This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1910 edition. Excerpt: ...of this act" has a legal or technical meaning in this statute that will take it out of the generally-accepted use and understanding of the term? It is beyond question that a legislative enactment can only go into efiect either by the declaration of an emergency in the act itself, or upon distribution of the session laws 2. to the various counties, and the proclamation of the Governor. An act without an emergency clause cannot go into efiect in advance of distribution of the session laws and proclamation, even though it fixes a time for its going into effect in advance of distribution and proclamation. Cain v. Goda (1882), 84 Ind. 209; McCal'me'nt v. State (1881), 77 Ind. 250; Noel v. Ewing (1857), 9 Ind. 37; Hendrickson v. Hendrickson (1855), 7 Ind. 13; McC00l v. State (1856), 7 Ind. 378; Ex parte Lucas (1901), 160 M0. 218, 61 S. W. 218. Repealing or saving clauses in an act do not take efiect at a different time from the act as a whole, though 3. expressed in the present tense. Leyner v. State (1857), 8 Ind. 490; Schneider v. Hussey (1881), 2 Idaho 8, 1 Pac. 343. Outside this jurisdiction there is a decided conflict in the states as to the meaning of the phrase "after the passage of an act." It is held in some of the states and in 4. the United States courts to mean the date of its enactment, authentication and approval by the Governor '-or President, or its passage over a veto. Eliot v. Cranston (1871), 10 R. I. 88; Walker v. Mississippi, etc., R. Co. (1875), Fed. Gas. No. 17,079; In re Tebbetts (1842), Fed. Gas. No. 13,817; Johnson v. Fay (1860), 16 Gray (Mass) 144; Wartman v. City of Phil-adclphia (1859), 33 Pa. St. 202; Burgess v. Salmon (1878), 97 U. S. 381, 24 L. Ed. 1104; State v. Mounts (1892), 36 W. Va....