OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN

HonorableWm. J. Tucker, ExecutiveBecretaxy Oeme, Fish and OysterCorm31eeloa Austin, Texas
Bear S:Lrr Opinionlo. O-38

We are pleased to Q opiaion from thle department of House Bill No. 186 of

betveen the

the south boundary tate fIighvay 4 to t of ray boundary of the city 1imltr amoron oountyt ta or the 01ty ore oanm laterde as a neotlng end propagatdng Its-vlngeddover, ehaahalataaad other @me vithln vhloh am It &all be unlsv-’ Pul at any time to hunt, teke, shoot OF kilX any kind or epeclaas of vild fovl herelnebove mant loned. '
You ask if the boundariesof the b.lqI s@.neW~ attqwted to be oreatedby this hot are suf'flaient in viev of the Pollovlng Paots.HonorableWm. J. Tuoker, Page 2

Prior to the passage by the State Highway Commission of Minute No. 16701 on September 26, 1939, Texas State Highway No. 4 was designatedas follows:

-From Texas-Oklahoma state.line

near Perryton via Perryton,Canadian,Wheeler, Shamrock, Wellington,Childress,Paducah, Guthrie,Aspermont; Hamlin, Anson, Abllene, Tusoola,Ballinger, :Eden, and Menard to Junotion and rrom a oonneotion. with State Highway No. 41 via Lula, Leakey, Uvalde, ICarrizo

Springs to a-oonnection with State Highway No. 2 near Webb Oity, and then follow State High- 'ray Nor 2 to Laredo and from Laredo~viaRoma, Rio Orande,Mission, LaFeria, Rarllngen and Brownsville to Booa Chioa."
Berore 2 is date, the State Highway Gommissionhad ordered thatjall: tate Highways over whloh are routed United States Highwayswere to be numbered and reoorded aooordingto the United S~tt%%@%lghway numbers. In the order enteredSeptember 26, 1939,:alI.

prior orders designatingState Hlghways.were stiperseded~and

canoelled. State Highway No; ~4was deslgnated as being fro@ Brownsvilleto Booa Ohica. U&3. Highway No. 83 was reoogaizedas,

being as follows:

..,. ,. wBromtho Tezas&klahoiua State Line near Perryton,via Pdrryton,Canadian,Wheeler, Shamrook,Welllngton,~~Childress, Paduoah, Guthrie, Aspermont;

Ramlin; Anson, Ablldne,~~soo~a,~Ballinger;.Eden,

Menard, Junotion, Leakey,Uvalde, Orystal City, Carrleb Springs;Webb City, Laredo, Rama, Rio IGrande,

Ylesion, Pharr, and Rarlingen t,o Brownsvllle.w 0r We are advised oifioiallythat prior to the passage these orders by the Highway Oonunission,~therw existedhighway signs displayingboth the United estates Highway numbers and the State numbera. #ollowln8 these orders the,Sta$enumber signs were disoontinued

~oh Highways in Texas which had been designated as United States highways;

Regarding former State Highway No. 4, It appears that that portionwith.whiohwe are ooneernedwas oolnoldent with U, S. Highway No. 83. 'Inoonsequenoe,by the passage of the order referred to, State Highway No. 4 from the Texas-Oklahoma line to Brownsville

was changed from State Highway of State Highway No. 4 from Brownsvilleto Boca Chioa was not a designatedUnited States Highway, It remainedState Higbwag No. 4.HonorableWm. J. Tuokbr, Page 3

: .~: ,. All of the foregalng trampbrad prior to the enaot- -m&ntaf House~BlllNo. 186 by.the Fortr-seventh Lenielatum.



## .’ At the time of the enaotment;State Higbray:No.4 ran from Brownsville to BomOhloa. It does so at this time. The boundary line describedby Seotion 3’01 House Bill No; ,186 isnot marked as State Highway No. 4; it $a-marked only as U. S. HighwayWo.,l%i If the highway now laarksdas State lilghway

No. C,,asid

which is now the offluial Stats Highway No. 4, if oonsideredas thqbouadaryline referred to.&n Seation 5 of the Act; obviously the -Pgso~iption of the boundaries

* 035ths’gamesauotuary will 

## ml. .~@$ .$a

the highway now marked as’.State Elghway No. 4 whioh ‘extends

from Brownsvilleto Ema’Chioa to be oonsidered as the bo*dary llde referred to by.tha Legislature in enaoting House Bill No.“l86? Obviously~nst. Suoh intent la oompletelyrebut&adby ,the other language employed In the statute
. Note-the ~allusion to.“the o-on ,boundary.llne.of Za’tia and Stam C.ounties to, the South boundary Llnq,of Stats sd=F SfcL’7L”;bo whare ‘said riShtiofeisap,‘bodndary:~.rinterseota the We& bountlary

bi ~the oity limits of theraltryi.~t~Brownsvi~e,~ z%z ‘~*pliasls~

0ur.s)~. .%/ lIefieenb~‘~td.‘~siny

:aeauxatr

hlgbyia$&ap,ill&

disolose Only ~bne-hQhwq~as iiiterseoting or o~e~*lnp:bh~%he mnamon :.;;.: boundary lirre~

of Zapata an6 Starr Ooanti~sir:.,:~~ferenoe to the ‘-(:~ eabmmap will further dlsolosethat the presentState ~Illghway No. 4 does not;intereect tha West ~boqn&arp#%he -olty llsit8. ‘~a~,::. of Brownsville’;

but that ,U. ‘S.Highway Be:, 83 .d6ee

1 .State

‘Uigh-~~

!r:‘_ way No. 4 intersootsthe boundary of Browncgllle.

It is ,argued

that.sinobHouse.~B~ll~I&. ‘i86’ia a pan& statute, it must be striotly,oanstllred,.that there ie insuffio- r. ,’ lent notiae to the public to.,~meet ,he,req~rernentrr

‘of,Oertainty eesent+l to valid~ity of ,suoh

~pena.1 enaotment, .-~. :’,’ From T&a&i Jurisprudenoe we quota-Thefsl&awlngt ‘?; “The intention of tha Legislature in enaoting a ‘lawis the law Itself, .tha’e,s&no6’of the law,*,and,

*the psirlt whj.oh

glves’Ibf.a*

to the enactment; Henoe. the aim and ablest of oonstruotionis to.asaertainand enforce ,%ha legislativeIntent, and not to defeat,, nullify or thwart it:HonorableWm. J. Tucker, Page 4
,

"when the intent ie.plainlyexpressedIn

- . . . a. . . . the language or a statue, xc must be given erf;;tl;ithout

attemptingto oonstrue or interpret

. On the'otherhand, when it is neoessary to oonatruean aot in order to determine Its proper meaning.,

it is settled by a host of deolsions .tha't he court should first endeavor'toaaoertain the legislativeintent, from a generalview of the whole enactment. Suoh intent having b&m aaoertained,the court will then seek to construe the statute so as to give effect to the purpose ,of the Legislature,as to the whole and each material part of the law, even though this may %uvolve a ~departure from the atrlot letter of the law as written by the Legislature. *This is the fundamentaloauon and the oardiual;primary and paramount rule of aonstruotion,

whioh~ should always be oloaely ob- -sened.aud to whldh all other rules must yield. mdeed; luthe oonatruotionof olvll enaatmenta, the, courts are expressly oomanded to *l&ok dlllgently for the intention 0r the Legislature, kesp- .:&ng in vler.at'alltimes the old law, the evil, ~dnd'the~~remedy~'*:~

'And,Chis

rule is ~equallY-auuli- :oable In the ,oonstruotien of penal~statutea. ,- .-Intent

tobe given effeot.--Uudel' the foregoing rules,when the leglalatlveintentis aaoertalned, oris pla,inly manifest, it is bindingupou the eourte and must begIven effeot if it is legally poasible'to bo so. To ignore the legislative Intent and gi+e a~statute a oonstxuotionobviously oontrary thereto, or to xefussto enforoe a statute aooording to ve Intent,when asoertained,

Is-. pieme Court to be van inexcusable dloial,~duty' and 'au unwarranteh lnt the exeroiseof lawful le~slative authority.'* (Undarsooring ours). 39 Tex. Jur. 166, i90; See also'Artlole'7, Vernon*8 Annotated Penal Code and easee alted thereunder.

Prom~MoQuillin

os Munloipal Corporations; Vol 1, 28 a., Revised, (281, P. 769 at p. '770, we quote:? *‘, ‘

.

‘L.

HonorableWm. J. ticker/Page 5

n*** If the deeoriptioeor the boundaries

. in a statute*oannot be literallyapplied on aooount of inaoouraoy,the statutemust reoelve a reaeonable oonetruotlon,ln order to oarryinto effeot the intent of the legielature. A desorlptionthat gzvea a definite looation or that le~au$f$o.$e~t for identilioatiim till be sustained.
In support of the statement- in the te8t,~oltatlon ia made to the oases of P*Pool v. State;93 Blai 378, 112.80. 59; Douglass v. Harriavills, 9 

## W.Va. 162, 27 AL Rep. 548.

-0oupled

wit&the fact that until the 

### order of September 26, 1939, the hl@may crosslug the oomnon boundary line OS Starr and 2a:pata~Countles was ofiloiallydesignatedand known as State Highway No. 4, and the further faot that ref'erbnoe to the 8tate Highway Department:~filolal map will diaoloseno other publio highway oroselng said county line, and Is oerttilnly the buly h&hwap from auoh lnterseotlonleadin& to the City,of~Brownaville,w,e think the language of the statute is no2 so~~~xiu@mta$.n as to make It impossiblet@~dstexml.ne the territory lnt&&ed~t? bb lnoluded. In tile sanotuary,and **that** this oonetruotion~'~&nporte with the manirest Intent 'ofthe statute. Thereior‘e, lt'~is our opinion that 'I' the motion oi..the4ot.:undor oonsideration

LsY~sUd; that the bonndarle#.

o$.thqL:b3.x$

sanotuary ars dsfinit@$ asoertalnable am ~' the **Ao ’**  **r,** 8houJ.d

bti:qqmstrued

as though ths,Le@~lature,hadwritten ?:, wfitsd Statea &&#kay 83" in akl plaees where:by mistake the words *State Highway 4* were actuallyused. Youa very trtily
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

BY

BWZRS A#Lltant

APPROVED AU0 22, 1941 s/ Gerald G. h@nn ATl!ORNlUGENERAL

OFTEXKi
APPROVED OPINIONCOMMITl?EE~WB CHAIRMAN