THEA~ORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

AUSTIN aa. Texan WILL WILSON A-ORNECY GNNEHAL August 

### 14, 1959

Honorable M. T. Harrington, Chairman Cotton Research Committeeof Texas Texas A 8 M College College Station, Texas OpinionNo. 

### ~~-685

Re:

Dear Dr. Harrington: Authorityof the Comptroller of Public Accounts to approve a P-l voucher drawn against the Cotton Research Committee in favor of Texas Technological College for reimbursement for the purchaseprice of two spinning frames purchased for the Committee.

You have requested our opinion concerning a question which is predicated on the following facts:

The Cotton Research Committee receives research proposals from the various State educational institutions and State agencies. The Committee evaluates each of these proposals and within certain dollar limitations, imposed by the appropriationto the Committee,agrees to sponsor certain of the proposals.

Under the agreement entered into between the Committee and the State educational institutions or State agencies, the Committeeagrees topay the cost of conducting the research coveredby the acceptedproposal.

Quoting from your letter of April 

### 15, 1959, to the Honorable Robert S. Calvert:

$1

. . . "The CottonResearch Committee of Texas has had as a policy for severalyears and provides in its annualmemorandum agreementwith each. ,

Honorable M. T. Harrington,page 2 (~~-685)

institution, that any equipmentpurchased for a researchproject for which Committee appropriated funds are used to reimburse the educational institution shallbecome the property of the CottonResearch Committee of Texas and shallbe subject to the Committee's control. This policy enables the Committeeto transfer Items of equipment from one college campus to another in sponsoringvarious researchprojects and it eliminatesduplication of technical research equipmentbetween the institutions conducting research for the Committee.
"Thetransaction in question consists of two spinning frames costing $2~,511.58 which were needed by Texas Technological College to conduct a researchproject covered by a memorandum agreementbetween the Cotton Research Committeeand Texas Technological College. Inevaluating this researchproposal submitted~bythe Texas Technological College to the Committee,we were aware that it would be necessary for Texas Technological College to secure these two spinning frames and we provided in our memorandum agreementwith Texas TechnologicalCollege a sum sufficientto cover these items of equipmentwith our standardprovision that the equipment, once Texas TechnologicalCollegehad been reimbursed for its cost,would become property subject to the control of the Cotton Research Committee.

"For this particular transaction,Texas TechnologicalCollege ordered the spinning frames through the State Board of Controland paid for the items with Local Funds not deposited in the State Treasury. The attached P-l form is an attempt on the part of the CottonResearch Committeeof Texas to carry out its agreementwith Texas Technological College to reimburse the Local Funds of Texas Technological College out of the General Revenue appropriationsmade by the 55th Legislature to the CottonResearch Committee of Texas f,orthe costs of conducting research programs.Honorable M. T. Harrington, Page 3 (m-685)

The Comptroller of Public Accountshas refused to approve the voucher to reimburse the Texas Technological College Local Funds for the cost of the two spinning frames used in the research program conductedby the College.

In his letter to you, dated April 20, 1959, the Comptroller states:

11

. . . I am of the opinion that the act creating the Cotton Research Committeedoes not provide for the sale of equipment from the schoolswhich participate in the program, to the CottonResearch Committee.

"It ismy further opinion that the act only provides for the reimbursement for the use of the equipment and not for Capitol Outlay."
Your letter concludesby asking our opinion "as to the legality of the claim."

In view of the facts set forth, it is necessary for us to determinewhether the CottonResearch Committeewas acting within its authority in seeking to reimburse the Texas Technological College Local Funds for the cost of the two spinning frames used in a researchprogram sponsoredby the Committee.

In order to determine the scope of the authority of the Cotton Research Committee, itwill be necessary to look fo the statute creating the Committee.Section 2 of Article 165-G ofVernon's Annotated Texas Civil Statutes reads in par as follows:

"A CottonResearch Committee

. . . is hereby created and established to cause surveys, research and investigationsto be made relating to the utilization of the cotton fiber, cottonseed,and all otherproducts of the cottonplant, with authority to contract with any and all AgriculturalAgencies and Departments of the State, and all State Educational Institutionsand State Agencies to perform any such services for said CommTf;tee.

Honorable M. T. Harrington,page 4 

### (WW-685)

and for the use of their respectiveavailable facilities, as itmay deem proper, and to compensate such Agencies,Departments and Institutions to be paid from money appropriatedby the Legislature for the purposes of this Act.

. . ." (mphasis ours). Quoting now from the appropriationto the Cotton Research Committee in House Bill 

### 133,Acts 55th Legislature, Regular Session, 1957, Chapter 

### 385,page 1130,we find language which has furtherbearing on the power of the Committee:

T he hereby authk zed, to contractwith any or all of

4 CottonResearch Committee is
said institutions to perform such services for said Committeeas it may deem proper and to compensate said institutionor institutions for the cost thereof from the funds herein appropriated.

. . . (Emphasisours).
The Committee is specificallydirected to cause surveys, research and investigationsto be made relating to utilization of cotton fiber and cotton products and in so doing the Committee is granted the power to contractwith the various State Educational Institutionsand Agricultural Agencies for the use of their facilities and performance of services,as itmay deem proper. Although this is a grant of broad discretionarypower of contract,we are not disposed to hold that it is unlimited.

The languageused in neither of the above quotations specificallyauthorizes the Committee to reimburse an institutionfor the cost of equipmentused in cotton researchprojects and by agreement thereby become the owner of such equipment. Therefore,we must ascertain the legislative intentwith regard to this statute and construe the statute in the light of such intent and the rules of statutory construction.

In 39 Texas Jurisprudence 90, Statutes,pages 

### 166- 167,we find the following statementwith regard to the legislative intent:

"'The intention of the Legislature in enacting a law is the law itself,' 'theessence of the law,' and 'the spiritwhich gives life' to the enactment. Hence, the aim and object of construction is to ascertain and enforce the. -

Honorable M. T. Harrington, Page 5 (~-685)

legislative intent, and not to defeat, nullify or thwart It."
The following language from Section 1 of Article 165-4a of Vernon's AnnotatedTexas Civil Statutes sets forth the purpose which prompted the legislature to act:

'By this Act it is expresslydeclared that the policy of all the various agriculturalagencies of the State of Texas shall be shaped so that the subject of the increaseduse and outlet for farm products, especially cotton, shall be stressed as much as the production of said products.

. . ." (Emphasisours),
When we consider this language in conjunctionwith the authority granted the Committee to cause surveys, research and investigationsto be made relating to the uti!Tzation of cotton and cotton products,we conclude that the Legislature intended that the Committeehave as one of its primary purposes the coordinationof the various surveys, researchprojects and investigationscarried on under its authority in such a manner as to prevent duplication of effort and assure efficiency.

An additional guide in construing the statuteas a whole is expressed in the following rule of statutory construction stated in 39 Texas Jurisprudence 91, Statutes, pages 172-173:

"An important rule to be observed in statutory Interpretationis that an Act shouldbe given a fair, rational, reasonable and sensible construction, considering its language and subjectmatter, and with a view to accomplishing the legislative intent and purpose. . . . flhe-7construction should comportwith common, sense and justiceand irrational conclusionsor deductions shouldbe avoided.

. . .I' Undoubtedly the spinning frames purchasedby Texas Technological College for use in a researchproject sponsored by the Committeeare equipmentwhich can and will be utilized in future projects under the sponsorshipof the Committee. Whether such future utilization of the spinning frames will be in a project carried out at Texas Technological College or some other State educational institutionor Agency is a factor that cannot,within reason, be determined at the present time. It is certainlyprobable that spinning framesHonorable M. T. Harrington,page 6 

### (WW-685)

of this type will be necessary equipment for future research projectswhich will be conductedby State educational institutions or agencies other than Texas Technological College.

It would certainly not be in keepingwith the Legislative intentwith regardto the efficientcoordination of projects and duplication of effort to require that some other State institution or agency be required to purchase identical or similar spinning frames in order to carry out a researchproject under the sponsorship of the Committeewhen the needed equipmentwas sittingunused at Texas Technological Collegeand the Committeewas unable to order it moved to the needed location simplybecause it did not own it.

In order to accomplish a rational, reasonable and sensible construction of the statute, considering its language and subjectmatter and the intention of the Legislature, it is our opinion that the Cotton Research Committee had the authority,under its power to contract, to enter into an agreement to reimburse Texas Technological College for the cost of the spinning frames purchased by the College for use in a researchprogram sponsoredby the Committee and under this agreement,become the owner of the spinning frames. Therefore,you are advised that the claim is legal and the voucher shouldbe approved.

SUMMARY
The Cotton Research Committeehad the authority to enter into an agreement to reimburse Texas Technological College for the cost of two spinning frames purchasedby the College to be used in a research project sponsored by the Committee and become the owner of the spinning frames; the claim represented by the P-l voucher Is a legal claim and shouldbe approved.

Yours very truly,
WILL WILSON Attorney General of Texas

WOS:wb:mfh BY W. 0. Shultz Assistant. -

Honorable M. T. Eazrington, Page 7 (m-685)

APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE Geo. P. Blackburn, Chairman Raymond V. Loftin, Jr. Joe Allen Osborn Riley Eugene Fletcher L. P. Lollar

REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: W. V. Geppert