Stat v. Patterson

• Decision Date: 05 December 1887
• Citation: 98 N.C. 660,4 S.E. 350
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: Stat v. Patterson.

4 S.E. 350

98 N.C. 660

Stat

v.Patterson.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 5, 1887.

Statutes—Validity—Enactisg Clause.

Under Const. N. C. art. 2, § 23, which enacts that "the style of the acts shall bo, 'The general assembly of North Carolina do enact, ' " Priv. Acts N. C. 1887, c.113, § 8, prohibiting the sale of spirituous liquors in certain parts, is inoperative and void tor want of an enacting clause.

Appeal from superior court, Cabarrus county; Claiik, Judge.

The defendant, Patterson, was charged with selling spirituous liquors in a district wherein the sale of such liquors was alleged to be prohibited by statute. He was convicted, and appealed.

C. M. Bushee and Batolidor & Devereux, for defendant. The Attorney General and E. C. Smith, for the State.

Merrimon, J. The defendant is charged in the indictment with the offense of selling spirituous liquors within a territorial boundary in the county of Cabarrus, within which the sale of such and other classes of liquors is prohibited by the supposed statute, (Priv. Acts 1887, c. 113, § 8.) He pleaded not guilty, and on the trial relied upon the defense that the spirituous liquors sold were manufactured by him from the products of his own farm, and he had the right to sell the same without a license; and that the statute cited above was inoperative and wholly void because it has no enacting clause; that is, the words, "The general assembly of North Carolina do enact, " do not immediately precede in connection with the first of it, or appear at all in connection with it as a particular act. The court decided that the statute was valid without such appearance of an enacting clause, and the defendant excepted, and assigned this ruling as error. There was a verdict of guilty, and judgment against the defendant, from which he appealed to this court.

The very great importance of the constitution, as the organic law of the state and people, cannot be overstated. It is an embodiment of a system of free government of the people, affecting them collectively and individually in many respects of the highest moment to them. Every provision of it is significant as prescribing the form of government, conferring, defining, limiting, and restraining power and authority delegated by the people to officers and agents of government, and as prescribing how, when, and by whom such powers shall be exercised, and its provisions executed. The constitution, within its compass, is supreme in its nature as the established expression of the will and purpose of the people, as to state government, and a distinctive feature of it is that it must prevail, be observed, upheld, and enforced, according to its true intent and meaning, by every person within its jurisdiction, and especially by the officers and agents, whether individually or collectively, as composing co-ordinate branches of government, charged with the administration and enforcement of its powers and provisions, who, in addition to the ordinary obligations of patriotic duty, are by its terms required to take an oath to support it. It is not to be disregarded, ignored, suspended, or broken, in whole or in part; nor can any officer or a co-ordinate branch ofthe government supply, superadd, or assume power and authority not conferred by it. In this latter respect it expressly provides that "all powers not herein delegated remain with the people."

More particularly, for the present purpose, when the constitution prescribes and directs, in terras or by necessary implication, that a particular power shall be exercised in a specified way, or a particular thing shall be done by a particular co-ordinate branch of government, (as the legislature,) or by a particular officer or class of officers, and prescribes the way and manner of doing it, such direction cannot be disregarded. A due observance of it is essential, because the constitution so provides, and its provisions are not in vain or of trifling moment. It is not of the nature of constitutions of government to provide non-ess(Mitials, —useless, unimportant details, such as may be disregarded and dispensed with. As we have said, they are organic, made upon solemn consideration by the sovereign authority, and contain general, essential provisions. Details are avoided in them, unless deemed important, — essential. Non-essential details are left in the discretion of these who exercise and administer the powers of government. If this were not so, why prescribe the way and manner? Why not leave these things to convenience, and the authority charged with the exercise of the power? Why direct them? Why restrict them? And if such directions may be disregarded, ignored, suspended in some respects, then to what extent, and in what respect? If one co-ordinate branch of the government, or one class of officers, may do so, why may not another, and all, as to duties devolved upon them respectively, directly, by the constitution? The answer to these and like questions must be that requirements of the constitution shall prevail and be observed; and when it prescribes that a particular act or thing shall be done in a way and manner specified, such direction must be treated as a command, and an observance of it essential to the effectiveness of the act or thing to be done. Such act cannot be complete, such thing is not effectual, until done in the way and manner so prescribed.

To interpret the constitution otherwise would be to establish a dangerous rule subversive of it, —one that would place it to a great and alarming extent within the power, and subject to the will, of legislatures, executive...