Opinion

Board of Revenue and Road Com'rs v. State

  • 200 Ala. 456
  • 76 So. 388
  • 1917 Ala. LEXIS 478
Court
Supreme Court of Alabama
Filed
May 24, 1917
Status
Published
Author
Ouriam
On the bench
Ouriam, Gardner, Anderson, McClellan, Mayfield, Sayre, Somerville, Thomas
Cited by
6 cases
Authority
More cited than 73.6%

The opinion

REÍR OURIAM.

The court is of the opinion that so much of section 1 of the above act as may fix a charge upon the counties of 50 cents per day, upon the sentence of the derelict, to a probation officer to be expended upon the direction of the judge, and whether the county did or did not collect the same upon the said sentence, is foreign to the title of the said act. Fastening this liability upon the counties after the sentence, and regardless of what it may collect for the hire of the convict, is not germane or cognate to the general subject dealt with in the title of the act, and the- inclusion of same in the body of said act was prohibitive of section 45 of the Constitution. Whether or not the elimination of this objectionable part of the section will affect the balance of same, or the remainder of the act, or whether or not the rest of the act is subject to the other constitutional objections, we need not decide, as the elimination therefrom of the objectionable part of section 1, as above pointed out, is decisive of the present case. The trial court erred in awarding the petitioner the final writ of mandamus, and the judgment is reversed, and one is here rendered denying the writ and dismissing the petition.

Reversed and rendered.

ANDERSON, O. J., and McCLELLAN, MAYFIELD, and SAYRE, JJ., concur.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.