The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1895-05-16
AND KILLS THE FORT WORTH
AND DENVER CITY RAILROAD
SCHEME.
Does Not Approve of Their Funding
Their Indebtedness in Violation of
Law and Says so Very plainly
and to the Point.

rallrOuu up NY NSlOluS IhS ulll ulloWluS
them to fund their indebtedness. His
reason for so doing are as follows:
"Whereas, House bill No. $50, entitled
an act to authorize the Fort Worth and
Denver City Railway company to fund its
outstanding mortgage debt, and to substi-
tute new bonds therefor, and to secure
the same by mortgages upon its corporate
property and franchises, was received in
the executive Office April p, 1895, too
late to be considered and returned to the
legislature, which adjourned on April 30.
This is local or special law to authorize
the railway company named to fund all
outstanding indebtedness against said
company that is secured by mortgage
or other lien on its corporate property
or franchises and to issue bonds in sub
stitution of said indebtedness in an
amount not exceeding its present indebted,
ness so secured in no event to exceed
$4,000 per mile 1t is provided that
SAhe funding bonds shall not bear a greater
T. rate of interest than 5 per cent per annum
+ and the company is authorized to execute
< b mortgage or mortgages on its cor
X porate property, franchises and incomes
Y to secure the payment of the new bonds.
" The constitution provides that no local
or special law shall be passed unless
q notice of the intention to apply therefor
shall have been published in the locality
d where the matter or thing to be affected
may be situated at least 30 days prior
to the introduction into the legislature
\ of such bill and in the manner to be pres
cribed by law. The veto power is a
legislative and mot an executive func-
ton, and consequently it is the duty of the
executive to inquire whether local or
special laws have beer passed in the man.
ner prescribed by the constitution. The
Fort Worth and Denver City Railway,
with its principal office in Tarrant county,
is 545 miles in length and eX-
! tends from Tarrant northward
: through eighteen counties of the State.
4 Notice of the intention to apply to, the
4 legislature for the passage of the bill under
4 consideration was not published in any
other county through which the road is
constructed except Tarrant, and the legal
question whether this is sufficient was
Y submitted to the attorney general, to
Z which he thus replied:
n "You ask whether or not the notice of
the intention to apply for the law in queSS-
ton should have been published in each
county through which the road extends,
4tor whether a notice published in a paper
in Tarrant county only would be sufficient
TO meet the requirements of section 81
article of the constitution. The section
cited is as follows: No local or special
law shall be passed unless notice of in
tention to apply therefor shall have been
published in the locality where the matter
lr thing to be affected may be situated,
I, which notice shall state in substance the
contemplated law, and shall be published
at least thirty days prior to the introduce
ton into the legislature of such bill, and
in the manner to be provided. 1t VIII
be noted that the section of the cOnstitu-
tion indicates with clearness and pre-
cision that the notice shall be published at
least thirty days prior to the introduction
into the legislature of such a bill, and in
the manner to be provided by law. The
first inquiry that would necessarily arise,
has the manner of publication of the
notices of the kind in question been pro-
yided by law; if so, what is the provision
in reference thereto? Articles 313O-31,
inclusive, of the Revised Statutes of 1873,
attempt to comply with this section of the
constitution. Article 3l4z rs as IolloWs;;
Where the locality to be affected by said
law shall extend beyond the limits of any
one county such notice shall be given for
each county to be affected 1t would
seem, therefore, from the article, OF the
statute quoted, that inasmuch as the rail-
road in question extends through some nj
teen or twenty different counties besides
Tarrant the notice must be published IN
each county through which the road eX-
tends. The people of Clay, Wichita, VIII
barger and the other counties through
which the road runs will be as much at
fected by the legislation embraced in the
hill as the citizens of Tarrant county; and
for that reason think that the section OF
the statute contemplated that notice
should be given in each county. More
over, the language of the constructor. ~
self declares that notice must be puDllsn-
ed in the locality where the matter or
thing to be affected may be situated.
Where is the matter or thing to be al
fected hy this legislation situated! Can
If he said to be situated in Tarrant coun-
ty? 1t is true, the general offices are 10
Gated there, but the general ofhces are
not the matters and things mortgaged,
but its road bed, including right OF way
and all of the railroad property ana SD
ings and turnOuts-that is, assuming the
mortgage is in the usual form. Then, II
the road bed were mortgaged, 1t cannot
he said that the matters and tmngs 10
he affected by the bill are located wholly
in Tarrant county; but it must be SAID
that they are located in every county
through or into which the road extends.
Sunpose the road had no general offices
in TeXas? 1t could not be said to be q non
resident. Suit could be drought
against it in any county into or through
which the road extends; and mortgages
an II would be recorded in every county
into or through which it extends. Why
Because they affect the property describ,,
ed in the mortgage-the mater and
things affected by the proposed law.
I understand also that this construc,
+ion has been accepted by other railroad
companies asking ike favors, or seeking
any special legislation affecting thelr
railroad interests In each instance IN
which that has been sought, my lnt0rma'
ton is that they have had notices publish,
ed in every county into or through whlch
their road extended. The one in qqes,
tion presents the only exception; pun
this is only persuasive. L think the
language of the constitution Us clear.
And if it is not, it in terms authorized thf
legislature to regulate the manner OF
Giving notice. The legislature has Sc
Tegulated and article 1882 presents the
result. It says that where the, locality
10 be affected by said law shall eXtenI
beyond the limits of any county, sucr
notices shall be given in each county t1[
ho affected. The locality to be affected
or 4he matter and thing to be affected
nc the case may be, extends beyond the
limits of Tarrant county, and therefore
the notice should have been given in eacf
The bill not having passed the legis