Case Information
*1 572
OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN nonorahle SldntQ Latham memty of state Austin, Xexa~ mar Lir. Lathapt
ch s&l1 have .passeit WtFi *3
It is well settle& that the tiae rllowed by canetlt~~tion%l prariainn f+oz- conslderetion of bill% ie With the (IOT0XTka!=, rho imy w&Ye a xiattbr Or priVi1e@ h%E I%$!$b 20 the full per+it ZWId veto Or RppPWe fJ bill within the allotted period. ;Uant v. State, 32 Ark. 241, 7s 8. W.769, 106 A. Sti 8. 34, 2 Ann. CRR. 33, 88 L. B.A. 71; Piokle T. m%a, 86 Tex. 3X?, 24 9. w. 26U# 26 u. C. L. 698.
While the Gmwnw a bill in hle retains and under hia oontral titNn the 8Ilottad papsemion pwiocl, he may moonelder hle eotion tbereonr ?mt ihem he apprwee ti etgns a MU, end depodte it with the 6wretwy eS $tote, the ef'ficial rspooitorJ uf t&o OSfiOiSl sate e.f the Ornemer am3 of all lam, he kae 'pl8oed the bill b aad Us control anl rapl net "i themaeiter rea%ll the b&l fWtm the Sdoretery oi stat&s offioe for Pua%hw ootmldwation. Peon20 T. McGullou~
(IU.) '71 Ur B. 6~8~,,pLoJcLo Y. ReColl, c. L. m2g 119 c. 3. mt. supra; au ii. Very truly rows