Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1898-02-27
OPINION BY-BELKNAP, c. J.

This is an information III the nature of
quo warranto for the purpose of deter
mining the cOnstitutiOnality of the Act
entitled An Act to incorporate the Town
Of Reno,' Stats. 1897, p. 50) under which
respondents hold office.
Respondents demurred to the informa-
ton upon the ground that it did not state
facts sufficient to constitute a cause of ac-
don.
1t is first claimed in behalf of relator
that the Act is violative of Art. N, Sec.
II of the Constitution, which requires
that each law enacted by the Legislature
shall embrace but subject and the
matter properly connected Herewith,
which subject shall be briefly expressed
in the title y =" 1t is said that the Act
not only embraces the incorporation of
the City Of Reno, but three or four other
Independent subjects not indicated by the
title.
This restriction upon the Legislature
was considered III the case of the State
vs.. Silver. Q New. 23l. 1t was there said
that the design of the Constitution in re-
quiring that each enactment should con-
tain but n subject and matter properly
connected Herewith was to prevent inn
proper combinations to secure the pas
sage of laws having no necessary or
proper relation, and which as independ-
ant measures could not be carried, and
also that neither the members of the Leg
islature nor the public should be misled
by the title.
The general purpose of these provis-
ions is accomplished when a law has but
II general object which is fairly indica-
ted by its title. To require every end and
means necessary or convenient for the
accomplishment of this general object to
be provided for by a separate act relating
to that alone would not only be unreason-
able, but would actually render Iegisla-
ton impossible"
Cooley COnSt. Linn. 143.
Accordingly this Court held that under
an act entitled AN Act to provide for the
taking care of the insane of the State OF
Nevada" properly embraced not only the
construction OF an asylum, but the pro,
ceedings by which the money for it's cos
should be taken from the State Schoo1
"iu dhu III I BldSC oCdIC JULIUS oopoS-
tied and a levy of a tax for the redemp,
ton of the bonds and interest. In tina
case it was said that the different steps te
be accomplished are not different sub
jects, but minor parts of the same genera
subject, to-wit: the care of the insane.
In Harris VS.. The People ETC., the con
stitutionality Of an act entitled "An Ac
to revise the Charter of Long Islant
City, was attacked upon the ground tina
it contained more than one subject an,
that the title did not express the subjec
of the creation Of the Court of Long Is
land City whose jurisdiction was ~assaileC
Thu Court said: 1--WE think it plain tina
an act creating a municipality and givin
to it the necessary legislative, taxing, jl
dicial, and police powers, embraces bu
one subject. Every municipality to be c
benefit to it's citizens, and t. be efhcier
in its action, must have such powers to
greater or less extent. Any act whic
sets out to erect a municipality must Civ
TO it these powers or it is passed in val
1t follows then, that the separate provi
ions of the Act defining and grantii
these powers are but parts of a who
and essential to make a whole. TT
whole thing, the creation of the munic
pality is the subject of the Act, and IL
parts Of it are not separate subjects, |
separate parts Of n subject. So that Il
Act under which Long Island City W.