Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OFTHLATTORNMQRNERALOFTEXAS AUSTIN . . .3 t a 3. h..’ latter schi~olsLsve not been an2rovsd or accrsdltsd by th5.sEosrd either OS to qusl- ificrtionsof stuCent nurses or as to o(j;Llrses 0r tit;itiy by Dtudants or any other mstter? '3. %b'ouldtkia Boord be autborlzedto issue s si~CFa1 llcanse t0 ~;~pliOf.UltS iOr nursi:y in tub~rciilaron~ee~o~ly,where tho q&.lciintahsve ritte3ded a nurskg soLoo oonneotedwith a hoapltal ~aoeptiag aa pa- tierit8only thooe rirtllated uith tub6reulo- sl8 u&ther'thea.urdgaohoel~coo* 1t&6.8psalalnur9~Mhoeloroot, u&k tha applSauit8ham not attended for yB@wml MaredIted Lture Qa.0oaatllluous L - Hon. OrTIll s. krpbutor, Fa6b 3 Comds8ion the power to make any rule0 and ra&u.latIona with referenae to 80a8ona1w0rkemf, tho bMetlt8 for suoh worker8 or the oontrlbutlons o? their amployezn. The oaptlon of Sanata Bill Ho. 21 dobo not In any rtate that a nw Seot:on, tc-wit! Seatlon 8-A Is being to tha bill or tha original Aat; It does, howover, speaIfIaallynote that two new aeatlons. Seotlon 19-A and Seotlan 19-B are being added. -e aall your attention to 39 Tex. Sur. p. 104 in whloh we ilnd the follmIng statement: "And where a title names aa the p&poee of.tho Aot the amendmant of spealfled motion of a former bill, the body o? the sot, after amndlng suah 8bo- tlon, may not prcmemlto ret out other 8eotlons whlah would beaome a part of the origIna aat but Omlah are not Inoludad In the title by reason of be- ohangos in, Or Ql8Z~Qt.S Of, the 8sOtiOII 8peOifibd thQ'dJL" Thle other rtetement is found in 39 Tar. Jur. p. 104: “The title upre8sIng a pUl’906b to amand a 8-t uta In a oortafn particular la dsaeptlve aud mirhaA- lng ln8ofara8 the Iply of the aat purport8 to aawl a prior law in other partIoular8.a In 8bMte Bill HO. 21 (SbOtiOn 8-A. $Ub8bOtiOL! (3). Artlals 522lb) the Lagirlaturb hu orbatbd antl addbd a IMU fUWtbA for tflb &1mi~81m~8, pbXMittbI6 thbm to do O- -With rOf8r@ElOb t0 8bMOIlb.l UOrk@F8 8lldthbir UglgbZY8, a par not haretotore dolbgated to the Comd88ioa. Ho Mn- tlon I8 Mda in the uptlon of tha Bill putting thb mmbbn of the LOgiE~tUl?b of the pub110 upOn IlotiOb that till& IIW mtter wa8 belaa sti by the Laglslatura as an ambndm~t to the already exlrt tbmrploymnt Catxpen8ationAat. ‘Phb aap- tlon la misleading and does not inrona the 8euubb?8 of thb LegIelature of the subjeot matter upon whlah thay are mting. Thb 8pnoffloationoi the nature of the prOpO8ed aaendmat In our opinion rlxes the oharaoter of the amndmcat as on8 sseklng no other alteratloliIn the OrIgInal lrtlole than to do the thin@ named. They speaItlaallyaat out that new Seotlons 19-r\and 19-3 nere being added. The listing o? thb Seotlons of ArtIole 5221-b to be aaended, tha 8pbOifiOIlthIl Hon. Crvllle S. Carpenter, Pagb 4 of the nature of the proposbd amndaont8 and the info~atlon that new Saotions 19-A aud 19-9 wbra baIng added was a dIs- tlnot aismranoe that the objeot or the act wa8 a llmlted one. The announasmenthaving been made by the Legislature, In the to be mended In oertain caption, that Artlole 5221-b kltle Fmtlauleirs, no different or nw embndments oan be added, 800 'ZardCattle and Tasturs Company YE. Carpenter, 200 S. 'fi. 521, and Aruold vs. Leonard, 273 S. 7:.800. To pernit ruoh a pro- oedure Is, In our oplnlon, a violation of krtlale 3, Seotlon 35 ot the Constitutionof Texar,. It la our opinion that the aaptlon of Senate Bill Ho. 21 Is not broad enough to aoter the new matter lnaluded in Seotlon 8-n, Submotion (3), a8 provlded In the amendmmxt to Ax-8101~5221-b. Ia riew of our 8nwbr to your tint que8- tlon, wo do not believe it nbobs8ax-y to awsrer your rrooond qaeatIolL ccc