Page:Fletcher v. Oliver.pdf/3

RhTerm, 1868.] But, admitting the validity of the last act, it does not repeal the former. Implied repeals are not favored, and a general statute does not repeal a special statute by implication. Baker v. Milwaukee, 14 Iowa, 214; Luke v. State, 5 Fla., 185; Beridon v. Barbier, 13 ''La. An., 458; Mobile, &c., v. State, 29 Ohio, 573; Cass v. Dillon, 2 Ohio, N. S. 607; Haywood v. Mayor, &c., 12 Ga., 404; Town of Altoona v. Lasalle, 12 Ill., 339; McRae v. Wessell, 6 id., 153; McFarland v. State Bank, 4 Ark.,'' 410.

The Legislature may grant exemptions from taxation. State v. Crittenden county, 19 Ark., 368.

The clause in the Constitution, as to uniformity of taxation, applies only to the State tax, and not to taxes for local purposes. Washington v. State, 13 Ark., 752.

W. I. WARWICK, and GALLAGHER & NEWTON, for appellee.

The county court has jurisdiction over the streets of the city of Little Rock, concurrent with the mayor and aldermen, the control delegated to the city not being exclusive. Baldwin v. Green, 10 Mo., 410; 9 Mo., 526; People v. High Com., 15 Mich., 347.

The exemption in the city charter applies only to eight days' labor imposed on the citizen by statute, and not to property tax, the two being distinct. 9 Cowan, 437; 15 Johnson, 358; 3 Barb., 439.

The tax levied for building bridges, and the term "highway" does not import a bridge. Acts granting special privileges must be strictly construed. Angell on Highway, sec. 40 and notes; Blackwell on Tax Titles, 478, 483; 2 Black., 722; 12 Wheat., 438; 12 Johns., 290; 10 Wend., 547.

Subsequent statutes, making different provisions, repeal former ones. 7 Johns., 477; 4 Cow., 556; 11 Wend., 329; 16 Barb., 547.

"Laws shall be passed taxing by a uniform rule," etc. Art. 10, sec. 2, ''Const. See 5 Ohio State Rep.,'' 589.

In this regard the Constitutions of Ohio and Arkansas are