Your request for an opinion with respect to the above subject matter is as follows:

"I desire your advice upon the following matter: Article 4476 R.C.S.,'1925, was passed by the Legislature in $923 and pro- vides that anyone manufacturing or sell- ing Self-rising Flour must label the Same so as to show the ingredients therein. In 1943, the Legislature passed '$enate'Bill No. 121 which has to,do with the manufao- ture of flour and bread and provides for the enrichment of flour and bread. The publishers of the annotated statutes of the State of Texas have brought Senate Bill No. 121 forward as Article 4476 R.C.S. The Senate Bill now known.as @- tide 4476 does~ not, by its terms, repeal Article 4476 R.C.S.,,1925j as passed by the Legislature in 1923 and several ques- tions are, therefore, presented and upon which I desire your opinion. (1) whether Article 4476 R.CiS. (the law passed in, 1923) was repealed by implication, I am of the opinion that it was not ,and that the,law passed by the Legislature in 1923 as well as the law passed by the Legisla- ture in 1943 should be construed together and that both of them are now in effect.

(2) whether if Article 4476 as passed by the Legislature in 1923 was repealed, it is now lawful to manufac*re and sell *2 Hon. Edgar Hutchins - Page 2 (V-212)

Self-rising Flour, provided such flour complies with Senate Bill 121 as passed by the Ikgislature in 1943, that is that such Self-rising Flour oontains not only the self-rising ingredients, but is also enriched as provided by said Senate Bill."

Senate Bill No. 121 of the 40th Legislature at its Regular Session, does not expressly repeal Arti- cle 4476 of the Revised Civil Statutes, 1925, nor does it purport to be an amendment of that article. On the contrary it is a complete Act within itself, declaring in its emergency clause *that there are.no state laws regulating the manufacture, baking, mix, compound, sale or offer for sale for human consumption of flour and bread as defined herein", etc.

Of course, if there is any irreconcilable oonflict between Senate Bill 121 and Article 4476, there would be a repeal by implication to the extent only of the oonfliot. Both laws should therefore stand and be oonstrued together, giving effeot to each of themunless there be found an irreconcilable conflict.

In view of what we have said, it becomes unnecessary to answer your sec~ond question.

Article 4476 of the Revised Civil Statutes of Texas, 1925, was not repealed by Senate Bill No. 121 of the 40th Legis- lature, Regular Session. Both laws stand and should be construed together unless there should be found an irreconoilable conflict, in which event the latest ex- pression of the Legislature would prevail.

Yours very truly, s.EJBymlA~ms AyFmxGEmw ,

Ooie Spe' Assistant 0S:wb