Tarr v. Western Loan & Savings Co.

• Decision Date: 26 February 1909
• Citation: 99 P. 1049,15 Idaho 751
• Parties: J. E. TARR and ANNA A. TARR, Appellants, v. WESTERN LOAN AND SAVINGS COMPANY, a Corporation, Respondent
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court

99 P. 1049

15 Idaho 751

J. E. TARR and ANNA A. TARR, Appellants, v. WESTERN LOAN AND SAVINGS COMPANY, a Corporation, Respondent

Supreme Court of Idaho

February 26, 1909

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Reversed.

STEWART J. Ailshie, J., concurs.

OPINION

STEWART, J.

A petition for a rehearing has been filed in this case, and presents one question which we deem worthy of consideration. It is contended by respondent that the original opinion failed to pass upon the constitutionality of the amendment to sec. 2653, Rev. Stat., as amended by an act approved March 10, 1903. We did not discuss this question in the original opinion for the reason that counsel did not argue the question upon oral argument, and upon examination we were convinced that there was nothing in the contention; but inasmuch as counsel in the petition for rehearing has urged the question again, we have deemed it proper to consider the matter. The contention made by counsel for respondent with reference to this amendment is that it was not passed in accordance with the provisions of sec. 15, art. III of the constitution.

There is no complaint but that the bill was regularly passed in the Senate. The objections made relate to the course of the bill in the House. The legislative journal of the House shows that House Bill 45 was introduced by Pyke on January 22, 1903, and on that day was read the first time in full. On January 23d House Bill 45 was read the second time in full and referred to the printing committee. On January 26th the printing committee reported that the bill had been printed and the report was adopted and the bill referred to the committee on railroads and corporations. On February 11th the committee on railroads and corporations reported the bill to the House with recommendation that it pass; and on the same day motion was made that the rules of the House be suspended and the provisions of sec. 15, art. III of the constitution, requiring the reading of bills on three several days, be dispensed with, and that the amendments to House Bill 45 be read first and second time and ordered printed. This motion prevailed and it was so ordered. On February 12th the committee on printing reported that the amendments to House Bill 45 had been printed. On the same day House Bill 45 with amendments was referred to the engrossing committee and ordered engrossed. On February 13th House Bill 45 was reported correctly engrossed. On February 19th House Bill 45 was read third time "in full" and placed on final passage and upon roll-call passed. The record of this bill on February 11th is challenged by counsel for respondent, and the contention is made that it does not show that the amendments were read on three several days or that the bill as amended was read on three several days. The record discloses that House Bill 45 had its first reading on January 22d; second reading January 23d. On March 11th amendments were proposed, the provisions of the constitution with reference to the first and second reading of which were suspended. This motion was carried and it was so ordered.

From this it clearly appears that the bill had a first and second reading before the amendments were proposed; that the provision of the constitution, as to the first and second reading of the amendments on three several days, was suspended. This was equivalent to the first and second reading of the amendments on different days, providing, of course, the amendments were read upon the day of suspension.

We think the record sufficiently indicates that the amendments had their first and second reading on the same day, to wit the day the provision of the constitution was suspended. If the bill before amendment was read first and second time on different days and the amendments were read upon different days, or the provisions of the constitution with reference to such reading were suspended, and both readings occurred upon the same day and the amendments were adopted, then up to that time the constitut...