Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1939 )

aRALc c. MAm Auc~T~NIx.TEXAS i3onotixi8~ E. s. Forsm8R CotitfAuditor Jefferson' CoGnty Bmlnmnt, Ta!xa8. Dear sir, opinionRum%ero-1986 Be: Relationof E B. 688, 46li1 LagJp R.SI, tc'H.E.~S,4Srd bg., 4th C.S.,1934. You huvd reque&ed our opinionawto whetheror not JeffersoaCounts till be entitledto reaeivethe benefitsoutlinedin Rouse Sill 688, pasmd by ihe Foripsixth bgislatum;lSS9, $%visn of the provisionscontainedin Houea ,+ll 9,passedwtha Forty-thirdlegislature,Fourth Cal?ed Smdoa, 1954,with p&iaular r6fsianoeto Section5 thereof. ihse El11 9 oi tie 43rd Ingislatnrewas a speoielaot:a+horitiag Je@erscm Couirtyto aon&uot + fres.bridge,and.approaohes +heteto,aorom the Reaes River latw~eaJeffsraonalld Orange aountiesoa State Rig- 88'7. Tha provisionta whioh you rsfer, aad upon lhiah @a reqwst our opinion,. is as follows: .Ceotioa5. &, lopa or grantrhioh may be obtainedunder the provisionsof this A& for the donstruotioa of &ah bridgs'ud approachesthetito shall'b, O+ beocpas, a debt again& the State of Texas, or againstfhe stete Rim Collmi#Si~,mt the~8aidFnQ8 irhiahmng oe voted ad iss& by's+d'aounw unddr the provi~i0a8 of this A@ shall oonstitutathe debt and obliat,ion solelyof Jefferson:CouxQ. It is here* deolaredto be the legitlaeve that the 'bondsissuedby JeffersonCouutyas providedhereinshall not be 86-d W of Wd off kt.Wm Board of CotmtJr aad RoadsM&riot Bond, Indebfednesa, or out of any funds used by said Board to.r&ire Qo&t?f and Road Distriatbonds." It is to be noted that Rouse'E&ll680 peesedbp~tho Fbrty-&xth Legislaturefn a geaerallaw as boatrasted'with Rouse ItiliSoof tie f&w- ted faglolature,4th called 8&8ion, whiah wcis.8speciallit.' Ronheri in Rouse Bill 688~donu find a~ languagelrhioheither erpr&uel~~6rim- pliedlyrepeal8%m p&or Aoh under nhiah Jeffei%o*Coutity was authodcod to aonstruotthe bridgeaoro88 the Heohee~Bivar. In order to datern&a the proper answer to yoy question,and we think upon that d&termination depeadsthe-right'ofJeggersonCow- to pnrticipatein the beaefitsof House Eill 688, we musf'o~aolude whether or not P generallti~enaotedsub- sequeatto a speciallawwill operatea8 a +epeal of said speoiillaw passedprior thereto. Hon. E. 8. Foreman, page 2 (O-1366) W6 think unquestionably that the weight of authorityhold8 that a geaerallawwill not b6 oomstru6dto repeala speciallaw on the 6ame sub.. jeot, and (~8 w-a8 8t8tedin ttreoa88 of &ti V. State,106 8.hT. 448, a sp6oiiLgtatuteis not repealedby a gSn6ralStatutebless the intent to RI&3031 18 lWMif86t. This rule was mr6 fully disou888diathe case of AndransV. City of Beaumont,113 S.W. 614,whereinthe court held thaf speoiallegislationor local law8 are not repealedby a later generalaat, Ud686 SpOoia~y mentionedth8r8imor tie88 such -66 18 mpde 68uIifO8t from the pl8In provisionsof the gmer81 law. Ilbfind the languageof the 00ux-b ~U&I stroigerin the aa Op SullivanV* City of Galvestoa, 17 8-H. (2d) 479, Pffirmadby the Ccmnissionof Appeals in 1931, 34 S-W. (2d) 808, whmereia the aourt said: “A 8peaialhw 18 not r8pea'ldby SUb6qUSnk a&S paSSed bg at&Other bgis- latureanless expressly80 statedor alearlyintended." In Section13 of Rouse Bill 688 it18 provided: “This Aot shall Ireoumlativu of all othervalid hw8 OS the ntbjeat,bat ia the eve& of a aonplfataqf pruvisioa of.thi8Aat and any other Aat, the ~ovi6ion8 of this Act shall &w8vaile" 16 do not find aqy oonfliotlmtw668 38 tw Aot8 under oonsideratioa, aor do w6 find amof the pmvisioa8 of eithersot rspugnantto each other, and ia th8 languageof the Court of CivilAp&wals in the 8as6 of St. kmi8 B4M RailnayCo. V. Xaroofiah,221 S.H. 582, affirmedia 185 8.H. 31, the court StateS, la partic %16x1 a latsr Aot i8 6ile& a8 to aa old8r law, ths prssumptioais that it8 8&&ued operationwas intendedunlsss th6&~pressata contradiotioa80 pos- itlw that the purp6ssto rsp6alis Iuanifsst.* Havingreaohedths aOllO&l8iQ~ that ao aotiliotexis'bsbetnre6a the tno Acba hersin oonsidered,and that the languageof &I88 2ill.688amnot be $.aterprekdto effecta repeal of ths prior law, w6 are of th8 opinion that JeffersonCouaiqis not eatitledto reoeiw th6 bellsfitoutlinedilt .RouseBill 688, 46th LegislaOere,B.S. 1939. verp truly your6 CRC-8cegw ATTQRNEIGEAWAL OF TRXAS APPROVEDRev 1, 1939 By /s/Clarenae E. Cr6w8 ~&iii$i%iiEfi?iF TFX48 Clar6nceE. crow6 APPROVBD: Assistant opinionCdttse,By BWB Chniw~