Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1902-02-04

does not, OF course, necessarily repeal
the old law. But even a repeating act !
the provisions of the re-
pealed statute, in the same words, is
construed to continue them in force
without intermission; the repeating
and re-enacting provisions taking eff
feet at the same time. So, it was
held, that, where an act repeating an
other which provided for the appoint
ment of certain officers, instantly, by
pealed act, the repeal was rendered
imperative, the former law left in
force, and the officers appointed I'M
der the same, whose terms of Office
had not expired, remained in Office.
So the repeal of general corporation
law by a statute substantially re-en-
acting and extending it's provisions,
does not terminate the existence of
corporations formed under it, but is
to be regarded as a continuance, with
notifications, of the old law. The
principle has been applied also to a
revision which repealed the acts col
lated and consolidated, but immedi-
ately, in it's own provisions, re-en-
acted them literally or in substance
SO that there was never a moment
when the repealed acts were not prac-
tically in force. So, the repeal and
| re-enactment, in a revision of laws,
Of statutory provision authorizing
! a town to make a certain bylaw was
held not to affect the validity of the
bylaw. And it has been applied to
criminal statutes, so as to permit a
conviction for an offense against the
re-enacted old law, even where the
re-enacting law undertook to repeal
it; the re-enactment being construed
a continuance"
Sutherland in Section 1877 of his
said work, says: Laws are presum
ed to be passed with deliberation, and
with a knowledge of all existing laws
on the same subject. If they profess
to make a change, by substitution, OF
new for old provisions, a repeal to
some extent is thus suggested, anC
the extent readily ascertained. Thus
amendment is frequently made by en-
acting that a certain section shall b.
so amended as to read as follows
then inserting the substituted prov
ision entire without specification o
the change. The parts of the forme
law left out are repealed. This inter
ton is manifest. There is a negativ
necessarily implied that such elimins
| ted portion shall no longer be il
: force. The re-enacted portions ar
combinations and have force from
: their original enactment"
: And in Section 161 Sutherlan
says: Where two statutes in par
, materia, originally enacted at differ
ent periods Of time, are subsequent
r incorporated in a revision and re-e1
: acted in substantially the same lans
e uage, with the design to accomplis
l. tended to produce, the times whe
). they first took effect will be asce
l. tanned by the courts, and effect wi
o be given to that which was the late
h declaration of the will of the Legi
o lature, if they are not harmoniou
G An existing statute is not to be co
al sidered as original because it is Ell
e, bodied in a revision, and therefore
e not to be construed on the theory tn
none of it's provisions have been in (
5: feet prior thereto. The appearance
al such a statute in the form and boz
at of revision has no other effect TIL
e, to continue it in force"
sh The note to page 1877 of Volume
ne American Decisions, is as follow
IN What effect re-enacting the gene
n provisions of a statute has upon t
~. exceptions to such general prov
- Continued on Third Page