 No law shall embrace more than one object which shall be expressed in its title; nor shall any law be revived or amended with reference to its title, but the act revived or the section amended shall be re-enacted and published at length.  Manual of the Senate and House of Delegates - Page 111by Virginia. General Assembly - 1918Full view - About this book
 | Virginia. General Assembly. House of Delegates - Virginia - 1899 - 1092 pages
...of Virginia, refer to the act which it amends. The Constitution, Article 5, Section 15, provides : "No law shall embrace more than one object, which...with reference to its title, but the act revived or section amended, shall be re-enacted and published at length." This bill, though in effect repealing... | |
 | Michigan - Constitutions - 1850 - 40 pages
...the final passage of all bills the vote shall be by ayes and nays, and entered on the journal § 20. No law shall embrace more than one object, which shall be expressed in its title. No public act shall take effect or be in force until the expiration of ninety days from the end of... | |
 | Michigan. Constitutional Convention - Constitutional amendments - 1850 - 990 pages
...final passage of all bills the vote shall be by ayes and nays, and entered on the journal. Sec. 20. No law shall embrace more than one object, which shall be expressed in its title. No public act shall take effect or be in force until the expiration of ninety days from the end of... | |
 | Virginia - Virginia - 1851 - 1348 pages
...his religious instructor, aud to make for his support such private contract as. be shall please. 16. No law shall embrace more than one object, which shall be expressed in it* title ; nor shall any law be revived or amended by reference to its title, but the act revived... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - Law reports, digests, etc - 1885 - 744 pages
...provisions of the Constitution with which this Act conflicts : 1st. Sec. 20, art. IV., which provides, "No law shall embrace more than one object, which shall be expressed in its title." 2d. Sec. 27, art. VI. which provides, " The right of trial by jury shall remain, but shall be deemed... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - Law reports, digests, etc - 1914 - 828 pages
...therefore that, as to those provisions, the act was invalid under section 21, art. 5, of the Constitution : "No law shall embrace more than one object which shall be expressed in its title." This law is penal in character. One convicted for a violation of its provisions is liable to both fine... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - Law reports, digests, etc - 1909 - 790 pages
...this amendment comes within the prohibition of section 20, art. 4, of the Constitution then in force. "No law shall embrace more than one object which shall be expressed in its title." The amendment is inconsistent with, and outside of the purpose indicated by, the title of the original... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - Law reports, digests, etc - 1886 - 744 pages
...four grounds, namely : First. That it is in conflict with the provision of the Constitution that " No law shall embrace more than one object, which shall be expressed in its title." Second. That it violates another provision of the Constitution, to wit : " No law shall be revised,... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - Law reports, digests, etc - 1900 - 804 pages
...therefore in conflict with section 20 of article 4 of the Constitution of this State, which provides that "no law shall embrace more than one object, which shall be expressed in its title. " We think this contention sufficiently answered by what was said by this court in Soukup v. Van Dyke,... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - Law reports, digests, etc - 1892 - 830 pages
...the following reasons: 1. That it is contrary to article 4, § 20, of the Constitution, which says: " No law shall embrace more than one object, which shall be expressed in its title." 2. That it confers upon military officers the power of arbitrarily setting aside the authority of the... | |
| |
