You huvd reque&ed our opinion awto whether or not Jeffersoa Counts till be entitled to reaeive the benefits outlined in Rouse Sill 688, pasmd by ihe Foripsixth bgislatum;lSS9, $%visn of the provisions contained in Houea ,+ll 9,passed wtha Forty-third legislature, Fourth Cal?ed Smdoa, 1954, with p&iaular r6fsianoe to Section 5 thereof.

ihse El11 9 oi tie 43rd Ingislatnre was a speoiel aot:a+horitiag Je@erscm Couirty to aon&uot + fres.bridge, and.approaohes +heteto, aorom the Reaes River latw~ea Jeffsraonalld Orange aounties oa State Rig- 88'7. Tha provision ta whioh you rsfer, aad upon lhiah @a reqwst our opinion,. is as follows:

.Ceotioa 5. &, lopa or grantrhioh may be obtained under the provisions of this A& for the donstruotioa of &ah bridgs'ud approaches thetito shall'b, O+ beocpas, a debt again& the State of Texas, or against fhe stete Rim Collmi#Si~, mt the~8aid FnQ8 irhiah mng oe voted ad iss& by's+d'aounw unddr the provi~i0a8 of this A@ shall oonstituta the debt and obliat,ion solely of Jefferson:CouxQ. It is here* deolared to be the legitlaeve that the 'bonds issued by Jefferson Couutyas provided herein shall not be 86-d W of Wd off kt.Wm Board of CotmtJr aad Roads M&riot Bond, Indebfednesa, or out of any funds used by said Board to.r&ire Qo&t?f and Road Distriat bonds."

It is to be noted that Rouse'E&ll 680 peesed bp~tho Fbrty-&xth Legislature fn a geaeral law as boatrasted'with Rouse Itili So of tie f&w- ted faglolature, 4th called 8&8ion, whiah wcis.8 special lit.' Ronheri in Rouse Bill 688~do nu find a~ language lrhioh either erpr&uel~~6r im- pliedly repeal8%m p&or Aoh under nhiah Jeffei%o* Coutity was authodcod to aonstruot the bridge aoro88 the Heohee ~Bivar. In order to datern&a the proper answer to yoy question, and we think upon that d&termination depeads the-right 'of Jeggerson Cow- to pnrticipate in the beaefits of House Eill 688, we musf'o~aolude whether or not P general lti~enaoted sub- sequeat to a special lawwill operate a8 a +epeal of said speoiil law passed prior thereto.

Hon. E. 8. Foreman, page 2 (O-1366)

W6 think unquestionably that the weight of authority hold8 that a geaeral lawwill not b6 oomstru6d to repeal a special law on the 6ame sub.. jeot, and (~8 w-a8 8t8ted in ttre oa88 of &ti V. State, 106 8.hT. 448, a sp6oiiL gtatute is not repealed by a gSn6ral Statute bless the intent to RI&3031 18 lWMif86t. This rule was mr6 fully disou888d iathe case of Andrans V. City of Beaumont, 113 S.W. 614, wherein the court held thaf speoial legislation or local law8 are not repealed by a later general aat, mentioned th8r8im or tie88 such -66 18 mpde 68uIifO8t Ud686 SpOoia~y from the pl8In provisions of the gmer81 law. Ilb find the language of the 00ux-b ~U&I stroiger in the aa Op Sullivan V* City of Galvestoa, 17 8-H. (2d) 479, Pffirmad by the Ccmnission of Appeals in 1931, 34 S-W. (2d) 808, whmereia the aourt said:

“A 8peaial hw 18 not r8pea'ld by SUb6qUSnk a&S paSSed bg at&Other bgis- lature anless expressly 80 stated or alearly intended."

In Section 13 of Rouse Bill 688 it18 provided: “This Aot shall Ire oumlativu of all other valid hw8 OS the ntbjeat, bat ia the eve& of a aonplfat aqf pruvisioa of.thi8 Aat and any other Aat, the ~ovi6ion8 of this Act shall &w8vaile"

16 do not find aqy oonfliot lmtw668 38 tw Aot8 under oonsideratioa, aor do w6 find amof the pmvisioa8 of either sot rspugnant to each other, and ia th8 language of the Court of Civil Ap&wals in the 8as6 of St. kmi8 B4M Railnay Co. V. Xaroofiah, 221 S.H. 582, affirmed ia 185 8.H. 31, the court StateS, la partic

%16x1 a latsr Aot i8 6ile& a8 to aa old8r law, ths prssumptioa is that it8 8&&ued operation was intended unlsss th6&~pressat a contradiotioa 80 pos- itlw that the purp6ss to rsp6al is Iuanifsst.*

Having reaohedths aOllO&l8iQ~ that ao aotiliot exis'bs betnre6a the tno Acba hersin oonsidered, and that the language of &I88 2ill.688 amnot be $.aterprekd to effect a repeal of ths prior law, w6 are of th8 opinion that Jefferson Couaiq is not eatitled to reoeiw th6 bellsfit outlined ilt .Rouse Bill 688, 46th LegislaOere, B.S. 1939.

verp truly your6 CRC-8 cegw ATTQRNEI GEAWAL OF TRXAS APPROVED Rev 1, 1939 By /s/Clarenae E. Cr6w8 Clar6nce E. crow6 ~&iii$i%iiEfi?iF TFX48 APPROVBD: Assistant opinion Cdttse,By BWB Chniw~