far back as 1916.
Cotton buyers have a great many
customers. many Of whom are ignor-
ant and ! can readily see how such
legislation as this may be both wise
| and beneficial.
The judgment OF the magistrate.
is therefore. affirmed by Judge De
Vore.
". G. Mullins. a cotton buyer Of
Columbia. was arrested few weeks
ago for violation Of the Act. and the
case was test case to determine the
constitutioaality OF the Act. II is
stated that $1.S00.000 is involved in
the Act II will be carried 70 the
Supreme Court. The State Farmers
Union is interested. and all dealers
in cotton are watching the proceed
ing with great interest.