### December 12, 1949

Hon. JamesH. fsoom Couut$ Attorney Allgalf.aa county m.fkin,9 !&%9s 0pinlon Ho*v-961. BenThe aatborlty of a subdivision of a county to hold anelection to mDear sir: peal In that subdlviariou a stook law prevlollrrly voted by the oomaty as Bwhole. Beferfmoe is madeto yollp remeat request wh+h ruwusin part aa r01>0w8:

“This 

### County reoently held aneleotlo& under.the provlelon of mtiale 6954 whlah remalted in favor of the stook law, prohibiting ip rtmting et large of the aattfle ,namyithere-

. :“The qwetion nowarises a8 to whether any 8ubdLvlsion of the aounty la entitled to call anelection to re’ 

### siibdltision. Article 963 prov#es~for the i!?al the Uiwin that repeal OSthe law throughout the whble County, 

### but the statute la vague and indefinite a8 to wlpther only one of the subdivision o? the !$d f 0 unm~~y vote to repeal the ~I@?In-that subTherefore our qwatibh td this: "After 8County; ‘6~ 8wkzuh, has voted ’ in favor of prohibiting @took from running sf large under the term8 of Artiale 6954, oan one aubditir~on of the County hold aneleatlon to repeal the law in that subdivision under the terms of Artiale 6963.’ 

### The stock law reiative to pPohibZtfng horses, mules, jaoka, jennets andoattle fran running at lame in oertaiu aountlea was paaaed originally a8House Bill 595, Rota 26th Leg., R.S., 1899, Gh.128, p.220, 

### and inoluded both Artiales 6954 and6963, Vernonfa Civfl Statutee. However there was no provision in the orfginal. .

Hon. YatmSIf. Bloore, page 2 (v-%1)



### Act whereby the stock law might be repealed in a aubdlvision of

’ a county once It had been adopted in the entire 0ountga Once the stock law has been adopted in a oounty pursuant to 

### Artlole 6954, supra, there was no authority to hold an election to repeal the law in any aubdivision of such county until 1903whenthe original 

### Act was amendedby Senate Bill 8, 

### Acts 28th Leg., R.S., 1903, Ch.71, p.97, so as to provide for such aneleation. This provlslon la found in Artiale 6963, V.C.S., wZllchprotides :

“Uponthe written petition of two hundred freeholders of any of the above namedcounties, or upon the written petition of fifty freeholdera of any subdivision of the above namedoounties, if the lawbe In force in that aubdlvlalon only, the commissioners court shall be authorlzed and required to 

### order an eleotion on the date therein namedto determine whether or not said law be repealed; provided, suoh petition be elgned by at least twenty-four l’meholdera from eaah justioe prealnot in suoh oounty. 

### $ut If this Iaw

### beaomes omrative over any of the above named oounties, as Pmsorlbed. it can in 

### no ease ba repealed bs any sUbdlVlsion, exaeRt bs a twobirds laajorlty of the votes cast by the freeholders of auoh aountles,. at aneleatLon held In acoordanoe wlth the (Emphasis added) 

### protis~ons oi this 

### ahepter.”
Slnae the County of Angelina has adopted the 8tOOk

### law under the provisions of Artiole 6954, It Is our opinion that the only wayit maybe repealed in a subdlvision of suoh oounty is by holding aneleotion In ooinplianoe with 

### Article 6963. ‘That 

### Artiale provldea that in no

### oaae oan it be repealed in any subdivision exoept by a two-thirds majority of the votea caet by the Sreeholders o? the oounty

. Therefore it ia our opinion that under the i’aota presented aneleation maynot be held by a subdlvlslon of the couqty to repeal the stook law in said aubdlvision of the oounty. SubfKARY 

### After a oounty as awhole haa adopted the stock law under 

### Article 699, Vernon18Hon. James R. Moom, page 3 (V-961)

Civil Statutes, an election iuaynot ba oalled in a subdivision alone to repeal the law in that subdivision. 

### Art.6963, V. C. 3. Pours very truly, ATTORREY

GRNRBAL

OFTRXf@

BA:bh:mw 

# By

kk&
Assistant

APPROVED
d+ ?.U FIRSTASSISTART ATTOFUQRYGRNRRAL