In re Road in Borough of Phoenixville

• Decision Date: 02 March 1885
• Citation: 109 Pa. 44
• Parties: In re Road in the Borough of Phœ nixville.
• Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

109 Pa. 44

In re Road in the Borough of Phœ nixville.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

March 2, 1885

February 12, 1885

1. The title of an Act of Assembly must not only embrace the subject of the legislation, but must also express the same so clearly as to give notice of the legislative purpose to those who may be specially interested therein.

2. The special Act of March 18th, 1868 (P. L. 352), entitled " An Act relating to Boroughs in the County of Chester," repealed certain provisions of a general Act, entitled " An Act regulating Boroughs," respecting the proceedings for laying out and opening roads within the boroughs of Chester county, the effect of which was to relieve the property owners in the boroughs from the burden of paying damages for roads opened within the boroughs, and to shift that burden upon the county:

Held, that the title did not clearly express the purpose of the Act, and that the Act was therefore unconstitutional.

3. Blood v. Mercelliott, 3 P. F. S., 391, commented on.

Before MERCUR, C. J., GORDON, PAXSON, TRUNKEY, STERRETT and CLARK JJ.

GREEN J., absent.

CERTIORARI to the Court of Quarter Sessions of Chester county: Of January Term, 1883, No. 324.

This was in the court below, a petition by the Burgess and Town Council of the Borough of Phœ nixville, in Chester county, for the appointment of a Jury of View to lay out and open a new street or road within the said borough and to vacate a portion of an old street, which would thereupon become useless. The proceeding was instituted under the provisions of the special Act of March 18th, 1868 (P. L 352), which reads as follows:--

" An Act Relating to Boroughs in the County of Chester."

" SEC. 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in general assembly met, and it is hereby enacted by the authority of the same, That an Act of Assembly, approved April twentysecond, one thousand eight hundred and fifty-six, entitled, ‘ A supplement to the Act regulating Boroughs,’ approved April third, one thousand eight hundred and fifty-one, and also the last proviso to the third article of the twenty-seventh section of the Act, entitled, ‘ An Act Regulating Boroughs,’ approved April third, one thousand eight hundred and fifty-one, and the proviso to the fifth article of the said twenty-seventh section of the said last mentioned Act, be and the same are hereby repealed so far as it relates to the boroughs now incorporated or hereafter to be incorporated in the county of Chester; and like proceedings shall be had, for the opening, widening and straightening of the roads, streets, lanes, courts and alleys laid out and ordained in the said boroughs in Chester county, and for the assessment and payment of the damages sustained thereby, as are provided by law for the laying out and opening, and the assessment and payment of damages sustained thereby, of public roads within the said County of Chester outside of said boroughs."

The jury was appointed, whose report was filed in favor of the new road as prayed for, and assessing damages to certain property owners, to be paid by the county of Chester.

The commissioners of Chester county filed exceptions to the report of the jury; among others, the following: 7. That the Act of Assembly of March 18th, 1868, entitled, " An Act relating to Boroughs in the county of Chester," under which the jury acted in assessing said damages, is unconstitutional and void.

The court, after argument, dismissed the exceptions and confirmed the report, and ordered the street to be opened, FUTHEY, P. J., saying, in the opinion filed, inter alia, as follows:--

We do not regard the Act in question as offending against the constitutional provision referred to. It is entitled, " An Act relating to boroughs in the county of Chester," and the provisions repealed thereby are contained in Acts respectively entitled, " An Act regulating boroughs," passed April 3d, 1851, and " A supplement to an Act regulating boroughs, approved April 3d, 1851," passed April 22d, 1856.

The provisions repealed being contained in Acts bearing these general titles, the repeal was properly contained in an Act bearing the same general title. The title, although general in its terms, is not misleading in its character. Those interested were only aware of the provisions repealed, by reason of their being contained in Acts simply " regulating boroughs," and an Act bearing the title of " An Act relating to boroughs in the county of Chester," was sufficient to call the attention of those interested to inquiry as to its provisions.

The legislation in the Act in question is germane to that contained in the original Acts, to which it is virtually a supplement, and where such is the case, the object is sufficiently expressed in the same general title: State Line and Juniata Railroad Co.'s Appeal, 27 P. F. S., 429; Craig v. First Presbyterian Church, (7 Norris, 42).

We are of opinion that the subject of the Act is properly contained in an Act bearing the title of that in question. It refers to matters affecting the interests of the boroughs, and the title we deem a sufficient compliance with the constitutional provision.

The commissioners of Chester county thereupon took this certiorari, assigning for error the above action of the court.

The case was first argued on February 11th, 1884, CLARK, J., being absent. On February 25th, 1884, a re-argument was ordered, which was had February 12th, 1885, GREEN, J., being absent.

Samuel D. Ramsey and Thos. S. Butler, for plaintiffs in error.--The title of the special Act in question is defective, in that it is too general to clearly express the design of the Act, and it is inappropriate in that it does not contain an allusion to the county as the subject which is to be most affected by its provisions. Its real purpose being in relief of the owners of property in the boroughs and detrimental to the county, the title should have been so framed as to indicate that the county was interested therein: Ruth's Appeal, 10 W. N. C., 498; Rader v. Township of Union, 39 New Jersey Law R., 509; Dorsey's Appeal, 22 P. F. S., 192; Beckret v. City of Allegheny, 4 W. N. C., 530; 4 Norris, 191.

H. H. Gilkyson, for defendant in error.--The fact that the practice under this Act has been unquestioned for sixteen years, is persuasive that the Act does not " violate the Constitution clearly, palpably, plainly and in such manner as to preclude doubt or hesitation" --all which must be shown to the satisfaction of this court before it will declare an Act of Assembly unconstitutional. If the title clearly expresses a subject, and the legislation be upon that subject, or upon matters properly connected with it, the Act is constitutional. The Act in this case, viewed by that test, is not unconstitutional: Clinton Twp. v. Draper, 14 Indiana, 295; Thomasson v. The State, 15 Indiana, 455; Chiles v. Drake, 2 Metcalf's Rep., (Kv.) 150; Commonwealth v. Green, 8 P. F. S., 226; Yeager v. Weaver, 14 P. F. S., 425; Cooley's Constitutional Limitations, p. 142; Blood v. Mercelliott, 3 P. F. S., 391.

Mr Justice STERRETT delivered the opinion of the court, March 2d, 1885.

It is conceded the validity of the proceedings in the Court of Quarter Sessions depends on the constitutionality of the Act, entitled " An Act relating to Boroughs in the county of Chester," approved March 18th, 1868; P. L. 352. If the Act is constitutional the order complained of should be affirmed; if not, the entire proceedings are erroneous and must be set aside.

The Act in question consists of a single section, repealing the Act of April 22d, 1856, entitled " A supplement to the Act regulating Boroughs, approved April 3d, 1851," and also the last proviso to the 3d article and the proviso to the fifth article of the 27th section of the last mentioned Act so far as they relate to boroughs then incorporated or thereafter to be incorporated in the county of Chester; and then declaring...