Robert E. Woodside, Atty. Gen., for appellant.
D. J. Snyder, Jr., Kunkle & Trescher, Greensburg, Joseph N. Cascio, Fike & Cascio, Clarence L. Shaver, and Shaver & Heckman, all of Somerset, for appellee.
Before Rhodes, P. J., and Hirt, Reno, Dithrich, Ross, Arnold and Gunther, JJ.
[ 168 Pa. Super. Page 597]
We are concerned here with section 905 of The Vehicle Code, Act of May 1, 1929, P.L. 905, Article IX, 75 P.S. § 455, as amended. In the original Act this section was entitled 'Permits for Excessive Size and Weight' and contained two subsections. Subsection (a) provided, inter alia, for the issuance upon application of a special permit authorizing the applicant to move a vehicle of a size or weight exceeding specified maximums upon highways within the Commonwealth. Subsection (b) provided for the lawful movement of such vehicle without a permit in the event of catastrophe or accident affecting public convenience. Accompanying these subsections was a penalty clause prescribing a punishment where vehicles exceeding the
[ 168 Pa. Super. Page 598]
maximum in size or weight were moved without a permit.
The Act of 1929 was amended by the Act of June 22, 1931, P.L. 751, § 2. Section 905 was changed only in that subsection (a) was broadened. Subsection (b) and the penalty clause were unamended but were set out in full.
The Act of 1929 was again amended by the Act of July 16, 1935, P.L. 1056, § 27. Subsection (a) of section 905 appeared in its amended form, but neither subsection (b) nor the penalty clause were set forth in that amendatory Act.
By the Act of June 5, 1937, P.L. 1718, § 1, the original statute was again amended. Subsection (a) was printed in its emended form, but once more subsection (b) and the penalty clause were omitted.
Briefly, the relevant facts are as follows. Defendant was arrested by a Pennsylvania State Policeman May 5, 1950, in Somerset Borough, Somerset County, for an alleged violation of section 905(a) of the Act of 1929, supra, as amended. After a hearing before a justice of the peace he was found guilty and sentenced to pay $50 and costs in accordance with the penalty provision of the original Act. The court below allowed an appeal and, upon motion of counsel for defendant, quashed the information on the ground that 'the omission of * * * the penalty clause of Section 905 in the amendatory Act of 1937 amounts to an abrogation thereof from the Motor Vehicle Code.' The Commonwealth appealed, as it had a right to do, this order of the court below being ...