OFFICEOFTHEAmORNEY GENERALOF T=XAUBTIN I ,.' ~"~,.:.~Yy?=+ ~Honort3bleii. Pat Edwards Civil Distript:Attoraey Dallas' County Reoor$a Bulldine; Dallae, Texas Dew Mr. Edwax'ds: Attentfon: Mr. wsrren 5. co&, Assitittmt District ;Rttorne~ 'Opinion' No.~@-7234 Re:. Whether or not a persqa over fihty ‘years of age,.llving lki a clt of 10,f)OQpopulatioh s Is 9

entit ed to vote wheiihe

, h&s not renewed his exemption &W3f ’icate as requi*d by ii. B. MO.344, 49th Legislature. Webeg'to <novlbdge. tipeoelpt of ”your lett$i-+opound-

-“lng the following for. a legeJ.',:?piaion eom this depar@nent~.‘
~”

.. ( : ‘fl have this pr.dposltf&. Kiaarjr render an

opinioh’op seoure sam~f ’r-, the ,Atto%mayGeneral.

‘Our oonstitutiori pro&d~tlia;t; fXil~&iiom oh 60 esrs of ajp ee,ex$mpt from the payment ~Ofpoll ax.4 sirm3

% tl$at time the Leglslature~haa -m,, pzovlded for 'tlie!Pt+ O~~eotQr to issue td ~tiQ8e persens so exempt,‘a ymqanent voting certifleate.

“Rowduiring the last session of our Le _-
a law xas passed requQ?ing that exemptiona fis’latkre, n elties of over.lO,OOO be renewed @e$weenOatober 1st an$” -. ‘, January Slat eaoh yeas.

“My’a%tentioa hai be&%‘:oaLLled.to3hi faot that quite a number of these perm&ent e%e!uption holders failed. to z-mew their voting oertifioates, beaause

~’ of illness or being out of the city, or other reasons.

“ken these people vote under the conetitutiolial right, or will they be ‘denied on the,leglslative a&, as 8-6 forth above?. I Honorable H. Pat Edwards,. page 2

--

“Kindly give methis opinion at the earliest possible date 80 th%itI ma$correctly answer those whoseek this information. -- The above is itself your quotation from the Inquiry of Mr. Ed Cobb, Assessor and Oolletstor of Texes for Dallas County.

Wethankjiou for your brief of dlaousslon lendcltatlijn of authorltles acoompanylngyour request. On.aocount of the imminent Importance of your inquiry, wehave given it a most careful examination. .~ _ It Is the opinion of this dep*Xrtment that a person vho has herEtofore received a permanent exemption certlfiaate because of age may aot’be denied the rlght~ to vote at any election held in this State merely because he has failed for any reason to ‘renewhis certifl6,ate under the requirement of H. B. Bo. 344 passof: at the regula;r sesalon of the 49th Legislature. The reasons which lead us to this concluelon ,are a8 follows: -_ The question & &first Impression In thli.State, we~beIleve, and our,ooqoluslon,ls-reached upon an orlgFna;Linvest&atlon of. the pertinent cone'titutional and etatutory.pr~vl.~lone.~ ife start out with the 1ndlapitabIe proposition that the rlghf; %f ’ &fA-age, although it be timatter of~oonstitutione,l and statutory " gwe, ~3.n

tie'senee that it2s subjeo% to the re Is neverthelesf3 one,+ the most PundamentaIrlgh s & ulationa of law, of a cltlaen a+.’ t&T8State. Itideed,’ it M an essential rlgbt of a oil&en In any demooratla form of government., The right to vote, therefore, KU;. not be denied t7j Sny c ’lti$en. ifnl.ess such right is forbidden In clear and unmlstakabJe terma Bf law.
deolared: In ‘&otlon 2 of Article XVI of the 6on<utlon, it is .:.:,

“The plvllege of free &fY’rage ahal& be pr?atected by laws regulating ‘ele&tlons and prohibiting untler edequate pmx3fXes a31 undue Gifluence therein from power, bribery, tumult, or other improper ‘$ee,otloe.” Seation-I, of ArtloZe VI of the Constitution, dealing with suffrege, namesthe classes of pers6ndnswhoshall not be Gllowed to vote. By no stretoh of the imagination could it be held to include the class of persons under consideration.
‘a lows : Seotlon 4 of Article VI of the Constitution 1s as ~fol-.. Honorable Ii, Pat Edwards, page 3

“In all eleations by the people the vote shall be by b‘allot and the Leglslat-We shall provide for the numbeFlng of tickets and makesuch other regulations as maybe neoessary to deteot and punish fraud, and preserve--the purity of the ballot box, and the Legislature mayprovide by law for the registration of all 

### voters In aJ.1citlis'e containing a population of 10,000 inhabitants or more.” This Section cleexly clothes the Legislature with power to provide reglstratloii laws for voters, andfurther to makesuoli other regulations “as maybe necessary to detect and punish frau;‘

. er?dpreserve the purity of the baUot box.” Noone would deny ,t%- power of the Legislature to do these things; but it has never undertaken.to pas8 general registration laws, andH. B. No.:344 does not purport to be; nor 18 It a law for detecting or punishing fraud, op m8aeMQ.q the purlty.of the ballot box pursuant to the ~ovliilone of Sectlon.4. Onthe contz=y, the bill Itself shows tZflrmatD?ely that 14s purpose and eSfeot UC+entlrelyother than the constltutiona;l purpo8,ee.

The emergency .olause bf ii. B. No. 344 fairly and,oor- ,, ‘rectly states the motivating purpose ef the Aot, 8+8 follows:,.. -_ -* .a“The fat .that there are at this time’ thE i&mea Y“’

.’ “’

.of t&mypeople wh6e,re deeeased, ti whohave LremoQed from the State af Texss upon%he poll tax exemption list of all the aountl.es .throughout the State, pl8aee’ a.heavy burden upon the Tt$xAssessors and Collectotis of.each of the sev&aZ bounties of Texas’, creattie an emergency aad an wyative pub110 tieeoeselty?.hat the
~’ conetitut1oM.l rule pequlrlng bill8 to be reed on three several days In eaah house be 8tipendet$‘, et cetera. t-1. !Phebill there%%& purgozfedly’ and actu&ly was for the / relief OSthe oounty offloere WXE@, and ‘not .ln any sense ‘to deteot.or prevent fraud, or to preserve the purlt of the ballot ,box. These wholesome objeotlverr ,aould.not 9 pose big be threatened by Zhe appeezance of (41aged voter holding a @rmanent old-age exe%ptlon certlfioate, but not further holding an annual renewal exemption thereof.

. ..-_

Again, Ii. 8.’ I?d. 344 58 undoubtedly in form mendatory UP-VII the holder8 of old-ege exemption oertlfioatee to have the a&e renewed aunually, but it Is algnlfiaant that au& bill no-

. where provides, any ahara&er of &maZlty for a violation of ’ that,, .-‘:-:- . 1’...1.\W’~, , _,,-_ _

: + Honortila? lit Pat Edwsxds',~ Pag9h

__ duty, and espeecisJ.ly does it nist impose upon such person the severe penaZ.tyof disfranchisement.

Forfeitures and penalties s?e'ndt favored in law. They are avoided if pos~s'ible. Moreover, In construing a legislative i%t, WCare not permitted to go-'beyond the four corners of the Instrument or bill Itself. Wemust find the intentfon of the Legislature, and therefore ’%he law, within that instrument. Speoiflcallg, we are not permitted to read into this act a forfeiture or penalty that 1s no ‘t contained thereln, either by express language or necessary implication. Of' course, no suoh forfeiture or penalty is expressly contained in the bill, and neither is one to be regd iiito.lt upon any conception of lmplloation, for clearly such ti lmpllcatlon of forfeiture la not necessary, for ~thesot as above show aleesly supplies 831 that is neoesssry to support the aoX a8 a vs3U-act -- t&at is, 'the relief of the county of?& cer namsdin the emergeaoy clau'se. -- _- H. B. No. 3% is .aiiamendmentof Arti& 

### $?gfS8.& the statutes providl.Ag for a pemanent oertlfleate- of e.xemptlons..

.. .ktSele 2968a (Vernon's aod%fiaatlon of~the statutes exemption oertifiaates-'to **persons** whodo not reside i deals with n a city of 10,000 InhabltaAts OFmore) an8 spe6ifl6ally provides "aAd **~O,BUO~** pbi?sonwho&as failed or refused to obtaiA's.uoh aertifl+te of,ex~ emptlon from the paymeat ,of.'+ polltajr shall be sUbwed %o vote.!',

It Is signlf'laant, theref~ore, that H;'B. Wo. 

### 344 eon-. t&AS A0 such ~O+S~C& WeXre not fre6 to implg~~auoh a penalty, which the Legislature, presumably, IAtetitioAally omitted. \ Theie is nothing in Aitiale 3004 of.the Reiilsed &ii S+,atutes oontrmy to 0~ oonelusloni That &?tiole was ens&ed -- Tn

### W05, pe-enacteb'in the oodtiioation of 1925, an&h&the ssme meaningat those times a8 it hi& at this eime -% no tiore,:.aAdno leas. It has acquired AO newnieanu from the eAa&t@nt--of 8; B.-* No. 

### 344. It ii+yi5t in full force s.&$ord$ngto Its true meaning, and every requirement'of lc*oan be met'fullg %&.sny person to whom there has been issued a pernwwnt oldzage exemption oe.rtiiioate, '~"i without the renewaXthereof at any time.

he ease of Texas Power &Light Co. V. Brownwood'PubiiC Service Co., 111 S,. W. (2) l225, has b6eA urged UPOA US a5 beingscontrary to the views herein expressed.* Tw oaae ie,not ' susoe tible of atly suoh oonstruotlon. That o&se construed 8ebt Cone- of Article VI of'the Coiistitution heretofore quoted by USA, andmoreover is LA perf'ebt harmonypith our viiSw5. As we have heretofore shown*;.

the Legislature in the enactment of ii: B. No, 

### 344did not attempt to exieraise those powers, 

### %a dXdaot in anyHonorable H. Pat Edwards, page 

### 5

event diriky nor .lndlrectly, ex&ssly nor by Aese5sary lmplication, impose the drastlc"penslty of disfkanohisement for a f+ailure"to observi3 the requirement for annua: I renewal5 of an existins: permanent exemption.

._

The prlnoiple that a mandatory **statute,** with no p?naZLtg attached, is in reality only a direotory statute is not ngwIn our jurisprudence. For a hundred years there has b&in a msndatory constitutional provisitin requiring re-aijportionment of 

### ahtricts in the State, which mandatory requiremSnt has been more frequently violated than observed. Again, someyesxs ago, it'wlll be reoalled, there wa8a **StatUtO~ provision**  that where husband 'tid wife were divorced upon grounds of.oruelty, ~neittier should mat+ytithin a ye- thereafter. Such a statute w&9mandatory in foti, but it did not further visit the peAtity of IAVtiidity upon a marriage oontrsoted.I.n violation thereof by eltPi@ party,, and dLdAtit therefore IA legal effect Porbld the consummafion.of such a re-mesrlsge.

FlAaliy, it will be seen.-Artiole 

### 2968a5 ameAded-byH. -8. no. 

### 344;requires all w-exemptioti kertlficates to be ob-! tained before the fira% day of Februasy of the yew whensuch voter shall haffe become entitled to suoh exemption, but it does **not** fix **asy t&e**  'whenslich **oertifioate** shall be-renewed or7rels5neJSo that; at the very **utmost** 

### It Could be,obta%Aedn E-7 fore the hdlder offered to vote,

If it should be that we @e wrong IA all we-have said 5.5to~the COAStN&iOA of R. B. Ro. 

### 344,nevertheless we 8;re'of the opI.nion.the Act is void in toto, 'in that it violates Seotion ~~-;31~tiole III'of the ConsXitutioA With respect to the title c'

. The title i8 affii%atively misleading. The subjeot n&d in the title clearly embraces &l persons holding poll tsx {exemption oertifioates, wheress the ml as passed per'talns only to a aertaln class of such psrstins,.that,is to say, perwns living w33iEZ *of 10,000 or more population; Onelnt*eHted In the subjeot;inatter, uijon i%?adingthe title of the bill, might favor an sU-embraeliig amendment,and yet oppose Oneapplying only ta a pat of the exempted persons.. 'Moreover, the title is,absoPtely false; l.t 1s belied by the bill'as passed.

__ 

### 134 s.w. Mstrlct, Landrumv. CeAtenAlaS Rursl High School Mstrict Ho. 2,

f~?)~2):;, by the Court of Clvll Appeal8 for the Third

: "No rule is -&ter established than the one that where a title or capEion-*of an sot spealfies the pa?tl- &Las field of the amendment,and--that It is to cover. orestate a ps&koul83 pu%pose to m&e a change Vn a prior statute-. the emendmentis 3Smlted to the makingHonorable Ii. Pat Edwards, pege 

### 6

of the speolfio changes designated in Its title, aiid precludes eny additional, contrary, or different amendment then that stated in the title. Rutle e v. AtkInson 101 S. W. (2) 

### 376;Wslker v..State, 11 S. W. (2) 3 1076;' Sutherland v. Board of Trustees, 

### 261. S. W. 489.' Wethink this well-settled rule applies to the case before us. See:

City of Fort,Wcrth v. Hsrr$s, 177 3. W. (2) 308, 180 s, w. 131; Abernathy County Line School District v. New Deal County Line District, 175 9. W. (2) 446; Kinohelo v. State., 175US.W. (2) 593; Walker v. State, 

### 116-p. W. (2) 

### 1076;.‘ Lowery v. Red Cab Company,262,s. W. 

### 47; : Ds Sfiv1a.v. State;~ 229 S. W. 542; M;.K. &T. Ry. Coy--v. State, 113 S.~W. 916; ,..

..:., Gulf Production Compsny~v.Osrrett, 24 S.'W< (2) 389. Praetorla3m v. State,'184 8. W. (2) 294, by Jdge Baugh" .of the Court of Civil App&Qs for the Third Mstrlct, declares: ,- -- I,

. . . A somewhatstrlo%er rule of conformity of the title tb the subjeot-matter 1eglXlated upon in the body of~the act Is applied to emendmeiitsthan to titles of original aat. See: Doeppensohmidt v;’ International & C. *. R. Co.,.101 3. W. 1080; and Rutledge v. Atkinson, 101 5. W. (2) 

### 376.

. . . .” ~~uli' Insurance CO. v. James, State Treasurer, 185 S. W. (2) 966, de&ares:

,I The rule of liberal oonstruotion Will not be foliowe: to the extent that Itwill relieve the Legislature of the neoessgty of dlaolosing the reel subjeot of the Act in.the title thereof, nor will It be extended so as to hold acts velld, the titles of *'. <.:. which are deceptive or misleading as to the real oontents of the Acts."RonoPab1e H. Pat EdwekMi page 7

There 83.eother 'perlous 0onstltutiona;l puesti'dns which mlgiSbe raised, but in vigx of our d33poslt~on OZthe matter, It beoomee unnecessasg to discuss the same.

Wetrust that wha$wehave s&id sufficiently answers your inqriitiy. Very truly yours Al'TORNE!f

0RmA.L OFTEXAS -. /s/ Wm. J. Fanning

OS-MR:fb .BY __ .Wm,3. Fanning Asslstr+nt /s/ O&e Speei’
BY \ Ooie Speer Asststant APPROVED JUL.‘~~, 1946 ‘,S.

. /s/.O@rlos I?,,Ashley FIRSTASSISY!ART

ATTORNEY

QENE& i _- This opka2on oonslde~~d,~and approved In limited aonferenoe;

.:.:
.

,

.