OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Bonorable Joe Xunaohik, Commlseioner 

Bureau of Labop Statistica 

Auetln, rPexar 

Dear SlPI 

. 

to this depnrtnellt, 

been received 

n enizrsnt agemy. 

for procuring employmnt. it contends that because it 5s~ chnrglng no foe Par it3 scr:‘Fces 

it fnlla within the GXCOptiO,?S cmticned in 

Article 5209, R, C. S., of Toxns, Q Q *. 
i-333 

Xonorable Joe Kunsohlk, Page 2 

Agenoy Act shall be cumulative of the Emplogment Agenoy Law. 

"In other words, the question may be 

boiled down to this proposition; Do the 

exceptions mentioned in Article 5209, R. C. 

3 apply to emigrant agents or do they 

a$&y solely to employment aGents transaoting an lntra-state bueineas? 

The "Employment Agency Lav" is set out in Chapter 13 

of Title 83 of the Revised Civil Statutes of Texae, 1925, being 

Articles 5208 to 5221, lnoluslve. 

Article 5208 deSLnes an employment agent. Article 

5209, dealing vith exoeptions to Article 5208, ma&r 

'The provlsfona of this chapter shall 

not apply to agents who charge a fee of not 

more than two dollars for registration only 

for procuring employment for school teachers; 

nor to any department or bureau maintained 

by this State, the United States Government, 

or any municipal government of this Stete, 

nor to any person, Slrm, pnrtnershlp, assoolation of persons or oorgorntion or any officer, 

or employee thereof engaged in obtain% or 

aolloiti~ help from him, them or it when no 

Sees are charged directly or indirectly tine 

applicant for help or the eppllcant for enployment; nor to farmers and stoc::raisers 

aotlng jointly or severally ti securmc 

laborers for their own use rrherc no See is 

collected or charged directly or indirectly, 

nor to any association or corporation chartered under the laws.of Texas conducting a free 

employment bureau or agency.' 

The RJ3mlgrant Agents Law" was enacted by Senate Bill 

No. 127, Aots of the 41st Legislature, 1929, Second Called Session, 

Pa&e 203. It 1s Sound In Vernon's Revised Civil Statutes as Ar- IH 

tlole 5521-8-1. 

Seotlon 1 of Senate Bill Ho. 127 provldesr 

"Section 1. The term l@.grant agent' as 

used in this Act means every person. firm, corporation or assocl8tion of persons engaged in 
Honorable Joe Kunschik, Page 3 

the business of hiring, entlclq, or sollcitlng laborers in this state to be employed 

beyond the limits of this State and 1s also 

meant to lncludo every person, firm, partnership, corporation or sssociatlon of persons 

mnintnlnm an office to hire, entice, or 

solicit laborers to be employed beyond the 

limits of this State; and 1s also moLult to 

include every person who, as on indcpondent 

contractor or otherwise thsn es zzn agent 

of n duly licensed eml@%nt scent ;>rocures, 

or undertakes to procure, or assist in procuring laborers for sn emigrant agent; and 

every emigrant ngent shall be tozmcd end 

hold to be doing business es such in each 

and every County whcroin ho, in porson, or 

throw an ¢, hires, entices or solicits 

any laborer to be employed beyond the limits 

of the State.” 

A part of Section 2 of the above Act, reeds: 

“Sec. 2. Each cmlgrsnt agent shrill, 

before opereta ln Texas, secure a Stete 

lioense as such, on spplicntlon therefor 

to the Commlasioner of Labor Statistics of 

the State of Texas. l * *.’ 

Section 3 of the s&ma Act provides: 

"Sec. 3. Any person, firm, aasociktlon 

of persons or corporntlon who shall engaze in 

the business of an emigrant esent in any county in this State vlthou C having first filed 

with the Conmlssioner of LnSor Stctistics of 

the St&to of Texas, en qplication for license 

cs emlgrsnt azont as above provided, and/or 

without having first pzld nil otcte end county 

occupation taxes end annual license fee ES providod by lav or without hevinz first sccurcd 8 

..state license as ebovo provided, or without hav1~ first filed certified CO~J of his stzts license with the Tcx Coilktor of such county 

es abovo provided, end/or dho does not file 

monthly reports es provided by this Act, end/or 

who shall engage in the business of en emigrcnt 

agent in any county In this State without first 

i 
Bonorable Joe Kunsohik, Page 4 

having designated such county as one of the 

counties in vhich he proposes to do such 

business in his original or amended appllcaI tlon to the Comlssioner of Labor Stetistlor 

of Texas, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, 

1 and upon conviction shall be punished by 

Sine not exceeding $500.00, or by lmjrlsonment In the county jail for not exceeding 

i 

six months, or by both such Sine and fm-. 

prisonment , ’ 

! Section 7 of the same Act also deals with the soope 

i 

of aald Senate Bill No. 127 but vi11 not be copied here. 

Section 8 of oald Senate Blli So. 127 provides; 

“sot. 8. The provisions of this Act shall 

bo cumulative of the cm$oymnt np,cncy 10~3 of 

the Stnte of Texa3 and the err~loyncnt a-iencx 

Laws aioreoela. shall be wnere consistent. aplicable to the movieions of this Act." 

erscoring ours} 

The Supreme Court of Texas In the case of State v. 

i Laredo Ice Co., et al, 73 3. W. 951, in construing the effect 

of a oumulatlve provision similar to that in Section 8, supra, 

raldr 

“The fourteenth section of tho act of 1899 

concernimz trusts and monoDolie3 la in this 

language!- “irne provislon3~of the fore.Toins 

sections, and tno i'ln33 3p.o ?onr.izlcc, provided 

for violations 0;' CXs act 329.X. be !ZiL en2 

construed to be culrr.llntive OS all lzvn no:r 

in force in tni3 3ix~c. Counrei fOl a::;;olloes 

earnestly contend that the effect of this ;)rovision is to consolidate and to make one lav 

of the act of 1895 and the act of 1199, and 

theroby to give exerqtion Siiom proaocution 

under the law OS 1899 to those nersons nho 

are exempted by the-provisions bf the law 

1895. The term lcrmulativc' indicates en 

harmonious cocxistcncs 2lld CJ-OZl~?~tiCXt, 

mthcr -trP.n a con3oLia3;lcn oi iz3 iXi1773 

to one. An amendment to a statute is not 

Batlye' because it repeals and takes 

the plaoe of the part of the law that It 

OS 

22 
Ronorable Joe Xunschlk, Page 5 

amends, thereby becoming a part of the lav 

amended. It Is true that, In seeking the 

meaning of language used In a statute, it la 

proper to consider all of the acts of the same 

legislative body vhich are in aarl materla. 

because 'It is supposed that there has been 

no change in the leglsintlve intent e.nil purpose,' unless it Is manifested by some crnge 

of language. Sutherland, Stat. Constr. ~283. 

But this 13 a rule of construction, merely, 

and does not constitute each act a-part of 

every other act on the same sub<ect. Laws 

which are uald to be in par1 &&&a ai%- 

parts of a common system or polic , but are 

not one and the same lav. * I l * 

(Underscoring ours) 

An examination of Senate Bill MO. 127 shows that it 

vas evidently passed to regulate and be applicable to instances 

where the prospective employee or emlfy-ant is hired, entticed or 

solicited to be employed vlthout the State of Texas. The Employment Agents Lau seems to have been designed to regulate and 

be applicable to instance s where the prospeotive or‘ployee is to 

vork in the State of. Texas. There la some slmllarlty in several 

provisions of the two Acts. 

Another rule of statutory construction which we believe applicable in answer- your proposltloa is stated in the 

case of State v. Standard Oil Co., 130 Tex. 313, 107 S. W. (26) 

550, where the oourt says: 

"We are to interpret the language used 

ln a nanncr to make all relevant laus harmonlous, if we can, and in a manner consistent 

with the public policy of the State, as vell 

as in the light of thG evila sought to be 

remedied by the legislation before ~6.~ 

See also 39 Texas Jurisprudence 171 and cases cited. 

The court in 32x-r v. aaldwln, (Dist. Ct.) 57 Fed. (2d) 

252, in upholding the Zm~1oymen.t ,Qents Lnw agsinst an .unconstitutionality attack leveled ct the provisions of Article 5209, e3 

being arbitrary exceptions, made this pertj.nent statement, which 

vo think la applicable% 

"The farmer or stockrs:ser or the free 

bureau make no charge. Tney seek immediate 
Hdorablo Joe Xunechlk, Page 6 

assistance. There lo every reaoon why 

there should be no fraud or overreaching 

in their solicitations or placlsgs. The 

difference between a gratis service and a 

pay service Is rocognIz~ed In such CEDES as 

Llndsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co., 220 

U. 3. 61, 31 Sup. Ct. 33;, 55 L. Ed. 369, 

Annotated Cases 912C 160, (and citing many 

other cases) + l *. The State has a rIr,ht 

to confine its restrictions to those classes 

which It deems need them. If the lav hits 

an evil vhere it Is most felt the prohlbltloa need not be all-ombraclng,” 

we can find nothing In the definition of an erd,-rant 

agent or ‘the other provIsIons of Senate Bill ilo. 127 vhich 

vould Indicate that tho Act was paosed to apaiy to tine type of 

lnstltutlons referred to in your inquiry. If the Instltution~s 

true purposes are those of a non-groflt, charItabie, religious, 

benevolent and educational Institution then its “business 

could hardly be said to come within the provisions 01’ Section 

1 of the Emigrant ASoncy !.ct. ThiS WC thLr& 13 true even though 

In carryinS out Its real and primary pmgo3o3i-3, it incidentally 

rendered somo service which an ~iZiSr6ilt ASant mISht perform. 

In vlev of the history of the servicon rcndcrod by such Institutions, which the Lqlolature xdst have knovn at the time of the 

gassage of the Act, and the fact that the Legislature In the 

Emigrant Agents Act,’ itself, provldcs in Section 8 that “the 

provisions of this Act shall be cumulative of the Bm~lo~~ont 

hoency Law of the State of Texas end the 3nlo7rant A?~-~c~ Lmr 

a F oresaid shall ho where consistent, aiz@icrbia to tna 2rovlsions 

of this Act,” ve do not bclkzve the Leglsleturz Intended to 

change its previously dociared public policy so as to Include 

such Institutions strictly within the 3copo of Scnato Bill Xo. 

127. Uo do not balLeve the evil aimed at and soilSht to be re,ulated by the provisions of Senate Bill Bo. 127 Included the helpful and incidental services rcndurad by a non-?rofYt, charitable, 

religious, educational and benevolent Institution. Zieither CFi.rl 

ve say that tho provIsIons of Article 5209 of the Emplo:mcnt 

Agent Act are Inconsistenti vlth the definltlon and provisions of 

the Emigrant Agents Act. 

We believe that with due regard given to the exceptions 

as contained In Artlole 5209 as being applicable t; the provisions 

of Senate Bill N$. 127, the “Employment Agents Act and the * “EmIgrant Agent a Aot oan be construed harmoniously together and can 
Eonorable Joe Kunsohik, Page 7 

I be properly administered and enforced so as to regulate the 

evils sought to be oontrolled by the respective Acts. 

For all of the foregoing reasons, it is our o2inlon, 

and you are so advised, in answer to yaw question, that the 

exceptions of Artlole 5209, Revised Civil Statutes, 1925, are 

applicable to and are proper exceptfons to the provbdons of 

Senate Bill Ho. 127, passed by the Acts of tho &lnt Legislature, Seoond Called Session, 1923, Page 203, and the institution inquired about, Under the faots Ln your inquiry, vould 

not be required to obtain an “Emigrant Agento!’ license. 

I Tie trust that ve have fully answered yov.r inquiry. 

Yours very truly 

ATTORNTGY GlZNFXAL OF TEXAS 

i I 

i