Case ID: kan_70/html/0877-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam:\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The State of Kansas v. Joseph Hahn, Appellant.
    
    No. 14,244.
    SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.
    Constitutional Law —Dependent Children — Act of 1901 Valid. Section 8 of chapter 106, Laws of 1901 (Gen. Stat. 1901, § 4205), relating to the protection of dependent children, is not in conflict with the provision of the constitution that "no bill shall contain more than one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title.”
    Appeal from Wilson district court; Leandee Still-well, judge.
    Opinion filed February 11, 1905.
    Affirmed.
    
      
      G. G. Coleman, attorney-general, and E. D. Mikesell, county attorney, for The State.
    
      S. S. Kirkpatrick, for appellant.
   Per Curiam:

Appellant was convicted of a violation of section 8 of chapter 106 of the Laws of 1901 (Gen. Stat. 1901, §4205). The law is entitled :

“An act to define conditions of child dependency, neglect, and ill treatment, and to prescribe methods for the protection, disposition and supervision of dependent, neglected and ill-treated children within the state of Kansas.”

The only question presented on this appeal is whether section 8 is in conflict with section 16 of article 2 of the constitution, which provides that “no bill shall contain more than one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title.”

The title states that one of the objects of the act is “to prescribe methods for the protection of neglected and ill-treated children.”

We think that the legislation contained in section 8 is germane to the language of the title. No narrow or restricted scope is to be given to the title of legislative acts. (Lynch v. Chase, 55 Kan. 367, 40 Pac. 666; School District v. Atzenweiler, 67 id. 609, 73 Pac. 927.)

The judgment of the court below is affirmed.