State ex rel. Sedillo v. Sargent

Citations

• 24 N.M. 333
• 171 P. 790

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Where the validity of a statute is questioned on the ground that it is unconstitutional', it is- the duty of the court to uphold the statute when the conflict between it and the Constitution is not clear, and the implication always exists that no violation of the Constitution has been intended by the legislature. P. 337</p> <p>2. In construing statutes, if the meaning thereof is doubtful, the title, if expressive, may have the effect to resolve the doubts by extension of the purview or by restraining it, or to correct an obvious error. P. 337</p> <p>3. Section 27, art. 4, of the state Constitution does not prevent the Legislature from appropriating money to pay for services rendered the state by a servant or contractor -outside the scope of his previous employment. Where the ;Legislature of 1915 (Laws 1915, c. 86, § 1) appropriated the sum of $2,000 to pay a named individual for translating from English into Spanish the Code adopted at the session, which Code so adopted did not include the prefatory matter, nor index, accompanying the English publication, and such party voluntarily translated such additional matter and read proof and corrected the same on the' Spanish publication, and incurred expenses not contemplated- by the original appropriation, a succeeding Legislature could constitutionally appropriate money to pay for such extra services. P: 337</p> <p>4. Section lj c. 28, Laws 1917, construed'.. Held, thát such, section does not appropriate money, as extra compensation .contrary to section 27 of article 4 of tbe Constitution. ^ , , . , P. 337</p> <p>Hanna, C. J,, dissenting.</p>