of its constitutionality; and again it is said
nothing but a clear violation of the Constitu-
tion—a clear usurpation of power prohibited
-will justify the judiciary department in
pronouncing an act of the legislative depart-
ment unconstitutional and void. Pennsyl-
vania R. R. Co. v. Riblet, 66 Pa. 164, 5 Am.
Rep. 360. The Constitution allows the Leg-
islature every power which it does not posi-
tively prohibit. The wisdom, justice, or ex-
pediency of the passage of an act of the Leg-
islature is not the subject of debate in our
courts of justice. In one of the more recent
cases (Sugar Notch Borough, 192 Pa. 349, 43
Atl. 985) the present Chief Justice stated:
'It must not be lost sight of that the attitude
of courts is not one of hostility to acts whose
constitutionality is attacked. On the con-
trary, all the presumptions are in their favor,
and courts will not be astute in finding or
sustaining objections. * * * The express
enumeration of the specific subjects must be
affirmatively misleading as to the intent to
exclude others, or the title will not be made
invalid by it. The constitutional requirement
as to the title is not to be strained to apply
to cases not really within its reasonable in-
tent.' And in Commonwealth v. Moir, 199
Pa. 534, 49 Atl. 351, 53 L. R. A. 837, 85 Am.
St. Rep. 801: The judiciary can only arrest

the execution of a statute when it conflicts

moneys may be applied by candidates, political managers and committees in political campaigns, both for nominations and elections, and to require the managing committees and managers of all political parties to file with some designated official at the close of each campaign, a detailed statement in writing, accompanied by affidavit, of the amounts collected and the purposes for which they were expended'-is not sufficiently specific to sustain the act, as being in conflict with and offending against section 25 of article 3 of the Constitution, which reads: 'When the General Assembly shall be convened in special session, there shall be no legislation upon subjects other than those designated in the proclamation of the Governor calling the special session.' Among the specially delegated powers of the Governor of this commonwealth is the authority given in section 12 of article 4 of the Constitution as follows: 'He may, on extraordinary occasions, convene the General Assembly,' etc. Pursuant to this authority, the Governor issued a proclamation and indicated as one of the four subjects the item third above quoted, 'for the consideration of the General Assembly, with a view to legislation at the said session with respect to them.' An additional article was included in the same proclamation, rewith the Constitution. It cannot run a race lating to legislation on the subject, ‘to enable of opinions upon points of right, reason, and cities that are now, or may hereafter be, expedience with the lawmaking power. If the courts are not at liberty to declare stated in one municipality, etc. This latter feacontiguous or in close proximity, to be unitutes void because of their apparent injustice or impolicy, neither can they do so because ture of the proclamation, as well as the legal they appear to the minds of the judges to effect to be given to it, was considered by violate fundamental principles of Republican this court (Pittsburg's Petition, 32 Pa. Super. government, unless it should be found that Ct. 210) and exhaustively reviewed in Pittsthese principles are placed beyond legislative burg's Petition, 217 Pa. 227, 66 Atl. 348, 120 encroachment by the Constitution.' Am. St. Rep. 845, when it was conclusively Cooley on Const. Lim. c. 7, § 4. Our only duty and established that 'whether the General Asour only power is to scrutinize the act with sembly ought to be called together in extraorreference to its constitutionality in order to dinary session is always a matter for the discover which principles of the Constitution, executive alone. How it shall be called toif any, it violates. Whatever the people have gether, and what notice of the call is to be not by their own Constitution restrained them- given, are also for him alone. The Constituselves from doing, they through their repre- tion is silent as to these matters and wisely sentatives in the Legislature may do. This | so. * A proclamation, however, is the latter body represents their will just as com- proper mode of calling the Legislature topletely as a constitutional convention in all gether, and the Constitution seems to so conmatters left open by the written Constitution. template, for section 25, art. 3, speaks of the Commonwealth v. Reeder, 171 Pa. 505, 33 proclamation. But no form of the proclamaAtl. 67, 33 L. R. A. 141. The power of con- tion is to be followed. This, howstruing the Constitution devolves upon the ever, is not for the judiciary, but for the judiciary through the manifestation of the Governor alone. With every prepolitical principle that ours is a government sumption in favor of the compliance by the of laws, rather than of men. In exercising executive with the constitutional requirethat power, the courts should take a large ments relating to his calling the General Asand comprehensive view of the Constitution, sembly together in extraordinary session, it ever mindful that every scripture is to be would be judicial hypercriticism to declare interpreted in the same spirit that gave it his second notice or proclamation insufficient forth, and with a deep desire to enforce its to authorize the Legislature to pass the act full meaning. under consideration.'

"It is specially urged that the proclamation of the Governor of March 5, 1906 (P. L. 78),

申 *

"The subject embraced in the third item of the second proclamation should be con

parts, but in its entirety. It represents a | and prescribe a penalty for violation of the continuous and complete thought in one sen-election laws. Former legislative enactments tence, which refers to a general project, the were deemed inadequate, and this was a uses to which money may be applied in po- step forward as an added requirement to litical campaigns-and in ascertainment of safeguard the ballot box from the pollution this the required filing of statements in writ- of fraudulent votes by making more specific ing of the amount of such moneys collected and by defining with greater particularity and the purposes for which they were ex-'the uses to which money may be applied by pended. In order to interpret the proclama-candidates, political managers and committion of the Governor, we are bound to give tees in political campaigns both for nominathe words used the same fair and reason- tions and elections.' The Constitution and able meaning and intendment which we ap- the General Assembly by prior declarations ply when considering a statute, and the had directed attention to this general subject, general scope and sufficiency of the proclama- and the provisions contained in the body of tion is to be determined by the same well- the act under consideration are but details known rules. The purpose of the proclama- of the general purpose expressed in the title, tion is to inform the members of the Legisla- which fairly and clearly expresses its purture of the designated subject which they pose by which all those who are interested are convened to consider, and when the Gen- or may be affected by its provisions are put eral Assembly enacts a law which is fully upon inquiry. No one could read either the and clearly responsive to such a call, both in proclamation of the Governor or the title of its title and in the body of the act, it is play-the act without meeting the subject referred ing on words to say that the call, as such, was misleading or insufficient. As we said in Pittsburg's Petition, 32 Pa. Super. Ct. 210: 'While it is necessary upon the executive to designate the subjects to be considered by the General Assembly, it is outside our duty to go beyond the words of the law to inquire whether all of the other precedent formalities have in fact been complied with.' Moreover, the designation of the subject, so far as this case is concerned, is in no wise ambiguous; and that the General Assembly clearly understood its meaning, and that this enactment was responsive to the call of the Governor, is clearly shown by the title and body of the act. That the proclamation, so far as it relates to the act under considera-body of the bill. Nor is the requirement of tion, was equally clear and that the notice it carried was plain, is demonstrated by the records of the Legislature with the debates, amendments, and final enactment followed by the approval of the Governor. The necessity for such legislation was manifested by the call of an extraordinary session of the General Assembly.

to in both-the use of money in elections—and, as we said in Commonwealth v. Jones, 4 Pa. Super. Ct. 362: "The subject may have but one object, while the means necessary for the attainment of that object may necessarily embrace separate subjects differing in their nature and particular effect, yet all contributing to it and comprised within the principal subject. Everything which the lansuggests as necessary or appropriate for the guage of the subject of a title reasonably accomplishment of its express purpose is sufficiently enacted by its title'-and either the proclamation or the title is sufficiently clear and explicit to invite an inquiry into the

the law satisfied by anything short of an examination of the whole body of the act when an inquiry is once invited by a sufficient title, and the same reasonable rule applies to the sufficiency of the proclamation. The learned court below concluded that the Legislature under this proclamation could not at this special session pass a law of a general "Had this legislation been enacted at a character 'regulating' nominations and elecregular instead of an extraordinary session tion expenses, and that there was no authority of the General Assembly, the attack against to go beyond what is implied and expressed in it would have been confined to the sufficiency the proclamation-the enactment of a law of the title, but this feature of the assault on the subject 'designating' the uses to which was not sustained by the court below, as the moneys may be applied, etc.; and held that: learned judge properly denied and refused 'While the authority to regulate includes the contention that the title to the act did and carries with it the authority to designate, not clearly express the subject, and he held the authority to designate does not and canthat it was not in conflict with section 3, not be said to include and carry with it the art. 3, Const. The oath of office prescrib- authority to regulate. Under authority to ed by article 7 of the Constitution of 1873 pass a law regulating any matter, a general includes the declaration: "That I have not system of law may be formulated, embracing paid or contributed, or promised to pay or every feature, specification, and detail that contribute, either directly or indirectly, any would be germane to the subject.' The last money or other valuable thing, to procure my proposition has ample authority for its supnomination or election or appointment except port in Sugar Notch Borough, 192 Pa. 349, for necessary and proper expenses expressly 43 Atl. 985, in which case the present Chief authorized by law.' Sections 8 and 9 of article Justice says in regard to the act of April 3, 8 of the same fundamental law define and 1851 (P. L. 320), entitled 'An act regulating

hensive on that subject could have been de- | respect to them,' viz.: First. To revise the vised. It included the entire range of borough affairs so far as they were within legislative control.

"In applying these rules to the proclamation, we must keep in mind that, when the 1. STATUTES (§ 5*)-SPECIAL SESSION OF LEG. General Assembly was convened to enact this statute, it was in response to two proclamations, the earlier one, dated November 11, 1905, 'to consider contiguous cities to be united,' etc. Second. To increase the interest paid for use of state money, etc. Third. To reapportion the state into legislative districts, etc. Fourth. To provide for personal

3. STATUTES (§ 5*)-SPECIAL SESSION OF LEG-| designate the uses to which moneys may be ISLATURE-PROCLAMATION OF GOVERNOR applied by candidates, political managers SUBJECTS OF LEGISLATION.

Appeal from Superior Court.

Petition by William M. Likins and others under Act March 5, 1906 (P. L. 81) § 9-the corrupt practices act-for an audit of an account filed by John Q. Van Swearingen, who was a candidate for the office of judge of the court of common pleas. From a judgment of the Superior Court reversing an order of the quarter sessions dismissing the petition, an appeal was taken to the Supreme Court. Affirmed.

See, also, 72 Atl. 858.

The requirement of Act March 5, 1906 (P. and committees in political campaigns, both L. 81) § 9-the corrupt practices act-that a for nominations and elections, and to require candidate for office as well as the managing the managing committees and managers of committees and managers of political parties file all political parties to file with some desigan account of moneys collected and the purposes for which expended, is sufficiently designated nated official at the close of each campaign a by the Governor's supplemental proclamation of detailed statement in writing, accompanied January 9, 1906, designating as a subject of by affidavits, of the accounts collected and legislation the uses to which moneys may be ap- the purposes for which they were expended.' plied by candidates, political managers, and committees, and requiring managing committees and In the analysis of this item of the proclamamanagers of political parties to file an account tion we are to view it as the members of the of moneys collected and the purposes for which General Assembly were warranted in viewexpended, as required by Const. art. 3, § 25, providing that a special session of the General ing it; that is, in the light of the whole docuAssembly shall not legislate upon any subject ment, together with the earlier proclamation not designated in the proclamation convening it. of November 11, 1905, under which the Gen[Ed. Note.-For other cases, see Statutes, eral Assembly was specially convened with a Cent. Dig. 4; Dec. Dig. § 5.*] view to legislation on this and other specified subjects. It is urged that the third item in this proclamation contains two subjects, or at least a principal and a subsubject, for the purposes of this case, conceding this to be the fact, yet the reason for the constitutional mandate prohibiting legislation on any subjects at a special session save those designated in the proclamation of the Governor is fairly apparent. The purpose was that the legislators thus unusually summoned and the public at large should be advised as to the general character of the legislation that could or might be constitutionally enacted at such special session. Although a Governor who "This is a companion case to In re Ac- the Legislature is empowered to proclaim, to has decided to convene a special session of count of John R. Byrne, Treasurer, etc. (in indicate, to designate, the subjects for legiswhich an opinion is filed this day) 72 Atl. 858, lative consideration at such session, he canand is similar to it, except that this is an not by his proclamation, any more than he application for an audit of the account of can by his message to the same body when in John Q. Van Swearingen, who was a candidate for the office of judge of the court of regular session, prescribe or limit the manner common pleas, etc., of Fayette county, and in which or the extent to which the Legislawas elected at the general election held No- ture may dispose of these subjects which he vember 5, 1907, and who on December 4, 1907, designates in his proclamation as matters for filed with the clerk of the court of quarter legislative consideration. He may by proclasessions of the county a detailed account of mation in the one case, as by message in the money contributed, received, and disbursed other, suggest the lines along which, in his by him for election expenses, etc., as requir- judgment, the lawmaking body could most ed by Act March 5, 1906 (P. L. 78). Five wisely or effectively operate. Such recommenqualified electors petitioned the court to ap-dations are in no wise restrictive of the legis point an auditor, etc., as required by section 9 of the act, and, after hearing on motion to quash, etc., the court below held the act to be unconstitutional for the reason that it was in conflict with section 25 of article 3 of the Constitution, in that the provisions of the act relating to the filing and review of accounts filed by candidates are not sufficiently designated in the proclamation of the Governor calling the special session at which this act was passed.

Orlady, J., filed the opinion of the Superior Court, which was as follows:

lative power. When, therefore, the Governor, by his proclamation, couched in such language as he may select, has fairly indicated to the legislators and the people a general subject for legislative consideration, the Legislature in special session may lawfully deal with that subject as fully and completely as at a regular session. It is practically conceded that, if the proclamation had stopped at what is called by the appellees, the first clause of 'Item Third: To designate the uses to which moneys may be applied by candidates, political managers and committees in political campaigns, both for nominations and elections,' the Legislature would have fairly and properly before it the whole subject of the uses of money in political campaigns, and the legisla

"Under the facts in the Byrne Case we held the act to be constitutional, and the reasons therein given apply in large measure to this one, so that it is not necessary to recount them here. Item third in the second proclamation of the Governor is as follows: To

appropriate restrictions and penalties, all these were but details reasonably to be anticipated and resulting from the designated subject. Even if the individual, whether he be candidate, manager, or committeeman, should have notice equivalent to the members of the General Assembly of the designated subject for intended legislation, each would see in the proclamation that he is in the designated class of persons in regard to which the prospective legislation is requested.

tion that followed would have been in this re- | certaining the sources from which moneys spect constitutional. Certain uses of money, are obtained and the method of their disexpended by certain classes of persons or or- bursement; the uses to which moneys might ganizations, could have been declared lawful, be applied 'by candidates, political managers, other uses by other classes of organizations and committees in political campaigns, both could have been prohibited, and the primary for nominations and elections.' The machincommands of the law could have been surely ery to be adopted in supervising and restrainmade effective by an enactment for the filing, ing its improper use, and-for legislative deauditing, and publishing of accounts by those liberation and conclusion—many cognate proauthorized to expend money, and the punish-visions for remedying existing evils, through ment of those who violated the legislative prohibition. But it is argued, because, in the language following the suggested first clause referred to, the Governor speaks of the filing of accounts, and in that connection mentions only 'managing committees and managers of political parties,' and not candidates, he thereby cut down the dimensions of the subject previously designated, and limited the legislative power so that it could not lawfully prescribe or require the filing of any account by any person or body not specifically mentioned, described, or designated in the proclamation. If this construction be sound, the Governor has succeeded in practically strangling before its birth the very offspring he hoped to call into being through the efforts of the Legislature he was summoning. The candidates are the persons most interested in the results of political campaigns, and, if they may expend money at will without being required to make public the nature and extent of their expenditures, the requirement that such accounts must be filed only by 'managing committees and managers' who might neither gather nor expend any money would simply

divert the course of the stream into a channel whence it would flow unvexed by any construction or supervision, so that this legislative attempt to prevent the pollution of the ballot box would be destitute of sense or sig nificance.

"It is necessary that the subject be sufficiently designated in the proclamation to bring about intelligent and responsive action by the assemblymen. It is not required by the Constitution that the subject be as clearly expressed in the proclamation as in the title to an act, nor is it required that the details by which the desired results may be accomplished be stated in the call, as this is necessarily a brief suggestion of a subject in such words so as reasonably to direct to it the attention of the legislative mind. This accomplished, the purpose of the Constitution is fulfilled and the mission of the call is ended. In this item the designated subject was the lawful and unlawful use of money in political campaigns; the tribunal for as

"The executive and legislative departments are designed to work to a common purpose in order to enact effective legislation. The result of this notice 'to consider, with a view to legislation' on this designated subject is the act before us. In so far as the question involved in this case is concerned, the designation of the subject in the proclamation is sufficient, aud, the same subject being clearly expressed in the title to the act, the order of the court below is reversed, and the record remitted to the court below with a procedendo."

Rice, P. J., and Porter and Henderson, JJ., dissenting, held as follows:

"We will merely state the grounds upon which we differ from the majority, without elaboration. We are of opinion that the legislation, so far as it relates to filing accounts by candidates, is not within the subject designated by the Governor; in other words, the subject of filing accounts as designated by the Governor is expressly restricted to managing committees and managers of political parties. If this construction of the proclamation leads to a result which deprives the act of a beneficial feature, the remedy is with the Legislature."

Argued before FELL, BROWN, MESTREZAT, POTTER, and STEWART, JJ.

George Patterson and Sterling, Higbee & Dumbauld, for appellant. M. H. Stevenson and L. L. Minor, for appellee.

PER CURIAM. The majority of the court are of opinion that the order appealed from should be affirmed on the opinion of the Superior Court.