The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1899-12-12

It is under and by virtue Of this act
that the respondents now hold office.
But no such objection can be made
to the Act of 1862. nor Of course to the
creative Act of 1860, and the argument
against the act under discussion, that
1t does not recitc these acts In full In
undertaking to modify them therefore
still remains. A mere statement, how
ever, of that argument as 1t seems to
us sufficiently refutcs 1t. II Is nothing |
less than this: That every act of as
sembly which, by the Introduction OF
new provisions, undertakes to change |
or modify the provisions of previously |
existing acts. must reCite every part OF |
each of them that is in any way modi- |
fled or changed. Clearly this Is not the |
law, not only as a matter of reason but
by authority Of the decided cases.
Such a position would virtually eX-
clude all so-called supplemental legis-
lation, because there is none which does
not i'm some respect amend or modify |
that which has gone before. The mis-
take is in confusing amendatory and
I supplementary legislation. The
! act in controversy is abundantly vindi-
! Gated by the authorities and there is no
! occasion for pursuing the discussion
/ further Supplemental In form and so
! declared to be I'm its title, 1t enaCts new
provisions. modifying the existing law
of the poor district in several particu-
J lHTS, Dut dllONlllE an VI II ll'N ~ ll'''T
fed to stand In this there Is nothing
which offends against the Constitution,
| and 1t is only by the most strained
| construction that II could he made to
! do so. Entirely within the form Of or
/ dinary legislation as 1t Is, 1t is difficult
to see how the ends to be accomplished
could be effected in any other way than
that which was pursued.
SOME MINOR DIRECTIONS.
Certain minor objections, however,
! are still further urged against it; for
| instance, that il changes tne name of
the district, thing forbidden as it is
said by the seventh section of Article
of the Constitution which prohibits
special legislation, Changing the
names of persons or places" We do
not think a poor district is place
within the meaning of this section.
But suppose for the sake of argument
it We're? The changing of the name is
a very inconsiderable part of the act
and might be struck out without any
particular detriment to it, An act may
be valid in part and in part not, and If
| the courts can save any OF 1t they are
bound to do so. Were this part of the
act therefore in ContraventiOn of the
Constitution, of which we have not the
slightest idea it still would not affect
| the rights to which the REALTORS are en-
titled under the rest of it,
Nor are we persuaded that by the
power of appointing to vacancies on
the board, given to the judges of the
! quarter sessions of this county in the
third and fourth sections of the act,
= the prohibition of the Constitution is
violated which fOrbids special legisla-
tion regulating the practice or juris-
E dicton of, or charging the rules of
[ evidence in, any judicial proceeding or
inquiry before courts, aldermen, JUS
| tipAc pf tha -
We should be glad to escape the extra
e judicial duties imposed upon us by this
and other similar statutes, but the
power of appointment so given is an
administrative function not unlike
: | many others of the court of quarter
sessions, a probable relic of the petty
, sessions held by the justices of the
I quorum in the mother country; but un-
. | fortunately for the argument of cOun-
sci as well as for our own relief, ii has
7 nothing to do with the practice of the
court or its general jurisdiction, and we
canuOt therefore condemn ii as uncon'
stitutional because of it's special OF
| local character.
Z As to the relator. Alva Daley, judg-
| ment is given on the demurrer in favor
of the respondents: but as to the re-
| latOrs. Henry Carter and MILO Gard
4 ner Judgment is given against tn" re-
I spondents with costs and peremptory
| mandamua awarded.