The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1891-07-09
1T IS INVALID.
THE ALIEN LAND LAW APPEARS TO
BE INVALID BECAUsE OF DE-
FECTIvE CAPTION.

FECIlNE CAfl1ONs
The alien land law is undoubtedly
one of the most prominent subjects for
discussion throughout Texas today
and that discussion will not be de-
creased, when it is known that The
STATESMAN, in it's efforts to throw a
little. more light on the subject, has
found a hole in the bill which will let
the daylight through it with but little
obstruction.
The constitution, in providing for
the amendment or reviving of laws,
contains this requirement.: THAT no
law shall be revived or amended by
reference to its title, but in such case
the act revived or the section or sec
tions amended shall be re.enacted and
published at large"
Section 80 of the constitution also
provided that no bill shall contain
more than one subject, which shall be
expressed in its title"
All bills properly enacted must COM
ply with one or the other of the fore
going provisions, and any bill which
ganders through both houses of the
legi> lature, and having successfully
lodged those two mandatory constitu
tional sections, struggles. out before
the people claiming tn be full fledged
law, evidently travels under false
! colors.
Look at the alien land law, which is
| lust now attracting so much attention.
The title reeds this way:
"Chapter SO. s. Ii. BIS. Nos. AZ and
| 1877. An act to amend title there,
articles nine and ten, and to add arti
Giles 10a. lob, Zoe, 10d, Zoe, 10f, log and
1Oh, and to repeal all laws in conflict
herewith"
Section one of the bill reads this
way:
'Section 1. Be it enacted by the
Legislature of the State of Texas:
That title III, and articles and 10 be
amended, by the addition OF artl-
Giles 10a, lob, 19c, 1Od, l0e, lOf, lug
and lob so as to hereafter read as
follows"
Rather indefinite when looked at in
the light of the constitution. No man
could tell by that title what was to be
amended, and the initial section
wouldn't help n out OF his difficulty
either. 1t might be an attempt to
modify the laws of the Modes and
Persians, or an effort to amend the
title to the third political party for all
that could be learned from the cap
ton.
AS an independent act, the Alien
Land Law is clearly invalid, for 1t does
not state it's subject in its title. as the
constitution says it must do If 1T would
stand as an independent law.
AS an amendatory law its validity is
so questionable that no one clearly
understanding the facts will hesitate
| to admit it. It's validity as an aInenda-
tory act dept nds entirely on the clear
ness with which the law it proposes t }
amend can be identified, and just how
this is to be done cannot easily be
seen, for it is not done In the title OF
| the bill. where the constitution says it
should be.
or course the friends of the measure
will declare that the b IL is iniended to
amend title III, articles 8 and 10 oil
the Revised Statutes of the State of
Texas, but unfortunately for the Allen
Land Law their explanations Will not
appear in the printed pages or tn
general laws of the Twenty-secon
legislature, the bill itself is silent on
the suject and the amended act is so
entirely different from the original ar
ticles that no ordinary detective could
swear to their identity.
| There's your Alien Land Law. Now
what are you going to do about 1tf