The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-09-28

1 suggestion which can be referred to the expressed purpose of establishing l municipal charter
 'Tn the case of Black V. State, IA | Ala, 92, the court followed the case | of Bell v. State, supra, and held that | like provision contained in an act to 1 amend an act to incorporate the toWI | of Geneva was unconstitutional.
 'sThs following cases support the general principle laid down by Judge McCie1land in the Bell case: FIX rel Gayles, i0S Ala. 514; Bradley v. state | eg Ala. TIT; Glenn V. Lynn, S9 Ala. | sos; Mobile V. L. and N, 124 Aia.' IoS- i42; the State V. So. Ky, 116 Ala zS0i Ballentyne V. Wickersham, 70 Ala. oSS Ex rel Reynolds, 87 Ala. 13s; White V Boyin. ifS Ala. TO; Montgomery V state. Ss Ala. Al; Sanders V. state | TIT Ala. s43; Lindsay V. U. s. Asso. lzC Ala, 156; Covington V. Thompson' A4@ Ala. 111-112.
 .sThe title of the act in question may for convenience, be divided into three divisions:
 "(a) To provide for the organiaa, :, tion, incorporation, government '''iU regulation of cities and towns.
 "Ibl To define the rights, powers: dvties jurisdiction and authority or s,,cb cities and towns and or the oI- ficers thereof: ,,,o-
 "(cl To prescribe penalties Tor vlo- lattons of the provisions Of this act.
 "Ennlving the principle of these cases to the case in hand, the subject ma Sttei oF Section 176 does not relate to tne or1anization, incorporation govern, e. ond regulation of cities ana ta~rns. nor is it a right. power duty ~, . feature of the jurisdiction ana au- thoritv of cities and towns and or the osners thereof, and clearly 1t mas uo saIat tIon to the last division or the tttle
 nrescrihinR penalties for violations oI +ba provisions of this act. 4.
 "In analyzing the question WtIn the title in view, it is apparent that rne only phrase of the tltie "hlcn ~ any sort of support to the psOtit tLo titIa Section ITS Is that part oh .ne s,., JetaS have set out as division p , 'r,z @ro define the rights. powers ou- t,as ,urisdiction and authority or such S.tt.. ond towns and of the omcers tharsof' And so far from pelns right. power or duty or citS, !. noses on the other hand 9uty VpU,' .i", inc State Superintendent or Euueaeiolt ana would change the entIre sSS .ba dealing with large portlon tton nuhIic school revenue-in contra sS avIstin9 laws on that subject.
 ..It alao indirectly affects the com
 nso+ior to which the County super iRntandent of Education Is entitled un- Har Section 3555 of the Code by relleV- Sns kim of the duty of distributing so no1ch of the public school revenue as ,-o,,Id bv the proposed system be paid S,reot to tha city. It does not provide Sor tha exerctse of any function of mu- nJo,naI life nor does 1t confer any pow ar Incident to municipal government
 = '"The purpose of Section 45 of the Constitution, said Chief Justice Brick eII in Lindsay vs. U. S. Assn, 12O Ala 1se 172 Is among other things, to fair lv anprise the people. through such nuhlica tion of legislative proceedings ss is usually made, of the subjects or IeoisIation that are being considered Tn order that they may have the op- nortunity of being heard thereon by netition or otherwise if they shall so desire And further in the same case if is held that the title must be such' at least. as fairly to support or give a clew to the subject dealt with In tne act and, unless it comes up to thls standard. 1t falls below the consutu- tional requirement. ,-....,.,,
 ~The subject matter of this sectioh Q76) would never be suggested 70 tie leRislativa mind from reading or near inc read the caption of this bill; nor IS it reasonable to say that the general public was fairly apprised, from the tl- t1a oS the act. under the principles above ouoted, that a provision was cortained therein which directly at- fected and changed the duty heretotore imnosed bv law upon the State super irtendent of Education. as well as the duties and emoluments of County sup