Case Information
*1 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
Honorable Wm. J. Tucker, Executive Becretaxy
Oeme, Fish and Oyster Corm31eeloa
Austin, Texas
Bear S:Lrr Opinion lo. O-38
We are pleased to Q
opiaion from thle department
of House Bill No. 186 of
betveen the
the south boundary 4 to tate fIighvay t of ray boundary of the city 1imltr amoron oountyt ta or the 01ty ore oanm later- de as a neotlng end propagatdng Its-vlnged dover, ehaahalata aad other @me vithln vhloh am It &all be unlsv-’
Pul at any time to hunt, teke, shoot OF kilX
any kind or epeclaas of vild fovl herelnebove
mant loned. '
You ask if the boundaries of the b.lqI s@.neW~ attqwt- ed to be oreated by this hot are suf'flaient in viev of the Pollov- lng Paots.
Honorable Wm. J. Tuoker, Page 2
Prior to the passage by the State Highway Commission of Minute No. 16701 on September 26, 1939, Texas State Highway No. 4 was designated as follows:
-From Texas-Oklahoma state.line near Perry- ton via Perryton, Canadian, Wheeler, Shamrock,
Wellington, Childress, Paducah, Guthrie, Asper-
mont; Hamlin, Anson, Abllene, Tusoola, Ballinger, :Eden, and Menard to Junotion and rrom a oonneotion.
with State Highway No. 41 via Lula, Leakey, Uvalde, ICarrizo Springs to a-oonnection with State Highway No. 2 near Webb Oity, and then follow State High-
'ray Nor 2 to Laredo and from Laredo~via Roma, Rio
Orande, Mission, LaFeria, Rarllngen and Brownsville to Booa Chioa."
Berore is date, the State Highway Gommission had ordered thatjall: tate Highways over whloh are routed United 2
States Highways were to be numbered and reoorded aooording to the United S~tt%%@%lghway numbers. In the order entered Septem- ber 26, 1939,:alI. .prior orders designating State Hlghways.were stiperseded~and canoelled. State Highway No; ~4 was deslgnated as being fro@ Brownsville to Booa Ohica. U&3. Highway No. 83 was reoogaized as, being as follows: ..,. ,.
wBromtho Tezas&klahoiua State Line near Perryton, via Pdrryton, Canadian, Wheeler, Sham-
rook, Welllngton,~~Childress, Paduoah, Guthrie, Aspermont; Ramlin; Anson, Ablldne,~~soo~a,~Ballin- ger;.Eden, Menard, Junotion, Leakey, Uvalde, Orystal City, Carrleb Springs;Webb City, Laredo, Rama, Rio IGrande, Ylesion, Pharr, and Rarlingen t,o Brownsvllle.w
We are advised oifioially that prior to the passage 0r these orders by the Highway Oonunission,~therw existed highway signs displaying both the United estates Highway numbers and the State numbera. #ollowln8 these orders the,Sta$e number signs were disoontinued ~oh Highways in Texas which had been designated as United States highways;
Regarding former State Highway No. 4, It appears that that portion with.whioh we are ooneerned was oolnoldent with U, S. Highway No. 83. 'In oonsequenoe, by the passage of the order referred to, State Highway No. 4 from the Texas-Oklahoma line to Brownsville was changed from State Highway of State Highway No. 4 from Brownsville to Boca Chioa was not a designated United States Highway, It remained State Higbwag No. 4.
Honorable Wm. J. Tuokbr, Page 3 : .~: ,. All of the foregalng trampbrad prior to the enaot- -m&nt af House~Blll No. 186 by.the Fortr-seventh Lenielatum. .’ At the time of the enaotment; State Higbray:No. 4 ran from
Brownsville to BomOhloa. It does so at this time. The boundary line described by Seotion 3’01 House Bill No; ,186 isnot marked as State Highway No. 4; it $a-marked only as U. S. HighwayWo.,l%i If the highway now laarksdas State lilghway No. C,,asid which is now the offluial Stats Highway No. 4, if oonsidered as thqbouadaryline referred to.&n Sea- tion 5 of the Act; obviously the -Pgso~iption of the boundaries * 035ths’game sauotuary will ml.
.~@$ .$a the highway now marked as’.State Elghway No. 4 whioh ‘extends from Brownsville to Ema’Chioa to be oonsider- ed as the bo*dary llde referred to by.tha Legislature in en- aoting House Bill No.“l86? Obviously~nst. Suoh intent la oompletely rebut&ad by ,the other language employed In the stat- ute . Note-the ~allusion to. “the o-on ,boundary.llne.of Za’tia and Stam C.ounties to, the South boundary Llnq,of Stats sd=F SfcL’7L”;bo whare ‘said riShtiofeisap,‘bodndary:~.rinterseota the We& bountlary bi ~the oity limits of theraltryi.~t~Brownsvi~e,~ z%z ‘~*pliasls~ 0ur.s)~. .%/
lIefieenb~‘~td.‘~siny :aeauxatr hlgbyia$&ap ,ill& disolose :.;;.: Only ~bne-hQhwq~as iiiterseoting or o~e~*lnp:bh~%he mnamon boundary lirre~ of Zapata an6 Starr Ooanti~sir:.,:~~ferenoe to the ‘-(:~ eabmmap will further dlsolose that the presentState ~Illghway
‘~a~,::.
No. 4 does not;intereect tha West ~boqn&arp#%he -olty llsit8.
of Brownsville’; but that ,U. ‘S.Highway Be:, 83 .d6ee 1 .State ‘Uigh- ~~ !r:‘_ boundary of Browncgllle. way No. 4 intersoots the
It is ,argued that.sinob House.~B~ll~I&. ‘i86’ia a pan& statute, it must be striotly,oanstllred,.that there ie insuffio- r. ,’ lent notiae to the public to.,~meet ,the,req~rernentrr ‘of,Oertainty eesent+l to valid~ity of ,suoh ~pena.1 enaotment, .- ~. :’ ,’
From T&a&i Jurisprudenoe we quota-The fsl&awlngt ‘?; “The intention of tha Legislature in en- aoting a ‘law is the law Itself, .tha’e,s&no6’of the law,*,and, *the psirlt whj.oh glves’Ibf.a* to
the enactment; Henoe. the aim and ablest of oonstruotion is to.asaertain and enforce ,%ha
legislative Intent, and not to defeat,, nullify
or thwart it: *4 Honorable Wm. J. Tucker, Page 4 , "when the intent ie.plainly expressed In - . . . a. . . .
the language or a statue, xc must be given er- f;;tl;ithout attempting to oonstrue or interpret
. On the'other hand, when it is neoessary to oonatrue an aot in order to determine Its prop- er meaning., it is settled by a host of deolsions
.tha't the court should first endeavor'to aaoertain the legislative intent, from a general view of
the whole enactment. Suoh intent having b&m
aaoertained, the court will then seek to construe the statute so as to give effect to the purpose
,of the Legislature, as to the whole and each
material part of the law, even though this may
%uvolve a ~departure from the atrlot letter of
the law as written by the Legislature.
*This is the fundamental oauon and the oardiual;primary and paramount rule of aon-
struotion, whioh~ should always be oloaely ob-
-sened.aud to whldh all other rules must yield.
mdeed; luthe oonatruotion of olvll enaatmenta,
the, courts are expressly oomanded to *l&ok dlll- gently for the intention 0r the Legislature, kesp- .:&ng in vler.at'all times the old law, the evil,
~dnd'the~~remedy~'*:~ 'And,Chis rule is ~equallY-auuli- :oable In the ,oonstruotien of penal~statutea. ,-
.-Intent tobe given effeot.--Uudel' the fore- going rules, when the leglalatlve intentis aaoer- talned, oris pla,inly manifest, it is binding upou the eourte and must begIven effeot if it is leg- ally poasible'to bo so. To ignore the legislative Intent and gi+e a~statute a oonstxuotion obviously oontrary thereto, or to xefussto enforoe a stat- ve Intent, when ute aooording to pieme Court to be
asoertained, Is-. dloial,~duty' and 'au
van inexcusable the exeroise of law- unwarranteh lnt ful le~slative authority.'* (Undarsooring ours). 39 Tex. Jur. 166, i90;
See also'Artlole'7, Vernon*8 Annotated Penal Code and easee alted thereunder.
Prom~MoQuillin os Munloipal Corporations; Vol 1, 28 a., Revised, (281, P. 769 at p. '770, we quote: *5 *‘,
? ‘. ‘L.
Honorable Wm. J. ticker/Page 5
n*** If the deeoriptioe or the boundaries . in a statute*oannot be literally applied on aooount of inaoouraoy, the statute must reoelve a reaeon- able oonetruotlon ,ln order to oarryinto effeot
the intent of the legielature. A desorlption that
gzvea a definite looation or that le~au$f$o.$e~t
for identilioatiim till be sustained.
In support of the statement- in the te8t,~oltatlon ia made to the oases of P*Pool v. State;93 Blai 378, 112.80. 59; Douglass v. Harriavills, 9 W. Va. 162, 27 AL Rep. 548.
-0oupled wit&the fact that until the order of September 26, 1939, the hl@may crosslug the oomnon boundary line OS Starr and 2a:pata~Countles was ofiloially designated and known as State Highway No. 4, and the further faot that ref'erbnoe to the 8tate Highway Department:~filolal map will diaolose no other publio highway oroselng said county line, and Is oerttilnly the buly h&h- wap from auoh lnterseotlon leadin& to the City,of ~Brownaville,w,e think the language of the statute is no2 so~~~xiu@mta$.n as to make It impossible t@~dstexml.ne the territory lnt&&ed~t? bb lnoluded.
In tile sanotuary, and that this oonetruotion~'~&nporte with the manirest Intent 'of the statute. Thereior‘e, lt'~is our opinion that 'I' the motion oi..the4ot.:undor oonsideration LsY~sUd; that the bonndarle#. o$.thqL:b3.x$ sanotuary ars dsfinit@$ asoertalnable am ~' the Ao’r, 8houJ.d bti:qqmstrued as though ths,Le@~lature,had written ?:, wfitsd Statea &&#kay 83" in akl plaees where:by mistake the words *State Highway 4* were actually used.
Youa very trtily ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS BY
A#Lltant BWZRS
APPROVED AU0 22, 1941
s/ Gerald G. h@nn
ATl!ORNlUGENERAL OFTEXKi
APPROVED OPINIONCOMMITl?EE~WB CHAIRMAN