**OFFICE OF**  **THE ATTORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN**  **11**

**IIonorable** ESIabat f%AhUt CountyAttorney **Xl Pas0**  **county** Al Paso, Texas
Dear Str: opinion No. 044351 :



### weare in NO61 ter seeking ion ot this 

### the Qplndepa statsmentor factsi, .whlohare taken

r or not a 

### tire, the United **Staten, en,**  **oen obtain** 

**on arises**  **in two**  **waya,. porohene**  **and oparate**  **suoki** parate propertyand 8eoond6, hs may operate a **buaines$** ned with oommunltyproperty.” seotion 5,

of Article 667, V. **A. P.**  **C. oontatns**  the followingqualftioatlane a6 a prerequisite

to obtain any type OS lioense.HonorableErnest QuIM, page 2

*That he is (I

law aaiding,tax-paying oiticen of this State, over twenty-one (21) peers of age;
. . .* Section **43-b Of**  Ch. 325 **Of** ths 48th **~P@$BhitUrS,** Hegular Qeamlon,p. 525 of V. T. 6. L. 3. ?S 1943, provides as r0iima: 'When thq terms 'oitlzena of Texas’ and *oltfzenaof thfs state' era used In this Aot, they shall mean not only oltlzenahip In Texsa, aa requiredby **this** trot, but shall also requlra oItizenahlpin the UnitedStates.* The first questionthat m must determine is the status 6s a woman oltleenof the United Stateswho marries analien. Pkior tb Aot of Co~aa, Sarah 2, X907,,31, Stat., p. i228, 'Ch.

2534, the oases are not In aoeord as to the a%rtua Or e.womanwho is e Oltiaenby reason of birth In the Unit@ States and who marries aa allen. A$ter the paaa- ~ege end eftsotlredate df the Aeo ,Unit.ad 8tatea oitltenahlp. jot, the wlte **or** an alien loat i This statutew&s approvadby ; tha Supreme Court.or the United 8tatea In the oaae of MoIKen v. Ears, 239 U. 8. 299.

.

Under~tbaAot.

of' Bsptembsr 22, 1922, 42 Stat., p. 1022, Ch. i&l, Sea. 3,',end 8 U. 6. 'C.

A., Sec. 9, wbloh provided thet,awoman who la a oltizenof the United States shall not oeeae to be a oltlaenof ,the **United States**  by raeson or her 

### aerrlege to an alien after the pe~aaage oi the hot, ualaaa she makes a torail renunsiatlon of her oltiaanahlp **before a**  **oourt of**  **proper** jurladiotitk **There 1s**  **also** a proviso In thla **Aot** thht forfeltsher oltireoehlpit her prrlege la to.aa alisn.~Inellglbls **for** oitlamahlp. This statute does not arreot the **status or**  **any** auoh woman who merrled an.allen prior to September 22, 1922. *’ The Aot or Septsmber22, 1922, agore rarerred to, as emended by an AOt or Maroh 3, 1931, 46 Stat.,,pi 1511, Sea. 4, omitted the provld that ioifalta,tM eltlaanahi of eny womsn born in the United States nho atarries an al 9en iaellglble

r0r **-0itlzenship.** The Acts of Ssptamber 22, 1922, and Maroh 3, 1931, were again emended in October 1940, 8 U. 8. C. **A.,** Title 8,- i

Xonorable 1S;meat O~+lnn, page 3

In 880s. 801, 802 an6 804, but ere eaaentlellythe am ea the Aot of Paroh 3, 1931, es to the atetus of~e woman born In the United Stetes an3 married to ao alien.

The listing of the differentacts of Congressreletlve to the oltlzenshlpof wonen **born** ln the United Statea and married'toaliens Is for the purpose of furnlahIngyou w5t.h a yardstiok to **deterd.ne** whether or not some of the ?oany epplloentaere citizensof the United States.

It I8 our opinion that all women born in the Qiited States who merry aliens end uhose husbanda are ellglble 'fox oItIaenahIpIn the United States have r6taimid their United States oltlzenahlp unless they have announcedoontrary lntentlona to proper judlolalor edmlnIatrstIve ofrloera,with **the** exoeptloaof those whose marriage ooourredbetween Mar& 2, ,1907 and September 22, 1922.
Dt oourae, ~ltshe ararrled aa alien lnellglblefor Unlded States oltlaenahlpprior to the effeotlvedate of the Aot of M&oh 3, 1931, abe rould lose her oltlaenahlp.

It ahe is not kkitlaeriof tha United Statea ahe 'k6uld not~.be

.entltledtd.apermit, and both of your qu~atlona -ad be anawei+ed

In the negative.
Even though ahe might have lost cltlaenahlpunder ..one~of

thd kboie aathoda, If she has been neturalleeb,she :li Lou a~ aitlzen. '. AktIole~~4619,

of the Revised 01~11 Statutes,with cya+o’t to ooaununlty property;lna~fsr es pertinent, Is. ea ~011olm; *All property eoqulredby either the huabend or wife dtirlng Illbrriege,

exoept that whloh Is the aaparatepropertyOf either, ah41 bs deswd. ootion propsrtyor the husband end wife; end all the effeotawhloh'thehusband end wife possess +& the time the marrlsgemay bc,dlssolved ahall be regarded as oommon etfeota 

### br gelna, vnless the contrary be aatl~faototlly proved.. During oorerture the oomraon propertyof the husband ,aa+d zlfe may be disposed of by the huayend only;

.Honorablel&met Cuina,,pege4

In OpinionNo. O-16/+0 we held that the i3oer3 ahould not day a pennit to retailwl~ae end beer merely beoause the applloent

was the wife ot oae who was ineligiblefor su& a peroiit. In that opinionwe aald:

The sole **q;lbStiOll** propounded by you for our oonslasmtlon, as we understand It, 1s whether a marriedwoman may be aenlea a permit to retailwine aad bser whh~1 her husband, who 1s dlsquallfled rrom recelvlng.euoh a permlt would benefit thereby,under the oommunlty propertyl.aw

of thle State."
T&t oplaloa,

we think, 3s sound, and oontro1.a the &Mwers to your present inquiry. The prorlts or any mercentlls.buelnesa

that imy be oarrled od by e mmrlea wonmn are perloroeof the Coastltutlon and **statutes oommurzlty**  property belonging .epually

to the hueband and wire. This 1s true, whether the oapltal lnreatment be the q6parateproperty or the die or the oommunltyof the marrlage.~ The right of .the husband to his lntereet In the profitsor auoh venture bj the wire doea not mzwlt rmm any wement or underetaaulng between them, however; that right is in oowequenoe~of,lew +n~anLncident,~

$.o,thr aarltel ration.

.. ,.,' .j butt'fi;gal'

: It ls'not oonventlon-i ewenoe, and oannot **be** eiieotedby the preagreementof the parties.

It does not folloff.frorn this, however, that the hcllbend'e

legal rights In the earning6of the .bualnessoonier upon him aay interest whatsoever In the business itself', within the meaning of the Liquor Cont~rol Aot. It requires mmething lpore

than **mere** oapltal ror one to engage In suoh bollnosa~there mwt be the expressperniaelonor the State through the statutorypermlf. This 18 the very eeaeaae or the buslness,~

una the hueband--merely becausehe 1s the husbaad--does

not have such interest in the buslntss as rcIuld reader his wife lnallglbleto **be** a pemlttee under the etatutie.,

Moreover, 618

held in our OpinionNo. O-1640, where a husbandwho by his own wrongful **act,** or othem$ae, la fob : bidden to claim a pecuniaryrQ$it,which oralnarlly would be oommunltyproperty; the saae by operetlor& lea would beooms the separateproperty'ofthe wire. See, XlokeraonY. Nlokeraon,HqnorebleErrnat Gulan, page 5

65 Tax. 281; Dloksonv. Strloklend,265 8. 19. 1012.
It la true, of oourae, that the huabaad la the exerolae **of** his **atatutorj** right to oontrol the oomnunlty propertymay thwart the efrortsor th6 rife to uae suoh rubi in any meroantllepursuit. **But that**  **is the**  **measure** ot his rl&t, slnoe ha does not have es matter or law any rigat or oontrol or managementor the businesses auoh.

Whet the statute **seeks to**  **prevent is**  the OO~YMtlonal use of a permit by one for the benefit or anothar.. This la always a raot aituatlon,aependentupon the agrednbsnt or intentioaa of the partlta;and not upon tholr legal atetuaeaas husband and wife, parent end ohlld, or the llka.

Furthezamse,

there la no rule of law forblddlng the huabacd to make d gift or his present lnteraet ln the oomunlty propertyor earnings,auah ha those 0f.e -roantile **.buaIneaa, to**  his tire ror any &awful uae by her.

Your queatloaa are thereroreantswarad to the atteat that a wire la not iaellglbleto hold a permit, 8~6~ thou&her husband. la lnsll(iible

to hold one. HOi-

troubles In auob a~<uatlon would be tlnanoialdirfiaultlea and not legal lnhlbltlona. Very truly yours, ATTORNEY

QEEIERAL

**OF** TBXAS

APPROVED SEP 11, 19&3 (a) Gerald C. Mann ATTORNEYGFNERAL **OF** TEXAS This opinion aonaiderad ana approved in 1ititeQ oonrecenoe.