Opinion

State ex rel. Crenshaw v. Joseph

  • 175 Ala. 579
  • 57 So. 942
  • 1911 Ala. LEXIS 428
Court
Supreme Court of Alabama
Filed
Dec 21, 1911
Status
Published
Author
Simpson
On the bench
Anderson, Dowdell, Mayfield, McOlellan, Sayre, Simpson, Somerville
Cited by
47 cases

"Under our organic law, to the executive is apportioned an important part in the performance of the legislative function. And it is entirely plain from the Constitution that the executive cannot delegate his part in the legislative process to anyone; for it is to the judgment of the person lawfully exercising the authority of the executive that the Constitution commits so much of the legislative function as it imposes upon the executive."

How later courts described this case

  • "Under our organic law, to the executive is apportioned an important part in the performance of the legislative function. And it is entirely plain from the Constitution that the executive cannot delegate his part in the legislative process to anyone; for it is to the judgment of the person lawfully exercising the authority of the executive that the Constitution commits so much of the legislative function as it imposes upon the executive."

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

SIMPSON, J.—

(dissenting.) — I hold that, even though the law may not specifically provide how the recox’d shall be kexxt ixx regard to bills which are passed and transxnitted to the Governor for approval, yet, if a record is in fact kept and preserved in connection with the proceedings of the Legislatxxre,- the court should have the benefit of that record in tracing the history of the bill. If it is true that a book is kept by the clerical officers of the Legislature, in which the recording secretary of the Governor signs receipts for bills whexx px*esented, and that book is, with the other papers required by law to be filed in the office of Secretary of State, filed in said office, said book should be admitted in evidence by the court.

I hold, also, that the record kept by the recording secretary of the Governor, showing the dates when the bills are presented to that office, and his official stamp on the bill, should have been adxxxitted in evidence. These *607 are not in the nature of parol testimony, hut constitute the official record of the history of the bill, through its various stages, until it becomes a law.

For these reasons, I dissent from the opinion of the majority of the court.

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.