Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Jones

Citations

  • 4 Pa. Super. 362
  • 1897 Pa. Super. LEXIS 127

Syllabus

<p>Mines and mining — Constitutional law — Bituminous Goal act.</p> <p>The power of the legislature to define and classify coal mines as it has done, and to legislate for each class separately must be regarded as settled on the authority of Durkin v. Kingston Coal Co., 171 Pa. 193. The Bituminous Coal Act of May 15, 1893, P. L. 53, does not offend the constitution in being either local or special legislation, nor in containing more than one subject.</p> <p>Statutes — Constitutional enactments as to sufficiency of title — Act o/1893.</p> <p>The unity of a subject of a statute is to be determined by its paramount purpose rather than by the details through which that purpose is to be accomplished. The subject may have but one object, while the measures necessary for the attainment of that object may necessarily embrace many subordinate subjects, differing in their nature and particular effect, yet all contributing to it, and comprised within the principal subject. Everything which the nature of the subject of a title reasonably suggests as necessary or appropriate for the accomplishment of its expressed purpose, is sufficiently indicated by such title.</p> <p>Mines and mining — Sufficiency of title of bituminous coal act.</p> <p>The title of the Act of May 15, 1893, P. L. 52, meets all the constitution demands as to sufficiency. The objections to its sufficiency are without foundation. It is not necessary that the title should refer specifically to matters legitimately implied from its purpose as indicated by the title. The essential parts of a statute are the declaratory, the directory, the remedial and the vindicatory; and if the title clearly expresses the subject to which the statute is to apply, it is sufficient without expressing in detail the character of the several parts.</p> <p>A penalty is implied in the expression of a purpose to which it is a necessary adjunct.</p> <p>Constitutional prohibition of local legislation — Query as to the effect of police power.

Judges: Beaver, Orlady, Reeder, Rice, Smith, Wickham, Willard

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

36 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.