Year: 1873

cumstance that there might be this
diversity Of practice among the several
rites Of the State show the act to be
repugnant to the constitution?


There is uniformity of provision re-
specting the powers and capacities of
cities in the act in question, but there
is an Infinite diversity of practice and
of results under it.


SO IN THE CASE OF COUNTY SEATS,
the law is uniform respecting the man
ner of changing them; but county
seat may be changed by vote of five
hundred electors in one county, while
III another five thousand might be in
sufficient to effect change, because
they do not compose majority of the
voters. Is the law for that reason un-
constitutional? illustrations Of this
kind under our statutes might be
multiplied without number. Should
a law not be Of uniform operation
which required the candidates for Of
fee in the several counties of the State
to have majority of the electors, be-
cause in Brown county thousand
might elect Representative, while in
Marion twenty thousand might fall
short Of doing it?


So under the temperance law, H.
censes may issue to applicants to sell
in townships or wards in which they
desire to carry on business, upon their
obtaining number of sigpers, not
less than a majority of the voters in
such township or ward who voted for
Congressman at the preceding Con-
might in one township, it is true, be
required to obtain more signers than
an applicant in another, on account of
difference in population, but there is
perfect uniformity of provision, and
there is perfect uniformity in regard
to the number Of signers to be obtain
ed as between all the applicants in
any one Of such townships or wards
respectively. Suppose that this law


had required that in a populous town
ship an applicant should obtain hun
dred signers, and in a township sparse


~ settled, where there might not be


more than one hundred voters, an


other applicant for a like privilege


should be required to get like num-


Der, would there not be like outcry


here against the hardships of such o
case and the want of uniformity?
UNIFORMITY OF PROVISION
is what the constitution contemplated,


not of uniformity of practice and re-
suit. The latter is practically unat-
tainable. It's attainment, if practical
bic, would be the surest evidence of
the decline Of the State. Differentia-
ton, says the political philosophers,


is the law Of progress. 1t is what


distinguishes the civilization of Eu-
! rope and America from the effete civil
lization Of the East


Nor is the law under consideration


a special" one in the sense of the


constitution. Its provisions apply


equally and uniformly to all parts of
! the State. That a special result shall
| follow from it in one place that does
not in another can not affect its char


acter in this respect, no more than if


it were a general license law proyid-


ing for license to all who might apply


throughout the State, the circum-


stance that it led to great deal of


drunkenness in one community and to


little or none in another would rem


der it liable to the constitutional OBJ


lection of being special law.


/ But it is argued that it is local
| law, and that in the language Of the


learned counsel for the defendants
i quoting from the constitution, the


General Assembly shall not pass


special or local laws in any of the fol


lowing enumerated cases; that is te


say For the punish.


ment of crimes and misdemeanors
/ n T. X In all the casei


enumerated in the preceding section


and in all other cases. where a genera


law can be made applicable, all law
shall be general etc.


It is sufficient to say that whethel


a general law could be made applica
, bic, is not question for judicial de
termination unless this law come
within the classes required specifical


Iy by enumeration in Sec. % of Art
4 to be general whether others can b.
. made of general application is a politi
cal question to be determined by tn
. Legislature, as this court has solemn
' ly decided.
In reference to the objection that i


is local law for the punishment Q
! misdemeanors, | answer that this doe
| not provide, nor can it happen tha
: the same act shall be punished at on
r place in one way and in another plac
0 in another.


AS IF THE L EGIsL AZURE
E should provide that in townshi
: purely. agricultural, where horses al


an absolute necessity for prosecutin


the occupation of the inhabitants,


horse thief should be punished b
f hanging, and in city, where they al
a chiefly used for pleasure, he shoul


be punished by imprisonment for
: short term in the States Prison.
d The act which, under this law, eS
It poses the yiolator to punishment,


retailing liquor, to be drank upon tn
G premises, without license, and thel
It is no difference in the character of til
e punishment for this act in any count
e or township or ward in the State.
i Objection is also made that tl
it Boards of County Commissioners al
It left with no discretion by this la
d whether to grant or refuse the licens
r; when the requisite number of petition
: ers have signed anapplicant's petition
is The objection would apply wi,
4. equal force to the acts concerning Il
g purchase of lands for agricultural an
% horticultural fairs; the change
g county seats; the change of coun
: boundaries; and many other acts th
r. might easily be enumerated.


.e The Board of County Commission
E. ers is body mentioned but once
m the constitution, and that is in Il
t. clause which states that the Legisl
lg ture may confer upon them powers
: a local, administrative character. Tk
s, can claim, therefore, to exercise ]
to powers which the Legislature do
rt not confer upon them. 1t can gra
a. ! to them what measure of power