The comet. (Johnson City, Tenn.) 1884-1916, 1910-12-15

D|V|NES
OPINION
johnson City, Dec, 6, Is

notice in to-day's issue of The
Comet an interesting, able and inge-
nious article of opinion on the subject
of the stcow law" by Mr.. Price, an at
torney in Johnson City. | can not
agree with Mr.. Price, and, as the mat
ter is serious one, affecting not only
Washington county and others so far
as sroek is concerned, but elections
and many other matters, perhaps the
right to issu1 tonds, [ beg space TO
state the grounds of my dissent.
1t is conceded that any act of the
legislature by 81 celtic designation made
applicable 10 the people and their prop
erty right in Washington county alone
won contrayene the oonsii. ution of
Tennessee and be void as class legisla-
ton. t. avoid this, acts like the one
involved in the case of Sutton VS.. State,
II Pickle, page 696, ct seq, referred to
by Mr.. Price, were resCrted to. The
first section of the act construed and
held void in that case was as FOL
lows:
'Be it enacted by III general assem-
bly, of the state of Tennessee that in
all counties of the state having popu-
lation of 10. less than 10000 mi nor
more than $4,000, and of 500 and
over according to the federal census of
1890, it shall be unlawful tor the own
er of any hors9, COW, sheep, goat, hog,
or other live stock, to KNOWN gly per-
NIT The SANE to iun at large within
the limits ofsuch counties OF this state,
provided, ETC."
Justice CALDWELL, who wrote the opin-
ion in his usual clear and simple an.
guage, set out tn groun Is of its inval- |
idity at length and in detail On page
FOL, among ether things it is said:
'The Jaw does not apply to all coun-
ties having reputation within the
prescribed limits in 1895 (the act was
passed five years after tn, census on |
which it was based), when it was
passed, not in any future year when it
may be violated; but it applies only
to those counties having such popula-
ton In 1890 by the federal census of
that year. AS a consequence, the law
may be applicable to some counties
and not to Others having populations
within The same limits, when it was
passed, or at soma tine thereafter;
and it may also be applicable alike
to some COMMITTEES within and to Others
without those limils at the time of its
passage or subsequently. The law,
when attempted to be enforced, by rea-
son of the controlling effect of IA long
past census be found to apply to some
and not to others then bav-
ing the same population; and, 70: the
same reasoa, 1t may also be found to
apply alike to any number of counties
at the time having different popula-
tions. Or, to state the same thing diff
and more briefly, the law, as
passed, includes some counties and eX
cludes others of the same population at
the time of the off'ense; and it also in
cludes in thesame class counties hav-
ing different populations when the
offense was committed"
And, on page 703, it is further stated.
"Such legislation is obviously par
tial in The Objectionable sense, and,
being so, it is unconstitutional and
void. 1t violates Sec. of Art. of the
whichis as follows: THAT
no man shall be taken or imprisoned,
Or disseized of his freehold, liberties or
privileges, or outlaw or eXiled, or in.
any manner destroyed, or deprived
Of his life, liberty of property, but by
the Judgment of his peers or the law of
the land 1t deprives the citizen of
MS property by fine and lien