Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Hon. Joe Junsahik, Commissioner Bureau of Labor Statistics Austin, Texas' Dear Sir: O&nion No. F-1723 : Gonstruption of Article.1571 of the Penal Code of Texas,~1925. This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of November 20, 1939, in which you submit'for an opinion of this Department the following,questiens:' "1. Does Article 1571, P. C ., exempt from the'previsions of said chapter all persons, institutions, establishments, and enterprises in cities that had.less than three thousand inhabitants, as shown by the last pre~ceding,Federalcensus? Q. Does this'artiele exempt from~~~theprovisions of said chapter stenographers and pharmacists inany and all cities,' 'regardless of the population of said ~,.cities?v Article 1569 of the Penal Code of Texas. 1925, asamended bv Acts cf the-43rd Legislature,,reads: - -. "No female shall :be employed: "1. In anyfaatory, mine, mill,~workshop, mechanical or mercantile ,establishment,hotel, restaurant, rooming house, theater, moving picture show, barber-shop; beauty shop, road side ,drinkand/or,food vending establishment, tele- graph;,telephone or other offioe~,,expres~s'or,transportation company,,or any State~instit,utien,.erenterprise where fe ales are empleye~d,for more than nine, (9) hours in any ane (1'p ualendar day nor more'than fifty-four .(54)hours in~any ene (l),calendar week. "2. In any laundry or ~cleaningand pressing establishment for mere than fifty-feur (54) hours in ene '(1)~aalendar week'!the heurs efwaerk te be Se,arranged as to permit the empleyment ef such female at any time so that she shall not work morethan a maximum of eleven (11) heurs during the twenty-four (24) hour period of one (1) day. Hon. Joe Kunschik, Commissioner, Page 2 O-1723 "3. In any factory engaged in the manufacture of cotton, wollen or worsted geods or articles of merchandise manu- factured out of cotton goods, for more than ten 10 hours in any one (1) calendar day nor more than sixty I60 1 hours in any one calendar week. Article 1570 of the Penal Code provides that employers in certain types of business undertakings wherefemales are employed shall furnish adequate seats for their use when not actually engaged in their duties. Article 157'1 of the Penal Code, as amended by the First Called Session of the L&t Legislature, reads: "The two preceding Articles shall not apply to stenographers and pharmacists, not to mercantile establishments or tele- graph or telephone companies in rural districts and in cities or towns or v~illagesof less than-three thousand inhabitants as shown by the preceding Federal~census, nor 'to superinten- dents, matrons, nurses and attendants employed by, in and about such Orphans' Homes as are charitable institutions, not run for profit, and not operated by the State. .In cases ofextraordinary emergencies, such asseat public calamities or where it becomes necessary for the protection of human life or property, longer hours may be worked." Thus it appears from Article 1571, supra, that it wasthe inten- tion of the~hegislature that stenographers and pharmacists be exempted from the protection of,Article 1569, supra,~regardless of the population of the town or city in which they might be employed. Article 1571, supra, likewise provides that Articles 1569 and 1570 shall not apply "to mercantile establishments or telephone companies in ruraldistricts and in cities or towns or villages of less thanthree thousand inhabitants, according to the pre- ceding FederalcEnsus." Your first question involves a determination ofwhether or not the terms of Article 1571, supra, are broad enough to exempt all persons, firms and corporations from the provisions of Articles 1569 and 1570, supra. It will be noted that there areanumber of different types and character of business institutions mentioned in Article 1560 which are not specifically mentioned in Article 1571 andwhich Cannot possible be exempted,except upon the theory that "mercan- tile establishments" is sufficiently bread to embrace the whole business field. Hon. Joe Kunschik, Commissioner, Page 3 O-1723 A mercantile establishment is a place where the buying and sell- ing of articles of merchandise is conducted. Basey Drug Com- pany vs. Bruza, 37 Pac. 2nd 294, The court, in the above case, said: "The word tmercantilel in its ordinary acceptance means 'pertaining to the business of merchants and is concerned with trade or buying andselling of merchandise?. &iting People vs.Federal Security Go., 255 Ill. 561, 99 NE 6681 PI&H. Kohlsoot & Co, vs. O'Connell, 255 111. 271, 99 NE .... Thus, while theword testablishm$ntt may mean al- most any kind or character of institution, location, building, or place, yet its meaning isgeatly restricted when used following the word 'mercantile' and the expression 'mercantile establishment1 must mean and refer to an insti- tution or mercantile business or a place, building or loca- tion where the mercantile business or the buying or selling of merchandise is conducted or engaged in. A merOantile establishment is a place where the buying and sell- ing of articles or merchandise is ~conducted. Oiting Hotchkiss vs. District of Columbia, 44 App.D.C., 73. Penal statutes such as we have involved in this opinion are to be strictly construed against the State and in faver of the accused. State vs. Elliot, 34 Tex. 148. This rule is necessarily medi- fied, however, to a limited extent by Article 7 of the Penal Code which directs that every law be construed "according to the plain import of the language in which it is written". The Supreme Court, in the case.of Thompson vs. Missouri, K.&T. Ty . Cal, 126 SW 257, said8 "The proper course is tosearoh out and follow the true intent of the Legislature and tealopt that sense which har- monizes best with the context and premotes in the following manner the apparent policy and objects of the 1egislature.w It is a fundamental rule of construction that an exception to a statute is, as a rule, strictly censtrued against one claiming its benefits and one claiming such benefits will be required to shew that he cemes within its terms. Evans vs. American Publish- ing Gel, 13 SW 2nd 358, 39 Tex. Jur. 277, para. 148. Applying the above mentioned definitions of mercantile establish- ments and rules of construction to the questians submitted, we believe that "mercantile establishments" as used in Article 1569, is g$ven its restricted meaning by the~Legislature and that the exceptions or exemptions contained in Article 1571 are to be strictly construed infavor of the State so as to carry out the intention of the Legislature. Hon. Joe Junschik, Commissioner, Page 4 O-1723 It is therefore, the opinion of this Department and you are so advised that Articles 1569 and 1570, supra, apply toall sections of the State whether rural districts, cities, towns or villages regardless of the pnpulation of such subdivisions unless they come within theaceptions contained in Artiele 1571, supra. We do not undertake te advise what particular business institutions come within the term "mercantile establishmentsn except that they be tested by the definitions hereinabove contained. Article 1571, supra, exempts stenographers and pharmacists from the provisions of Articles 1569 and 1570, supra, regardless of the population of the cities inwhich they might be employed. Very truly yours ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS BY Lloyd Armstrong Assistant APPROVED DEC 1, 1939 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS