Summary

Portrait of Samuel Freeman Miller Samuel Freeman Miller Wilmot v. Mudge — Opinion of the Court

If a certain class of debts cannot be discharged by proceedings in bankruptcy, then they cannot be discharged by this proceeding, for it is a proceeding in bankruptcy. If all other debts may be discharged by a composition in bankruptcy, then the debtor and the other creditors get its benefit and are bound by it, while the one whose debt may not be thus discharged does not. He neither takes its benefit nor is he bound by it.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Samuel Freeman Miller Samuel Freeman Miller Wilmot v. Mudge — Opinion of the Court

When repeal by implication is relied on it must be impossible for both provisions under consideration to stand, because one necessarily destroys the other. If both can stand by any reasonable construction, that construction must be adopted. We think that which we have already suggested reconciles the two provisions without doing violence to either. Numerous decisions of respectable courts are cited by counsel on each side.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature