Williams v. StateWilliams v. State
- Reporters:
- Before:
- Manning
While tbe different sections’ of tbе Be-vised Code should be so сonstrued as to make them, whеn it can be done, harmonize with one another, to bold that one section of it must be interpreted by reference to every other, with as much critical severity as if they were sections of a single ordinary statute, would be establishing too strict a rule on tbe subject. It is wеll known that many acts were рassed after the adoрtion of tbe original Code of 1852, that were supplementаry to, as well as many that were merely amend-atory of its provisions. Of tbe former sort was tbe act of tbe 16th of February, 1867, which is incorporated as section 4061 into the Bevised Codе. Previously to that date, it bad been provided, as set forth in section 3760, that if a person, convicted of an offensе, did not pay, or secure tо be paid, tbe fine and costs which he was adjudged to pаy, he might be imprisoned; and the durаtion of his imprisonment was to bе determined by the amount of the fine as therein prescribed. By the statute embodied in seсtion 4061, the unpaid costs werе also to be considered in determining the length of time the convict should be sentenced to imprisonment or hard labоr. One of these sections does not take the plaсe of the other, as the entire enactment on the matter to which they relate, but thе later one is supplementary to the earlier; and in Caldwell v. The State, at the present term, it has beеn held that section 4061 was not in violation of the constitution.
The judgment of the court below must be affirmed.