Texas Constitution:Article III, Section 35: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Texas Constitution:Article III, Section 35 (view source)

Revision as of 11:33, July 25, 2023

No change in size ,  July 25, 2023
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 45: Line 45:
* ''Breen v. T. & P. R. R. Co.'', 44 Tex. 302, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/044_Tex_302.pdf#page=4 305-06] (1875) ("The purpose [of this section] was no doubt to prevent the 'bringing together into one bill subjects diverse in their nature and having no necessary connection, with a view to combine in their favor the advocates of all, and thus secure the passage of several measures, neither of which could succeed on its own merits.' It was also intended to remedy another practice 'by which, through dexterous management, clauses were inserted in bills of which the titles gave no intimation,' and thereby pass bills through the legislature while many members were unaware of their real scope and effect.")
* ''Breen v. T. & P. R. R. Co.'', 44 Tex. 302, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/044_Tex_302.pdf#page=4 305-06] (1875) ("The purpose [of this section] was no doubt to prevent the 'bringing together into one bill subjects diverse in their nature and having no necessary connection, with a view to combine in their favor the advocates of all, and thus secure the passage of several measures, neither of which could succeed on its own merits.' It was also intended to remedy another practice 'by which, through dexterous management, clauses were inserted in bills of which the titles gave no intimation,' and thereby pass bills through the legislature while many members were unaware of their real scope and effect.")


* ''Tadlock v. Eccles'', 20 Tex. 782, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/20_Tex._782.pdf#page=11 792] (1858) ("The terms employed in the title of the act are sufficiently significant of the subject of its provisions; and that was what the clause in the constitution intended. It could not have meant that the word 'object' should be understood in the sense of 'provision;' for that would render the title of the act as long as the act itself. Various and numerous provisions may be necessary to accomplish the one general object, which an act of the legislature proposes. Nor could it have been intended that no act of legislation should be constitutional which had reference to the accomplishment of more than one ultimate end.")
* ''Tadlock v. Eccles'', 20 Tex. 782, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/020_Tex_782.pdf#page=11 792] (1858) ("The terms employed in the title of the act are sufficiently significant of the subject of its provisions; and that was what the clause in the constitution intended. It could not have meant that the word 'object' should be understood in the sense of 'provision;' for that would render the title of the act as long as the act itself. Various and numerous provisions may be necessary to accomplish the one general object, which an act of the legislature proposes. Nor could it have been intended that no act of legislation should be constitutional which had reference to the accomplishment of more than one ultimate end.")


* ''Cannon v. Hemphill'', 7 Tex. 184, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/7_Tex._184.pdf#page=13 208] (1851) ("The 24th section of article 7 . . . . The consequences of such a restriction on legislative discretion and power, of the application of such a test of the validity of special provisions, years, nay ages, after their passage, and after rights under them have accrued, may be very inconvenient and destructive. But such results were for the consideration of the convention; and, in their wisdom, such restriction was deemed salutary and proper. It would be irrational to suppose that this provision of the Constitution is merely a directory one, which may be obeyed or disregarded at the will and caprice of the Legislature.")
* ''Cannon v. Hemphill'', 7 Tex. 184, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/7_Tex._184.pdf#page=13 208] (1851) ("The 24th section of article 7 . . . . The consequences of such a restriction on legislative discretion and power, of the application of such a test of the validity of special provisions, years, nay ages, after their passage, and after rights under them have accrued, may be very inconvenient and destructive. But such results were for the consideration of the convention; and, in their wisdom, such restriction was deemed salutary and proper. It would be irrational to suppose that this provision of the Constitution is merely a directory one, which may be obeyed or disregarded at the will and caprice of the Legislature.")
Retrieved from "https://texaslegalguide.com/Special:MobileDiff/5253"

Navigation menu