Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1895-10-16

not act With relation to them, asp'a
component part Ut the lnw-making
power" The legislature adjourned be-
fore the expiration OF the ten days nf-
ter the two acts had been presented to
him, and without his having In the
meantime approved or disupproved
them and filed his objections thereto,
40 they became laws. II at all. by the
sole act OF the legislature.
II the governor had approved" the
law, the approval would date back to
the passage" OF the law, and It would
date from that time; then II he does
not do 60 and does not "disapprovc" II,
does not this non.aetiop also date back
to the passage" OF the law, and Is
the law not then passed? unoues-
tionably so.
II became necessary for Judge Hurt
TO inquire as to which law was pass
ed" last, for the latest expressed will
OF the legislature upon the subject
must be the rule of action. He holds
that the civil act licensing prize,
of the legislature" and this, for the rea-
son that the criminal act passed the
house on April 10, the senate on April
"a. and was presented to the governor
on April 25. that the "civil act passed
the house April 10, the senate April %,
and was presented to the governor
April 20, and that as neither was APP
proved, their passage Will date from
the expiration of the ten days from
which they were presented to the gov
ernor, In the absence Of his disap-
proval, and that under this rule the
"clvil act was passed last,
An important fact, however is over
looked. The legislature adjourned on
April 80. and before the expiration OF
the ten days. Upon the adjournment
of the legislature under the circum-
stances OF non-approyap' and nom
al pifhAF law 10tn
acts became laws on the same
day and ''eo Instant" Then the ques-
ton arises are they grossly repugnant,
and II so. which Is the --latest express
ed viii Of the Legislature" They are
repugnant and Internationally the
Criminal act Is the latest expressed
will OF the legislature. for the reason
that the conclusion of the proceeding
which was legislative in relation there
to was when II pissed the senate on
April "a, day later than the civil
act"
Again, II It be true. as Judge Hurt
admits. and as held by the Pennsyl-
vania case commented on by Judge
Hurt that where two acts are passed
at the same session of the Legislature
upon the same subject. one being of
later date than the other, and the later
repeats a section OF the former, and
they are both presented to the gov
ernor and are in his hands at the same
time and he approves the last act first
and by so doing repeats section Of
the former act, which he subsequently
approves, so that his subsequent Gp-
prevail OF the act VIII not revive 1t;
and IL II be true that the effect of
repeal is the same whether accom-
lished by express words or by neces-
sary implication, and If 'non-approv-
al" Is equivalent to approval" then
the criminal act prohibiting prize
fights, having passed the legislature
last and repeating by Implication the
civil act licensing prize fights by the
rule laid down by Judge Hurt after
the expiration OF ten days without OBJ
! lection thereto by the governor, End
on May 5, 1895, left no part Of the civil
act licensing prize fights In existence
! to go into effect on May 3, 1895, Dnd
the governor could not revive 1t. either
| by approving" 1t or doing that which
| was equivalent thereto, and there
| fore the criminal act was the only ie-
naming act concerning prize fights.
| The proposition of Judge Hurt to he
effect that 'the act of the 'revlsers'
! in Incorporating into the penal code
| the criminal act prohibiting prize
/ fights was continuation of that act
! and not now enactment IL correct,
for "embodying in n new statute
| e-eNlsting law IL a continuation of
| that law and not a new enactment"
| 81 II, w. Rep. llSo, The embodying,
| however, by the "revlsers' in the rev
| civil code of the "license act" was not
n continuation of the license act of
disappointed the criminal act of 1891
| was constitutlonal--for the license he:
had been repealed and had no existence
at the time of the revision" 1t was
therefore n new act, and being such,
the "revisers' had no authority to
Insert 1t IN the code, and the legisla-
ture by adopting the code did not
enact 1t as law. because 1t had TO be
enacted as an Original bill.
The constitution in art. 3, sec. 40,
| and the act of the legislature of 1891
authorizes the appointment Of c'm-
mlttee to revise and arrange the
laws"
II the legislature had have author
| ICED the "reyisers" to do more than
"revlse and arrange" the laws. or
rather had authorized them to "origln-
ate" an act their act would have been
unconstitutional, for while the consti-
ture shall not authorize the appoint
ment OF a committee for such purpose.
| yet when It does say a committee to
revise digest and publish" the laws
It excludes the idea of greater author
lily. on the principle Of "expressio
! unius est exclusiO alterlus'
Had the work OF the 'revisers" been
a work strictly of revision and ar
rangement" OF the statute laws In ex-
istence at the time OF the revision"
the legislature no doubt could have
enacted them into n law under the
one title of the Revised Statutes"
but not 80 with the new law contained
! therein,
This enw law would have to be passed
in the manner required of Original"
bills. 1t Is hard TO conceive of a re-
vision of something that doesn't ex-
list, particularly when we find In Web
ster's dictionary that "revlse" oceans
to review. alter or amend" Creating
new laws is certainly not reviewing,
altering or amending" old statutes.
Mr.. Cooley in his work on Court
Lin. sec. 1870 says: Nothing is Law
simply because the legislature will that
1t should be. They must enact and cx-
press their determination to that effect
In the mode expressly pointed ont by
the constitution. which Invests them
with the power. and under all the
forms which that instrument implicitly
recognizes and renders essential"
But the point here involved has been
directly passed upon by the supreme
court OF Arkansas In the case of Vim
SAINT VS.. Knox, q Ark. 36G. and de-
\ cIdes In keeplng with the Views here