An act which by its title is directed against the adulteration of milk, and professing to regulate the sale of milk, does not extend to the provision against producing unwholesome milk by any other process than adulteration. So, where the title of an act referred only to bills and promissory notes, no other contracts could be affected or made the subject of legislation in the body of the act. A title of legislation relating to the transportation of freight will not permit any provision relative to passenger transportation.76 Nor is a title providing for the acknowledgment of deeds and other conveyances of land broad enough to include provisions defining the consequences of a failure to record such instruments." Under the phrase "to lay additional tracks," in the title of an act supplementary to the charter of a railway company, a new route cannot be substituted opinion of this court in the case of The Bank of the State of Indiana v. The City of New Albany, 11 Ind. 139, that 'as to sec. 19, art. 4 (of the constitution), referred to, that "every act shall embrace but one subject and matters properly connected therewith, which subject shall be expressed in the title." The title incorporating the bank is, “An act incorporating the bank without branches." We have already seen that the extent and manner of taxing the capital stock of the bank, when created, is a matter properly connected with the subject of chartering the institution, and it is only the subject, and not the matter properly con nected therewith, that must be expressed in the title.' The chain connecting the matter of section 70 (supra) with the subject of the act is unbroken. We follow the case in all its stages, from the commencement of the action to the final judgment of the justice; then follows the appeal; then the proceedings in the appellate court, step by step, to final judgment, including costs in the action." Here the cases on which the jurisdiction is exercised are treated as "matter properly connected therewith," even after they have passed beyond that jurisdiction. It is not the purpose of the act to provide for cases-they are connected with the subject of the act - the justice's jurisdiction - - while they are subjects of that jurisdiction no longer. They are incidents; and when they have passed out of the sphere of the principal, they are no longer connected with it in theory or practice. 74 Shivers v. Newton, 45 N. J. L. 469. 75 Mewherter v. Price, 11 Ind. 199. 76 Evans v. Memphis, etc. R. R. Co., 56 Ala. 246, 28 Am. Rep. 771. 77 Carr v. Thomas, 18 Fla. 736. 79 78 for that established under the original charter. An act confined by the title to "the preservation of the Muskegon river improvement" may include authority to collect tolls and expend the money for that object, but a provision for raising means to pay and authorizing payment for the original construction of the work is beyond the object expressed in the title. An act "to secure complete records in the courts" does not warrant a provision for obtaining recovery from a delinquent officer who had been already paid for completing the record.80 An act "to provide revenue by taxation of corporations, associations and limited partnerships" is too restricted to embrace individual taxation.St Provisions for attaching unorganized territory to a judicial district cannot be enacted under a title to regulate the terms of court in it.82 Where the title indicates legislation in regard to specified classes, or enumerated objects or places, provisions in regard to other classes, objects or places will be without the title and void.83 A title relating to the sale of liquors will not cover provisions as to the giving away of liquors, or the sale of fruits put up in alcohol." A title to prevent the use of a thing will not cover provisions as to selling or offering to sell it. "An act to prohibit the use of billiard tables, bowling alleys, dice or card tables" also prohibited the use of "any other device by which men and boys are allured to 85 78 West Phila. R. R. Co. v. Union schan, 90 Fed. 80, 32 C. C. A. 530; R. R. Co., 9 Phila. 495. 79 Ryerson v. Utley, 16 Mich. 269. 80 Lowndes County v. Hunter, 49 Ala. 507. Fidelity Ins., Trust & Safe Dep. Co. v. Shenandoah Valley R. R. Co., 86 Va. 1, 9 S. E. 759, 19 Am. St. Rep. 858; Fish v. Stockdale, 111 Mich. 81 Commonwealth v. Martin, 107 46, 69 N. W. 92; State v. Borden, Pa. St. 185. 82 Ex parte Wood, 34 Kan. 645, 9 Pac. 758. 83 Dixon v. Poe, 159 Ind. 492, 65 N. E. 518; State v. Hallock, 19 Nev. 384, 12 Pac. 832; Commonwealth v. Darlington, 8 Pa. Dist. Ct. 237; Northern Pac. Express Co. v. Met 164 Mo. 221, 64 S. W. 272; Bohmer v. Haffen, 161 N. Y. 390, 55 N. E. 1047. 84 Hancock v. State, 114 Ga. 439, 40 S. E. 317. 85 State v. Great Western Coffee & Tea Co., 171 Mo. 634, 71 S. W. 1011. 89 Ivice and idleness." The latter was held not to be within. the title. A title was, "An act making it a misdemeanor to issue trading stamps and other devices;" provisions in the act as to distributing such stamps and devices were held void. A title to prohibit the sale of spirituous liquors will not cover provisions as to other liquors.88 A title to prohibit the issuing of licenses to sell liquor within certain territory was held not to cover a provision forbidding the sale of liquor in the same territory. Where the title is to prohibit barbering on Sunday, a provision making it a misdemeanor for a barber to keep open his bath room on Sunday is void. An act was entitled "An act to provide for the assessment and collection of revenue." A provision imposing a fine upon state and county treasurers for loaning or using the public funds was held not within the title." A title to provide for licenses to stevedores does not cover a provision requiring them to give bond.92 § 146. Acts incorporating or relating to railroads and common carriers.-"An act to revise the laws providing for the incorporation of railroad companies, and to regulate the running and management, and to fix the duties and liabilities of all railroad and other corporations owning and operating any railroad in this state," covers but one object. It is to bring together the legislation concerning the creation and management of railroads. 93 An act to incorporate a railroad or other like company may, besides granting its corporate powers, confer on townships or municipalities. 86 Commonwealth v. Ayers, 17 Pa. Supr. Ct. 352. 87 State v. Walker, 105 La. 492, 29 So. 973. 88 Elliott v. State, 91 Ga. 694, 17 S. E. 1004. 89 Hatfield v. Commonwealth, 120 Pa. St. 395, 14 Atl. 151; Commonwealth v. Frantz, 135 Pa. St. 389, 19 Atl. 1025; Commonwealth v. Montross, 8 Pa. Supr. Ct. 237. 90 Ragio v. State, 86 Tenn. 272, 6 S. W. 401. 91 In re Breene, 14 Colo. 401, 24 Pac. 3. 92 Steenken v. State, 88 Md. 708, 42 Atl. 212. 93 Toledo, etc. R. R. Co. v. Dunlap, 47 Mich. 456, 11 N. W. 271; Continental Improvement Co. v. Phelps, 47 Mich. 299, 11 N. W. 167. through which its road passes, or which otherwise derive a public advantage from the enterprise and improvement of such company, power to subscribe to the capital stock of, or make donations to, the company; and it may provide for elections to decide as to such subscriptions or donations; for taxation to pay such subscriptions or donations, if voted; and for the issue of bonds to represent the same. It may also provide for the personal liability of stockholders for labor.95 But a provision in a railroad charter that certain counties might subscribe to the capital stock of the company all or any part of any sums theretofore voted in aid of a certain other railroad, was held not within the title. An act to amend a railroad charter authorized the company to obtain and any city or village to grant to the company any rights, privileges and franchises it might choose to do and secured such grants against revocation, change, injury or impairment. The authority was held not within the title.97 94 Mahomet v..Quackenbush, 117 U. S. 508, 6 S. C. Rep. 858, 29 L. Ed. 982; Town of Abington v. Cabeen, 106 Ill. 200, 12 Am. & Eng. R. R. Cas. 581; Connor v. Green Pond, etc. R. R. Co., 23 S. C. 427; Board of Super. v. People, 25 Ill. 181; Bell ville R. R. Co. v. Gregory, 15 id. 20, 18 Am. Dec. 589; Fireman's Benefit Ass'n v. Lounsbury, 21 Ill. 511, 74 Am. Dec. 115; People v. Loewenthal, 93 Ill. 191; City of Virden v. Allan, 107 id. 505; Slack v. Jacob, 8 W. Va. 640; Hope v. Gainsville, 72 Ga. 246; Unity v. Burrage, 103 U. S. 447, 26 L. Ed. 405; San Antonio v. Mehaffy, 96 U. S. 312, 24 L. Ed. 816; Binz v. Weber, 81 Ill. 288; People v. Brislin, 80 Ill. 423; Hutchinson v. Self, 153 Ill. 542, 39 N. E. 27; Powell v. Supervisors, 88 Va. 707, 14 S. E. 543. 96 96 People v. Hamill, 134 Ill. 666, 17 N. E. 799, 29 N. E. 280. 97 Mobile v. Louisville & N. R. R. Co., 124 Ala. 132, 26 So. 902. The court says: "If it be conceded that the subject contained in the title to the amendatory act is the subject of the original act, which is sought to be amended, that is, the incorporation of the New Orleans, Mobile & Chattanooga Railroad Co., even then the matter expressed in section 5, conferring grants of power upon incorporated towns and cities, could not be referable and cognate to the subject expressed in the caption, so as to relieve it of its offensiveness to the constitutional provisions. To the legislative mind, or to the public, upon reading the title to the act in question there is not the slight 95 Shipley v. Terre Haute, 74 Ind. est hint or suggestion to be had of 297. an intention or purpose to amend, A railroad charter authorized subscriptions to its stock by counties and townships and provided that "townships shall be and they are hereby declared to be bodies politic and corporate and vested with the necessary powers to carry out the provisions of this act." This was held sufficient to incorporate the townships and the provision was held germane to the subject expressed, because in aid of the object declared.98 An act to provide for the incorporation of companies to operate passenger railways may properly contain authority to lease the property and franchises of other railroad companies.99 A provision that no railway company shall have power to create a mortgage or lien valid against judgments for materials furnished, or for work done, or for damages done to persons or property by operation, was held germane to the subject of the consolidation of railways.1 An act to provide for the organization of street railways contained a provision that all companies theretofore organized to operate street railways should have the same powers, rights, protection and privileges, and should be subject to all the liabilities provided for companies organized under the act. The court says: "It is germane and appropriate to the subject-matter of the act, and to enact under such a title that all companies of a like nature should have the same privileges is fairly within the general object described in the title." Under a title to extend a certain railway, a provision authorizing the company to charge not exceeding four cents per mile was held germane and valid. The title, "An act requiring railroad companies to pay for damages to stock," was held suflicient to cover provisions as to fenc 3 alter or change the chartered powers of the cities and villages along the line or at the termini of the railroad of the company incorporated by the act." Floyd v. Perrin, 30 S. C. 1, 8 S. E. 14, 21. A. 242. ukerton 7. Penn Traction Lo., 193 Pa. S, 229, 44 Atl. 289. 1 Frasier v. Railway Co., 88 Tenn. 138, 12 S. W. 537. 2 Detroit v. Detroit Citizens' St. Ry. Co., 184 U. S. 368, 22 S. C. Rep. 410, 46 L. Ed. 592. 3 Id., 4 Parker v. Elmira, etc. R. R. Co., 165 N. Y. 274, 59 N. E. 81. |