Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1947 )

R-482 OFFICE OF TEE ATTORNEY GENEWLL AUSTIX, TEXAS May 20, 1947 Hon. Edgar Hutchins. Opinion No. V-212 County Attorney, Hunt County, Re: Constructionof Article Greenville,Texas 4476, Revised.Civil Statutes, 1925,in the light of S.B. 121, 48th Len. relative to the ma&facture of flour and bread. Dear Sir: Your request for an opinion with respect to the above subject matter is as follows: "I desire your advice upon the following matter: Article 4476 R.C.S.,'1925,was passed by the Legislaturein $923 and pro- vides that anyone manufacturingor sell- ing Self-risingFlour must label the Same so as to show the ingredientstherein. In 1943, the Legislaturepassed '$enate'Bill No. 121 which has to,do with the manufao- ture of flour and bread and provides for the enrichmentof flour and bread. The publishersof the annotated statutes of the State of Texas have brought Senate Bill No. 121 forward as Article 4476 R.C.S. The Senate Bill now known.as @- tide 4476 does~not, by its terms, repeal Article 4476 R.C.S.,,1925jas passed by the Legislaturein 1923 and several ques- tions are, therefore,presented and upon which I desire your opinion. (1) whether Article 4476 R.CiS. (the law passed in, 1923) was repealed by implication, I am of the opinion that it was not ,andthat the,law passed by the Legislaturein 1923 as well as the law passed by the Legisla- ture in 1943 should be construedtogether and that both of them are now in effect. (2) whether if Article 4476 as passed by the Legislaturein 1923 was repealed, it is now lawful to manufac*re and sell Hon. Edgar Hutchins - Page 2 (V-212) Self-risingFlour, provided such flour complies with Senate Bill 121 as passed by the Ikgislaturein 1943, that is that such Self-risingFlour oontains not only the self-risingingredients, but is also enriched as provided by said Senate Bill." Senate Bill No. 121 of the 40th Legislature at its Regular Session, does not expressly repeal Arti- cle 4476 of the Revised Civil Statutes, 1925, nor does it purport to be an amendment of that article. On the contrary it is a completeAct within itself, declaring in its emergency clause *that there are.no state laws regulating the manufacture,baking, mix, compound, sale or offer for sale for human consumptionof flour and bread as defined herein", etc. Of course, if there is any irreconcilable oonflict between Senate Bill 121 and Article 4476, there would be a repeal by implicationto the extent only of the oonfliot. Both laws should therefore stand and be oonstrued together, giving effeot to each of themunless there be found an irreconcilableconflict. In view of what we have said, it becomes unnecessary to answer your sec~ondquestion. Article 4476 of the Revised Civil Statutes of Texas, 1925, was not repealed by Senate Bill No. 121 of the 40th Legis- lature, Regular Session. Both laws stand and should be construedtogether unless there should be found an irreconoilable conflict,in which event the latest ex- pression of the Legislaturewould prevail. Yours very truly, s.EJBymlA~ms AyFmxGEmw , Ooie Spe' 0S:wb Assistant