Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1946 )

.. OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENEkAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN GROVERSELLERS I; ATTORNEI GENE”*‘ i. 1 1 HanorabloT. J. Tuokor CountyAttorno~ liopkfnm Catiiaty Sulphur E~ingr, 'hua, Opinion No. SW56 ~0; con0tmotion or 00 011 5, Artiele'WQa-5 Pa . r+ Dear sir: rum stotuter it is aIrrye penui8siblo end raqufnd that the le&irl~tlre intad bo drterrinad. Hono*,the aIn and ob mot of oon8trurtion 18 to lsoortdn wul mforoo the leglr3atit lntont, and not to doSad, Honorable y. J. Tuoker - :a/:(1 5: nullify or thwart it. .'9Tax. Jurlp. 167. The intent should first be :~cucht from B reading of the whole stet- utes, but If the intent remelnc obeoure after reedlng the entire cot, th4 court ~;ay consl.derother lass and olroumtanoes 1nCloatlnp the lc~lelatlvc Intent, dud zay resort tc Certain eids for construction, suob a?.the his- tory of leglslatlon, and the neceF:lty or ooha:.lonfor the eneotment of the statute in question. 39 Tsx. Jurle. pag,es177-178. :Ire6dlnp of mtlole e79a-5 does not give my aisistanoe In deterainln~ juet whet type of shotgun 10 forbidden to be us&. The ect wan orl~lnally psss4d by the 45th LegIF:latum, %nd CalLd:;eeslon, on October lF., 1927. That aot hod the Idmtioal provisions, except that ths rord "gun" Is included after the words “magaelna loud- lng". 'bilethet oniar.1011 NBS evlder.tlyY clerloal omis- don, It nalt$rr adds to or takes from the aota prohibit&. It IF.well settled that the emergency clause of an tictnmy be considered if It sheds light upon ths in- quiry rtnC``1.1aid the aourt in ascerthlniog the leprlela- tive Intent. Inter&et4 Forwarding Co. v. Vineyard, 49 . . (Cd) 403. In looking to the original act PR paS:sedIn 1937, w4 find in the emergency cl4us4 the following lanruaes: "The feot thet :he mourning dove end white-w%nged dove regu- latlons ;':>r the year 1927 8:-eIn confliot pith the Fadsral Bsguletlon4 . . . oroetas en emortpncy . . .* Prom this Gnguaee It ie clear that the ieglslature lntendod that the aot be In harmony with the Yeder~l ragulatlons thereon. It IF i,roperto resch omitend to follow t!m true Intent of th4 Legielatura, anclto adopt that canes whioh hac:onlr-eswith the content ena :ro3otaci,In the fullsst . ! Honorable T. J. Tuokor - I'm. #S manner, the apparent polloy nnd object of the X.eelsla- ture. Thompson v. M.&T. Icy.Co., 126 S. ii'. 257. On July 30, 1937 the Frealdentapproved kroo- lamatlon No. .?245,found in 2 Pod. Koe. at page lZ.55, whloh proVeda amone other thinga that, >lrrt, al@atory same birds my not be taken with a ahotgua larger than No. 10 gauge; ma, seoond, thny may not be taken by maana of any autoamtio-loadingor hand operated repeating ?hot- gun capable of holding ZIOM than three shells at ona time in tha ohambar and magazine. nsaeaaary to arrive at the legislative in- :s'hen tent, it is pemlaalbla t3 oonatrue the cmnjunotion *~llld*' aa though it ware the dlsjunotlve *OP. Cllmenqa f;eolp- roual Aati*nv. Coo, $8 9. :'.(24) 1046-1047. It is, there- fore, our opinion that the no* *andw aa use6 in Article 879a-8, F.C., lauuedlatilyafter the worbe "larger tbn ten- gauge* should be,uaed in it8 dfrjunotlve aeqae. It is a mahter of ootabon knowled@ that a twelve- than a ten-gatige. gauge ehotgim is effialler You are, thorrfore, advim th::,t a prsooh who hunta with a twelve-gawe shotgun that la not pluggod so that it will hold not exoee4Lng threa ahells ie violating mtlala R79e-5, P.S. Yours very truly, Ey: /a/ Xichald !‘.Cotike ksalatant Approved iieb 14, 1946 Carlo8 C. Ashley Ffrst A66iBtm t Attorney General Approved: ciplnion Committee