Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1909-07-11


f~ication must be or such d ma
turo as to mark the objects SO dcsig-
mated as peculiarly requiring cNclu-
sive. legislation There must be a sub
stantial distinction, having a reference
20 the subject matter Of the proposed
legislation betWcen the objects or plac-
es embraced in such legislation ana
the objects or places excluded, The
marks Of distinction on which the
classification Is founded must be such.
In the nature Of things, an will in some
reasonable degree Mt least account for
and Justify the restriction of the legls-
%lation. Distinctions which do not arise
from substantial differences. SO mar
ked as 10 cull for separate legislation,
| constitute no ground for supporting
such legislation as general
Lewis sutherland statutory Con-
struction. Vol !. + 36s.
Legislation intended TO affect a
particular class and not the public at
large must extend to and embrace ca
ually ali persons who are or may be
in the like situation and circumstan-
ces and the classification must he ma
tural aud reasonable, not arbitrary and
capricious.
Joe sutton VS.. state of Tennessee, 80
l.. H. A., $50.
If the classification IL made . . =
for the purpose Of couferring pom a
class the benefit Of some special right,
privilege. immunity or exemption,
there must he some good and valid
why that particular class should
alone be the recipient of the benefit.
If the classification ~ made . Q for
the purpose of subjcotinE a class To.
the burden Of some special disability,
duty OF obligation, there must be some.
good and valid reason why that par
ticular class should alone be subject
ed to the burden"
Stratton Claimants \ Morris Claim
ants. II L. Il. A.. 40. $50 Tenn. $40.
In state " Hammer. A. y. j.. Law.
49,, Il was urged upon the court that
q certain law did not contravene a
constitutional provision prohibiting the
OF local or special laws TO
regulate the internal affairs OF towns
and counties because il was general IN
its terms and embraced 'all of o group
OF objects having characteristics suffi-
marked and distinct to make
them a class bY Themselves In h
well considered opinion the court held
the law invalid. as IN fact special
o. it0)
PLAINLY u luw may hc general in
It's provisions, aud may apply to the
hole az group of objects having char
acteristics sufficiently marked aud i'm
purtant to make hem a class by thcm-t
selves and yet such law may be in
c-ontraNcntion Of this constitutional
prohibition Thus a Law enacting that
n every city in the state IN which
here are ten churches there should
be three commissioners OF the water
department.. with certain prescribed
luties. would present n specimen Of
a law. FOR It would sufficiently t
designate a class of cities. and would
embrace the whole of such class, and
yet Il does not seem to me It would
BE- sustained hy the court II II would
be sustained then the constitutional
restriction would hc OF no avail as
here are but few objects that cannot
be arbitrarily associated. If all that
8 requisite tor lpo purposes Of l-gis-
alton Is to designate them by some
no matter what that may he.
ehith viii So distinguish them as To-
Them ns "A distinet class Put
he true principle requiring some
hing more than Il mere designation
y such characteristics as viii seem
@ classify. for the characteristics
shich thus sorNe az a basis OF classi-
ication mast ~ Of such "a nature as
a mark the objects so designated as
peculiarly requiring special legislation
There must bc substantial distinction
a reference Go the subject mat
er OF the proposed legislation. hctv cen
he objects or places embraced i'm such
and the objects or places