;;-. -

AU.STIN.TEXAB

PRXCE XDANlJsL A--o- klgllst 13, 1947

Honorable Thomas.D. Broad, Secretary-Treasurer, State Board or Architectural l&aridness, Burt Bulliilng, Dallas, Texas Opinion i\lo~. V-339~ ', Re: The effect of H. B. 269, 50th Legislature upon Chapter 274, Acts of the 48th Legislature governing registration ana exsalnation or arohiteots. Dear Slr: Your request for an opinion upon the abov?, subject matter la as follows: 'we rerer to House Bill No, 269 amending and re-enacting Chapter 274, page 406, Section 1, Acts or the Forty-eighth Legislature and extending the time for regls- 'tering under this Act without examination. "The original Act provided that the practlpe of Architecture at the tine or,application be a man's principal meansof livelihood. It also provided that he be 21 years or age. House Bill No, 269 does not mention these provisions. Are wetopresumethat these condl.tibns'~are still in efred ar ,ab8sHouse Bill.fW3. 209 specificallp take the place of thh original measure and set aaide those pro*isions which are not nowmentioned in itr* Section 35 of Art&e III of the Constitution asclareer

*Nobill, except general appropriation bills which mayembrace the various subjects and accounts,‘ for and on account of which moneys are appropriated, shallHonorable Thqtnasti. Broad - Page 2 (V-339)

shall contain more than one subject, which be expressed in its title.

. o .” Under this section it has been mny times held that where the title ts a bill is aifirmstively misleading or deceptive it does not state the subject within the meaning of the Constitution, and such bill, if passed by the Legislature is inerreotive. Gulf Ins. Co. v. James, 185 s. tv. (?a) 966; Walker v. State, 116 s. ;;‘

. (2a) 1076; city 0r Cross Plains v. Raarord, 73 9. a. (2a) 1093;‘Sutherland.v. Board of Trustees, 161 9. Yr.489 (writ rei,)
lows: The title to House Bill No*269 is as fol-

“~.nact to amendand re-enact Chapter 274, page 406, Section 1, Acts of the 48th~Legislature, so that an adtlitional period is provided in which praaticing archttects whowere practicing on May22, 1931, mayregister and receive a certiricate without examination; and declaring Ann emergency.n It ~111 be noted the title specifically names,k’lerespect in which Section 1 (the only section in the origiml act)‘ls to be amended, that is, “so that aG&iitional period in which’ practicing architects whowere practicing onMay22, 1937, mayregister ma recei~ a certificate without examination.*

The act has gone beyond this expressed subject of amending Cha@ter 274 **in** that it has amendedthat chapter in other respects. In order that this nay be graphically shownwequote the relevant portions of the amendedand the amending Sections -1as fo&lows:

.’ action 1 OPChapter 274:

“That any person of good moral character who, onMay2e, 1937, was practicing architecture in the..State of Texas, as his or her principal vocation andhaa been so engage& in the practice of architeoture for a period of at least six (6) months prior to May22, 1937, andwhc shall present to theHonorable ThomasD. Broad - Page 3 (V-339)

Board of Architectural Examiners of this State an arriaavit~to that errect, shall be entitled to receivs.from said Board,

. . omittea1 ."~ (portion underscored is
Section 1 of House Bill NO. 269: "That any person of good~moral character, whoonMay22, 1937, was practicing architecture in Texas, x whowas a citizen of Texas andwas practicing architecture in the employ

~~u~~~~~c~ac~~~~n~~~~~ar~~~~~ pract ce of architecture six (6) months prior to May22, 1937, andwhoshall present to the Board of Architectural Exeminers or this State an afridavit to that erreot shall be entitled to receive from da Board.

. . .*(portion underscored is added.)
we have underscored those portlo& of Chapter 274 which have been Omitted in House Bill No. 2.69, and likewise those provisions or House Bill 269 that have been added. Normally an amendmentof a statute ten be madeby omissibn as weil as by addition. It cannot be said that the vortions omitted 'in the Drocess were insubstantial. Fi'keyare of the substance-of the law. Theywere written with meticulous care.

Weneed not decide the question of the erfeot or House Bill No. 269 upon Chapter 274 of the 48th Legislature beoause wehave reached the conclusion that~ House Bill No. 269, as passed, is void and has noerrect whatever; for which reason, of course, Chapter 274 of the 48th Legislature remains unarreotea 8s the law.

House Bill 269 of the 50th Legislature, amending Chaptar 274 of the 48th Legislature with respect to registration andexamination or archlteots Lavoid.

Honorable ThomasD. :!road - Page 4 (V-339)'

because of a misleading and deceptive title declaring the purpose and extent of the amendmentproposed. Yours ver:: truly,
,- 'ATTORNEYGENERAL

OFTEXAS

0S:wb

. BY

ATTORNEY

GE&?.@ -