|
The section is a fusion of the section
that was passed in the legislative branch,
and a section that was passed in the local
government branch. The very last few
lines of the section, if you would turn over
to them on page 9, was the language that
was put in by the Committee on the Legis-
lative Branch, and their recommendation
was that the General Assembly shall pass
no special law when a general law is ap-
plicable.
Style, Drafting and Arrangement
changed that to read in the way that it
does on page 9, beginning there on line 13:
"This section shall not be construed to
limit any power of the General Assembly
otherwise existing under this Constitution
to enact speci'al laws except that a special
law shall not be enacted for any situation
for which a general law is applicable."
Now, this amendment is addressed to
the words "is applicable." The thought that
Delegate Boyles has is that a special law
could not be enacted if there was a gen-
eral law in existence that was inapplicable.
He felt that was too narrow, and that
he wanted the language broadened to mean
that a special law could not be enacted
where any general law was applicable, or
could be made applicable. The idea is to
further make sure that the General As-
sembly does not enact special legislation
if it would be possible to achieve the same
thing by a general law.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Mr. Presi-
dent, and ladies and gentlemen, I would be
required to oppose this change, because
this is not the language of the Committee.
However, I do not want to say that the
amendment is not without merit, because
it is.
The Present Constitution —
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): You
mean it is not without merit?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: That is
correct.
The present Constitution does provide in
Article III, section 33, with respect to
this subject matter, that the General As-
sembly at its first session after the adop-
tion of this Constitution shall pass general
laws providing in the cases enumerated in
this section which are not already ade-
quately provided for, and for all other
cases where a general law can be made ap-
|
plicable. So, it was the intention of the
framers of the 1867 Constitution to get
as much general law on the books as pos-
sible, and to fairly limit the ability of the
General Assembly to pass special laws.
The Model constitution, if my memory
serves me correctly, also uses the "can be
made applicable," rather than the "is ap-
plicable" test for general law. I do not
think the adoption of this amendment
would do violence to the Committee Report.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): A
point of inquiry: Under the present law
certain types of corporations can be
created by the General Assembly by spe-
cial law, that is, provided that the general
laws do not accommodate the particular
type of corporation that you are correcting
by special law.
Now, if this were adopted would it not
really completely eliminate the ability of
the General Assembly to create a special
type of corporation for any purpose?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I would
think that if a general law could be passed
to take care of the kind of situation
which the act of the legislature seeking to
create a new corporation would accomplish,
then the legislature would be prohibited
from passing such an act under the pro-
posed amendment.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Is it
not possible to state that there is no situ-
ation that cannot be taken care of by gen-
eral law?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: That is
where we used the word "if the general law
is applicable". If it is a situation which
required general law, it would be easier to
pass a general law rather than to ask your-
self each time if this particularly proposed
special law can possibly be put under the
canopy of some general law which does not
exist, but which the legislature could pass.
I was happier with the language that
came out of the Committee. I am just
pointing out that the proposal is not one
which is unknown to state constitutions,
and it has been used elsewhere. I am going
to vote against it, but I want to say that
it has some obvious merits.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Any
further discussion?
Delegate Adkins.
DELEGATE ADKINS: Mr. President, I
wonder if the Chairman of the Committee
would yield to a further question along the
lines of inquiry that the Chair was putting?
|
