Opinion

State Ex Rel. Richards v. Moorer

  • 152 S.C. 455
  • 150 S.E. 269
  • 1929 S.C. LEXIS 239
Court
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Filed
Oct 12, 1929
Status
Published
Author
Henry
On the bench
Stabrer, Judge'Townsend, Messrs, Cothran, Beease, Bonham, Townsend, Henry, Chiee, Watts, Carter, Wieson, Si-Iipp, Sease, Rice, Mauedin, Dennis, Johnson, Grimbaee, Ramage, Featherstone, Mann
Cited by
63 cases

The opinion

Mr. Circuit Judge Henry

(dissenting) : In concurring in results in the opinion filed by Chief Justice Watts, we only wish to remark that two errors or mistakes have been made — one by the legislature, the other by the Court:

(1) By the legislature. In its effort to confer a great benefit upon the State by road building, in tying two plans together, to wit, the Staté and district plans, it has formed a

knot,

which, if cut, must be done by the exercise of the exclusive prerogative of the legislature. The knot makes the so-called Act inoperative for that reason. The will of an executive has to be exercised before the so-called Act can be made effective. The legislature has overlooked a very simple principle in physics — that two equal bodies can

*566

not occupy the same space at the same time. The very meaning of

an- Act

is something done, accomplished, finished.

(2) The Court’s error is in the discovery of a political division of the State that is not limited by the provisions of Article 10, § 5, and outside of the pale of the Constitution, resulting in a riot of bond issues, thereby leaving the taxpayers the minority without protection, the only purpose or necessity for a Constitution.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.