Case Information

*1 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS OFFICE OF THE AUSTIN

Bonorable Joe Xunaohik, Commlseioner

Bureau of Labop Statistica

Auetln, rPexar

Dear SlPI

.

to this depnrtnellt, been received n enizrsnt agemy.

for procuring employmnt. it contends that be- cause it 5s~ chnrglng no foe Par it3 scr:‘Fces

it fnlla within the GXCOptiO,?S cmticned in

Article 5209, R, C. S., of Toxns, Q Q *.

i-333 Xonorable Joe Kunsohlk, Page 2

Agenoy Act shall be cumulative of the Emplog- ment Agenoy Law.

"In other words, the question may be boiled down to this proposition; Do the exceptions mentioned in Article 5209, R. C. 3 apply to emigrant agents or do they to employment aGents transaot- a$&y solely ing an lntra-state bueineas?

The "Employment Agency Lav" is set out in Chapter 13 of Title 83 of the Revised Civil Statutes of Texae, 1925, being Articles 5208 to 5221, lnoluslve.

Article 5208 deSLnes an employment agent. Article 5209, dealing vith exoeptions to Article 5208, ma&r

'The provlsfona of this chapter shall not apply to agents who charge a fee of not more than two dollars for registration only for procuring employment for school teachers; nor to any department or bureau maintained by this State, the United States Government, or any municipal government of this Stete, nor to any person, Slrm, pnrtnershlp, assoola- tion of persons or oorgorntion or any officer, or employee thereof engaged in obtain% or aolloiti~ help from him, them or it when no Sees are charged directly or indirectly tine applicant for help or the eppllcant for en- and stoc::raisers ployment; nor to farmers aotlng jointly or severally ti securmc laborers for their own use rrherc no See is collected or charged directly or indirectly, nor to any association or corporation charter- ed under the laws.of Texas conducting a free employment bureau or agency.' The RJ3mlgrant Agents Law" was enacted by Senate Bill No. 127, Aots of the 41st Legislature, 1929, Second Called Session, Pa&e 203. It 1s Sound In Vernon's Revised Civil Statutes as Ar- IH tlole 5521-8-1.

Seotlon 1 of Senate Bill Ho. 127 provldesr "Section 1. The term l@.grant agent' as used in this Act means every person. firm, cor- assocl8tion of persons engaged in poration *3 Honorable Joe Kunschik, Page 3

the business of hiring, entlclq, or sollcit-

lng laborers in this state to be employed

beyond the limits of this State and 1s also

meant to lncludo every person, firm, partner-

ship, corporation or sssociatlon of persons

mnintnlnm an office to hire, entice, or

solicit laborers to be employed beyond the limits of this State; and 1s also moLult to

include every person who, as on indcpondent

contractor or otherwise thsn es zzn agent

of n duly licensed eml@%nt scent ;>rocures,

or undertakes to procure, or assist in pro-

curing laborers for sn emigrant agent; and

every emigrant ngent shall be tozmcd end

hold to be doing business es such in each

and every County whcroin ho, in porson, or

throw an &cent, hires, entices or solicits

any laborer to be employed beyond the limits

of the State.”

A part of Section 2 of the above Act, reeds: “Sec. 2. Each cmlgrsnt agent shrill, before opereta ln Texas, secure a Stete

lioense as such, on spplicntlon therefor

to the Commlasioner of Labor Statistics of

the State of Texas. l * *.’

Section 3 of the s&ma Act provides: "Sec. 3. Any person, firm, aasociktlon of persons corporntlon who shall engaze in

the business of an emigrant esent in any coun-

ty in this State vlthou C having first filed

with the Conmlssioner of LnSor Stctistics of

the St&to of Texas, en qplication for license

cs emlgrsnt azont as above provided, and/or

without having first pzld nil otcte end county

occupation taxes end annual license fee ES pro- vidod by lav or without hevinz first sccurcd 8

..state license as ebovo provided, or without hav-

1~ first filed certified CO~J of his stzts li- cense with the Tcx Coilktor of such county

es abovo provided, end/or dho does not file monthly reports es provided by this Act, end/or who shall engage in the business of en emigrcnt agent in any county In this State without first *4 Bonorable Joe Kunsohik, Page 4

having designated such county as one of the

counties in vhich he proposes to do such

business in his original or amended appllca- tlon to the Comlssioner of Labor Stetistlor

I of Texas, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction shall be punished by

1 Sine not exceeding $500.00, or by lmjrlson-

ment In the county jail for not exceeding

six months, by both such Sine and fm-. , ’ prisonment

i Section 7 of the same Act also deals with the soope

! of aald Senate Bill No. 127 but vi11 not be copied here.

i

Section 8 of oald Senate Blli So. 127 provides; of this Act shall “sot. 8. The provisions bo cumulative of the cm$oymnt np,cncy 10~3 of

the Stnte of Texa3 and the err~loyncnt a-iencx

Laws aioreoela. shall be wnere consistent. ap-

licable to the movieions of this Act."

erscoring ours}

The Supreme Court of Texas In the case of State v. Laredo Ice Co., et al, 73 3. W. 951, in construing the effect of a oumulatlve provision to that in Section 8, supra, similar raldr

“The fourteenth section of tho act of 1899 concernimz trusts and monoDolie3 la in this “irne provislon3~of the fore.Toins

language!- sections, and tno i'ln33 3p.o ?onr.izlcc, provided

for violations 0;' CXs act 329.X. be !ZiL en2

construed to be culrr.llntive OS all lzvn no:r

in force in tni3 3ix~c. Counrei fOl a::;;olloes earnestly contend that the effect of this ;)ro- vision is to consolidate and to make one lav

of the act of 1895 and the act of 1199, and

theroby to give exerqtion Siiom proaocution

under the law OS 1899 to those nersons nho

are exempted by the-provisions bf the law OS 1895. The term lcrmulativc' indicates en

harmonious cocxistcncs 2lld CJ-OZl~?~tiCXt,

to one. An amendment to a statute is not mthcr -trP.n a con3oLia3;lcn oi iz3 iXi1773

Batlye' because it repeals and takes

the plaoe of the part of the law that It

Ronorable Joe Xunschlk, Page 5

amends, thereby becoming a part of the lav

amended. It Is true that, In seeking the

meaning of language used In a statute, it la

proper to consider all of the acts of the same

legislative body vhich are in aarl materla.

because 'It is supposed that there has been

no change in the leglsintlve intent e.nil pur-

pose,' unless it Is manifested by some crnge

of language. Sutherland, Stat. Constr. ~283.

But this ^[13] a rule of construction, merely,

and does not constitute each act a-part of

every other act on the same sub<ect. Laws

which are uald to be in par1 &&&a ai%-

parts of a common system or polic , but are

not one and the same lav. * I l *

(Underscoring ours)

An examination of Senate Bill MO. 127 shows that it vas evidently passed to regulate and be applicable to instances where the prospective employee or emlfy-ant is hired, entticed or to be employed vlthout the State of Texas. The Em- solicited ployment Agents Lau seems to have been designed to regulate and be applicable to instance s where the prospeotive or‘ployee is to vork in the State of. Texas. There la some slmllarlty in several provisions of the two Acts.

Another rule of statutory construction which we be- lieve applicable in answer- your proposltloa is stated in the case of State v. Standard Oil Co., 130 Tex. 313, 107 S. W. (26) 550, where the oourt says:

"We are to interpret the language used ln a nanncr to make all relevant laus harmonl- ous, if we can, and in a manner consistent

with the public policy of the State, as vell

as in the light of thG evila sought to be

remedied by the legislation before ~6.~

See also 39 Texas Jurisprudence 171 and cases cited.

The court in 32x-r v. aaldwln, (Dist. Ct.) 57 Fed. (2d) 252, in upholding the Zm~1oymen.t ,Qents Lnw agsinst an .unconstitu- tionality attack leveled ct the provisions of Article 5209, e3 being arbitrary exceptions, made this pertj.nent statement, which vo think la applicable%

"The farmer or stockrs:ser or the free bureau make no charge. Tney seek immediate

Hdorablo Joe Xunechlk, Page

assistance. There lo every reaoon why there should be no fraud or overreaching in their solicitations placlsgs. The difference between a gratis service and a pay service Is rocognIz~ed In such CEDES as Llndsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co., 220 U. 3. 61, 31 Sup. Ct. 33;, 55 L. Ed. 369, Annotated Cases 912C 160, (and citing many other cases) + l *. The State has a rIr,ht to confine its restrictions to those classes which It deems need them. If the lav hits an evil vhere it Is most felt the prohlbl- tloa need not be all-ombraclng,” we can find nothing In the definition of an erd,-rant agent or ‘the other provIsIons of Senate Bill ilo. 127 vhich vould Indicate that tho Act was paosed to apaiy to tine type of lnstltutlons referred to in your inquiry. If the Instltution~s true purposes are those of a non-groflt, charItabie, religious, benevolent and educational Institution then its “business could hardly be said to come within the provisions 01’ Section 1 of the Emigrant ASoncy !.ct. ThiS WC thLr& ^[13] true even though In carryinS out Its real and primary pmgo3o3i-3, it incidentally rendered somo service which an ~iZiSr6ilt ASant mISht perform.

In vlev of the history of the servicon rcndcrod by such Institu- tions, which the Lqlolature xdst have knovn at the time of the gassage of the Act, and the fact that the Legislature In the

Emigrant Agents Act,’ itself, provldcs in Section 8 that “the provisions of this Act shall be cumulative of the Bm~lo~~ont hoency Law of the State of Texas end the 3nlo7rant A?~-~c~ Lmr a F oresaid shall ho where consistent, aiz@icrbia to tna 2rovlsions of this Act,” ve do not bclkzve the Leglsleturz Intended to change its previously dociared public policy so as to Include such Institutions strictly within the 3copo of Scnato Bill Xo.

127. Uo do not balLeve the evil aimed at and soilSht to be re,u- lated by the provisions of Senate Bill Bo. 127 Included the help- ful and incidental services rcndurad by a non-?rofYt, charitable, religious, educational and benevolent Institution. Zieither CFi.rl ve say that tho provIsIons of Article 5209 of the Emplo:mcnt Agent Act are Inconsistenti vlth the definltlon and provisions of the Emigrant Agents Act.

We believe that with due regard given to the exceptions as contained In Artlole 5209 as being applicable t; the provisions * of Senate Bill N$. 127, the “Employment Agents Act and the “EmI- grant Agent a Aot oan be construed harmoniously together and can *7 Eonorable Joe Kunsohik, Page be properly administered and enforced so as to regulate the

I evils sought to be oontrolled by the respective Acts.

For all of the foregoing reasons, it is our o2inlon, and you are so advised, in answer to yaw question, that the 5209, Revised Civil Statutes, exceptions of Artlole 1925, are to and are proper exceptfons to the provbdons of applicable Senate Bill Ho. 127, passed by the Acts of tho &lnt Legisla- ture, Seoond Called Session, 1923, Page 203, and the institu- inquired about, Under the faots Ln your inquiry, vould tion not be required to obtain an “Emigrant Agento!’ license. Tie trust that ve have fully answered yov.r inquiry.

I

Yours very truly ATTORNTGY GlZNFXAL OF TEXAS i I