3 ( 1 ) ▁of ▁the ▁Constitution . ▁ ▁Sever ability ▁ ▁As ▁to ▁the ▁question ▁of ▁the ▁sever ability ▁of ▁the ▁prov isions ▁incons istent ▁with ▁the ▁Constitution ▁from ▁the ▁remaining ▁prov isions ▁of ▁sections ▁ 6 5 A ▁to ▁ 6 5 M , ▁Krieg ler ▁J ▁held ▁( Ch ask al son ▁P , ▁Mah omed ▁D P , ▁A ck ermann ▁J , ▁Did c ott ▁J , ▁Kent ridge ▁A J , ▁Lang a ▁J , ▁Mad ala ▁J , ▁M ok g oro ▁J , ▁O ' Reg an ▁J ▁and ▁Sach s ▁J ▁conc urr ing ) ▁that ▁it ▁was ▁impossible ▁to ▁exc ise ▁only ▁those ▁prov isions ▁which ▁failed ▁to ▁distinguish ▁between ▁the ▁two ▁categories ▁of ▁deb t ors . ▁The ▁reason ▁was ▁that , ▁in ▁order ▁to ▁achieve ▁this , ▁the ▁court ▁would ▁have ▁to ▁eng age ▁in ▁the ▁details ▁of ▁law - making , ▁which ▁was ▁a ▁constitution al ▁activity ▁given ▁to ▁the ▁legisl atures . ▁It ▁was , ▁however , ▁possible ▁to ▁sever ▁the ▁prov isions ▁which ▁made ▁up ▁the ▁option ▁of ▁imprison ment . ▁In ▁so ▁sever ing ▁such ▁prov isions , ▁the ▁court ▁would ▁never theless ▁leave ▁int act ▁the ▁object ▁of ▁the ▁stat ute : ▁to ▁provide ▁a ▁system ▁to ▁assist ▁in ▁the ▁collection ▁of ▁judgment ▁deb ts . ▁The ▁removal ▁of ▁one ▁of ▁the ▁options ▁available ▁under ▁the ▁system ▁did ▁not ▁render ▁the ▁system ▁contrary ▁to ▁the ▁purpose ▁of ▁the ▁legisl ative ▁scheme . ▁The ▁in fr ing