July 29, 1971



### Hon. Wilson E; Speir Director. Texas Deoartment of Puilic Safetjr Box 4087 n Austin, 

### Texas 78751 Opinion No. M-906 

### Re: The effective dates of S.B; 316, S.B. 476, 

### H.B. Dear Colonel Speir: 542, and S.B. 194.

You have requested the opinion of this office as to the effective dates of Senate Bill 316, Senate Bill 476, House Bill 542, and Senate Bill 194 which are set out below 

### in chronological order:



### 1.

2.

3. Senate Bill 316 

### amending Article 6687b, 

### Section 3, 

### Vernon’s Civil Statutes, by adding a

### new subset- -tion 4b, wa,spassed by the Senate onApril 22, 1971, and the House on -6, a record vote sufficient to make the bill immediately effective upon the approval of the Governor. The Governor approved this bill on Mag 13, 19’71. Senate Bill 476 amending Article 

### 6687b, Section 3, Vernon’s Civil 

### Statutes; passed the Senate on April 15 1971, ‘and the House on pyi19, i971, by record vote suf* ic ent to make the bill immediately effective upon the approval of the Governor. The Governor 

### approved this bill 

### on May 26, 1971. House Bill 542 amending Article 6687b, Section 4, 

### Vernon’s Civil Statutes; passed the House 

### on s 11, 1971, and the Senate on !tay 13, ly’fr by a non-record 

### voteand

-4411-‘Honorable Wilson E. Speir,’ page 2.’ (M-906)

was approved by the Governor on ~~0 :&b:i:e:o~2 go Legislature adjourns. 

### 4. Senate Bill 194 amending Article ,6687b, Sections 

### 3and 4, Vernon’s’ Civil Statutes, (and others not involved herein), passed the Senate on May 11, 1971, and the House, with amendments, on May30, 1971. The Senate concurred on the House amendments on Ma 31, 1971, by nonrecord vote. d the bill on June 2, 1971, .t effect 90 daGovernor approved :ogo into madjournment

. The controlling constitutional provision is Article III, Section 

### 39, Texas Constitution, which$reads as follows:

“No,law passed by the Legislature, ,except the general appropriation act, shall take effect or gointo force until ninety days after the adjournment of the session -at which it was enacted, unless in case of an emergency, which emergency must be expressed in a preamble or in the body of the act, the Legislature shall, by a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each House, otherwise direct; said vote to be taken by yeas $nd nays, and entered upon the journals. Senate Bill 

### 316which amended Article 6687b, Section 

### 3, Vernon’s Civil Statutes, by adding a.new subsection 4b became.effective immediately upon the Governor’s approval on May 13, 1971. It remained in effect until May

### 26, 1971, when it was superseded by Senate Bill 

### 476.

OnMay

### 26, 1971, Senate Bill 

### 476was approved by the Governor and became effective immediately. This Act amended Article 6687b, Section 

### 3. In amending Section 

### 3, this Act omitted subsection 4b. It is well settled that a repeal or revision maybe effected by amendment and substitution. Anamendatory act that recasts the language of an existing statute or section operates to repeal or supersede

-4412-l.lonorable Wilson E. Speir, page 3.’ (M-906)

any omitted provisions of the original. 

### 53Tex.Jur .2d,’ Statutes, Sec. 107. It is clear that Senate .Bill 

### 476 is intended to embrace all of the law as to “What persons are exempt from license” as set out in Section 

### 3, and it is awell settled rule of statutory construction that where ‘it is apparent that a statute is intended to embrace all of the law upon the subject with which it deals, it supersedes all former laws relating to the same subject. 

### 53Tex.Jur.2d, Statutes, Sec.~lOg; State v. Dancer, 391 S.W.2d 504 (Tex.Civ ,App. 

### 1965, error ref. n.r.e. j. In Gordon v. Lake, Secretary of State; 

### 163Tex. 392, 

### 356 2preme Court said: s. .

“A statute maybe repealed expressly

or by implication. Where a later enactment is intended to embrace all the law upon the subject with which~ it deals, it repeals all former laws relating to the same subject. ” [See Atty. Gen.Op. O-1539, dated November 7, 1939). It is our opinion that Senate Bill 

### 476 in so far as it amended Article 

### 6687b, Section 

### 3, became effective on May 

### 26, 1971, upon approval by the Governor and superseded Section 

### 3of Chapter 

### 173, Acts of the 47th Legislature, Regular Session, 1941, as well as subsection 4b of Section 

### 3as contained in Senate Bill 

### 316which was previously discussed. Subsection &bwas omitted from Senate Bill 

### 476 and is therefore to be considered impliedly as repealed by the latter act. Since Senate Bill 

### 476 clearly was intended to prescribe the only rules that should govern the subject matter set out in Article 

### 6687b, Section 3, it sunersedes Section 

### 3both as that Section existed immediately before and after the amendment to that Section made by Senate Bill 

### 316.

House Bill 542 was approved by the Governor on May 19, 1971: This Act purports to amend Article 

### 6687b, Section 4, and”becomes effective ‘90 days after the adjournment of~the Legislature. For reasons~ discussed later in this opinion, this bill wills never become effective and need not be discussed.Senate Bill 194 amending Article 

### 6687b, Sections 3 and 4, (and other sections which need not be discussed), was approved by the Governor on June 2, 1971 to become effective go-days after adjournment of the Legislature to wit: August 

### 30, 1971. Until that date, Section 

### 3as contained in Senate -4413-Honorable Wilson E; Speir, page 4. 

### (M-906)

Bil,l 

### 476will be in effect. OnAugust 

### 30, 1971, Senate Bill 

### 194which is intended to embrace all of the law on Article 

### 6687b, Sections 

### 3and 4,~bebomes effective. Since Senate Sill 19 is the latest expression of the intention of ~the Legislature ‘and is~clearly, intended to prescribe the only rules that. should govern the subject matter in Article 

### 6687b, Sections 

### 3and 4; it repeals the prior statutes. Therefore, on August 

### ,30, 1971, Senate Bill 

### 476 and House Bill 542 are superseded and annulled by the implied repeal effected by Senate’ Bill 194.

Senate Biil 

### 194 being the latest expression of the Legislature will prevai.1 over Senate Bill 

### 476which was passed Bill 

### 47%

rior to it, irrespective of the fact that Senate took effect prior to Senate Bill 

### 194taking effect. See Attorney General Opinion No. V-990, dated January 

### 26, 1950, and ExParte DeLa Jesus DeLa 0, 227 S.W.2d 212, (TexiCrim. 

### 1950). SUMMARY S.B. 

### 316 became effective May 

### 13, 1971, and remained in effect until May 

### 26, ,1971, when it was superseded by S.B. 

### 476. S.B. 

### 476which amend?, Art.,

### 66!17b, Sec. 

### 3, V.C.S., became effective May

### 26, 1971, and will remain in effect until August 30, 1971 when it will be superseded by S.B. ~1% which amends Art. 

### 6687b, Sees. 

### 3and 4, V.C.S., (and others not relevant). S.B. 

### 194 is clearly intended to embrace all of the law on the subject matter contained in Sees. 

### 3and 4 of Art. 

### 6687b, V.C.S., and.being the latest expression of the will of the Legislature repeals all former laws on the subject, to wit: S.B. 

### 476 and H.B; 542. H.B. $2 will be superseded by S.B. 194 onAugust 30, 1971, the date the latter becomes effective.

-4414-. .



### HonorableWilsonE.Speir,page5. (M-906)



### PreparedbyCharlesParrett AssistantAttorneyGeneral APPROVED: OPINIONCOMMITTEE KernsTaylor,Chairman W.E.Allen,Co-Chairman RolandDanielGreen RayMcGregor JamesMcCoy GordenCass MEADEF.GRIFFINS StaffLegalAssistant
ALFREDWALKER ExecutiveAssistant NOLAWHITE FirstAssistant

-4415-