..; 

OFFICE OF THE A'ITORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Honoreble. John R. Shook 

Criminal Dletrlot Attorafq 

San Antonio, Texas 

Attention: Hr. T. 8. Rldgevay 

e\, 

Dear Sfr: 

or 

as 
IXo~orable John B. 83mok - Fag4 2 

and gasoline and the County aooepted the& 

eemlaee down to Julr 7, 1941, when the<#uatlen 

for a rehearing mm overruled In Ohe abore 

OQUse. TWO or the patrolmen were bfsp4ns4a dth, 

14wilIg only r0tlr in the employ or the countr. 

The rour who w&r4 retained wexe paid their 

salaries aad the two who were dropped fr4m the 

qimploy Of the Uoiuity were not paid their e&itlSl4S. These two patrolmen, who were eliainated rrcm their wmiee an July 7, 19i&ren- 

&wed a bill t4 the Ctiss16ners’ Qoxirt ior 

$285.00 l mhb, being the amount or their mspective oalaries from rtrJr 14, 1943, to &ly 7, 

190. The Court reemtly entered an order allowing th4ir olalm, the or&e~ beins as follcmm 

"We weuld like 60 &a~4 yatrr Opts UPOn the 

raLf0dng tno questian*: 

"1. x4 ft 14gt2. r0r th6 &mmL8*16a~4x8* 

ao?lrt *io ~TaOX the paym6nt Qi the 
Honorable John R. Shook - Rqe 3 

salarlcq or these two patrolmen rraa 

May 14, 194l to July 7. 194X7 

*2. S1n0. the Oummi&Ei1oil4r&* aouxt 

ha8 entore& its order upon the ainutes 

or the Court approving the payment or said 

olaims of fhs two patroloen and haling lnstratated the Auditor to draw warrants in 

taror or 84fa patrolmen in payment or said 

elaIa., 1. It the duty of the kudltor to 

draw t@e ryants In pamnt thareot? 

*In this 4onnoatIon,w4 wieh to direot your 

attention to the 0.~4 or Buster Harp vs. +. 0. m&y, 

County Auditor or Boxer County, readwed-#y the 

Feurth Courtof Citil Appeal.atSi%s &6dfO, on 

w0r4a4r 12, ipu. Thit3 d401~i4~ i6 not report4a, 

but a oopy tikhbr is attaehea her&h Ii0 ratioa 

for rehearing ua. t%led aad this deaialoa i4 final. 

-4 order or the OommImioaer~* Gosrt eU&wlag 

the olaim 0r .the two patr4lnmn lb ori its ra44 nliil 

and pea-tabs to a, setter whhh is rested ~~~oluslrely 

within the jarladietion or that Qeurt; I$ appears 

to ss that this order ia a fiaal $-at and ozmld 

only be 846 a*144 in a 4irest~pr~eeaing institut4U 

in the dietriat~ aouxt. The County Airtlt$qr, belag 

a mis1st4rial~otii44r, is not rested with judiolal 

power and would not be aQthCWi&Od t4 haar and wei& 

4tia4~~4 u~tl past3 jtkag8i4nt upon the r8atq. 

9w1il488, the ardor 0t the Ommissionsr8~ Gourt 

i..void, it rclold b44tm4 the aWe7 or the Audifor 

to i..ae the werxsnts or ~owher. there an dlreeted. 

It dg.8 not m&xir to u& that S&e exbe of 6he QOEdsaioners* Ookrt is void ror the reason that the 

oopatr 8004p64d th6 bmubrtt or the 44rtlpl4u er 

the patr4lS4n(, and, in raot, 4Ld not nr*r tha 

that their 84mfoea wWlU.b4 &&4pea.@ with armtil 

JQL??, 194n. 

hour 0pIQIon opal the abme pue86Ioli8 w%l.l 

be .gpr&01.t.$.* 
Eonotable J&i R. Shook - Peg. C 

. 

Under the raots stated in~yotkr lettsr B&X&F oopnty 

for the past several years and up to &ly 7, 194l, had in 

its employ sin patrolmen under the assumption that the law 

aathorlsed the appointment OS that amber of highmar patrolQem. Apparsntly~the ~fX~~fs&ioners* c-t sating in eonj~O$iOa With the Sheriff was &oti+ br view of.ArtIcl& 

6699~~ veraum'. Annotated civil stem%@.' 8pet&r, the 

Sq-mme court or Texas in the above a&ntl&lltc:oa&& orCha.. 

W. AnaOr&On. Count Judge, et al. v. will 1. Wood, am0118 

other things held f 

atit<ional. 

hat Artiole 6699B, supa, was unoon- 
Therero*e, it is o&x oplnioa the% said aas4 is ao euthoritr 

authari&lag the &samlaslonere~ mart to msks the above 

8i4di0rua order. 

It is oar rarthsr oplnlon ghet the oommissioners* aourt 

had ao authority, 4itheaf upre8se& or~fsp~ud, to make the 

abore noatl4mea .Qlder -4 thet said order i~.th4nrom void. 

we here OarSrall~ 80nsid4r44 the eaa44 or Slubr 

Y. Qiity or San Aatonio. 2nd 8. w. (26) ai; Edw&ls v. 

Lubbook Gouatr, 33 8. W. (24) 482, and the euthorltles 

ofted. t&eroin, holdlirg in siieat that where oounti4s or 

mm$alpslitie& reoeito bon&fit& andor oonSraot& Allegal 

b44mme they are not in oosfomlty with the Oonstltution 

or statutes or oherter p~~i4Ion or 4 aitr, said aoantles 

ox munioipalitf,ea arb U4ble on iypu8a ooqtraots rw the 

reaaomble raluq ai'the.betmrit# whiah thu7~have r4aeired. 

Houmer a4 me und&rstanU the abwe rentIoaed awms, th4 

d&&kn~~* 06&t an&/or the proper &th6ri~~e& or the 

al%~ had the'autwritf to u&a aaid aolotraat sr aontraots 

mat raU4a. 66 'aomp2.y M,th the aatutea Or pcori8lans or 

tho Mty'olmrter ~werx&iq thu 4m. Xa.oth4z wrd4, whoa 

a oountr Qr. nity has ribueina the buwfit 0r a v&raet 

whkah'if hrd the pq$r to ma@, bolf wkf#a ~&%~.n#t; ~.legaLky 

OnterM into, th4,4ouaty ox Qitruy b*~~Wem~dLl8d to do 

jut3ti04 end to,paJ the aoasi6mti6n; be..it' f4qt to pay rot 

what t has reseivdl. Iisxwh e.... iti.@afd'that the 

lsu will Imply a aonWaet. Eowwu, em abova'statcrd, *B do 

not think that th,.~oamluiaxwrs~ omr%:ha9 ~~arrthorlt~ 

whstever to.~appoiat the 8bo~0 msatIaneU.o,au8t~,tralMis 

orci44r6. It is txu'far6her ~opinion thet tmld ooua-6 had a0 

W.&hQFit~ to oo~treet; with 44 

perfo*r~the ss~aea~.w&ish WM 

rore the &we ~ntIo+i oeu14a sre not op 

tp4at~4ins statsd abws.