OFFICE OF THE Arro’lp&SY ,GENERAL OF TEXAS 

A&IN 

-norable GeorgmR. Shemrd 

Cmst~l~erlaf Pub110 Aooounts 

I 

Dear Sir! 

/c,, 

/i 

forged endorseniant? 

thie departnsnt on 

orlzed to lsaue 

owner of an 

1 warrant 113 

and is neither lort aor dampoeaeaaicm of whioh is purby the bank tmm the true owner 

the bank has previously paid 

n afzilse or forged lndortmwnt? 

er you to Article 4666, R. cII 61.‘ 

also to your opinion nu$bered O-898. 

*This request im mede wf%‘n referenos to 

warrant6 other than unemploymmt ormgensation 

warrante .(I 

Axtiole 4366, Vernon*6 lnnOtated Oiril Stat&Ate,. 

made as followe: 
Honorable George H. Sheppard, Page 2 

*The Comptroller. when satisfied that any 

original warrant drawn upon the State Treasurer 

has been lost or destroyed, or when any oertificats or other evidence of indebtedness approved 

by the auditing board of the State hae been lost, 

Is authorized to issue a duplioate uarrant in 

lieu of the original warrant or a dupllaate or a 

copy of suah certificate, or other evidence of 

Indebtedness In lieu of auoh original; but no 

such duplicate warrant. or other evldenoe of lndebtedness, shall lrsue until the appllcrant ha6 

filed piith the Comptroller his aftidavit, stating that he Is the true owner of' suuh instrument, 

end that the same is In raot lost or destroyed, 

and shall also file with the Comptroller his 

bond in double the amount of the olaim with two 

or more good and aurfleient sureties, payable 

to the Governor, to be approved by the Comptroller, and oonditioned that the applicant will 

hold the State harmless and return to the Comptroller, upon demand being made therefor, such 

duplicates or ooples, or the smount of money 

named therein, together with all ooats that may 

acorue against the State on oolleoting the same. 

After the issuance of said duplicate or oopy 

if the Comptroller should asoertaln that the same 

was improperly issued, or that the applissnt or 

party to whom the same was Issued was not the 

owner thereot, he shall at on08 demand the 

return of said duplioate or oopy it unpaid, 

or the amount paid out by the State, IP so 

paid; and, upon iallure of the party to return 

same or the amount of money dalled.for, suit 

shall be instituted upon said bond in Travfe 

eountyi' 

We quote from Texas Jurlsprudenoe, Vol. 34, page 

636, as followsr 

*A state, munioipal, aounty, district or 

school warrant is an instrument, generally in 

the form of a bill of erahange or order, drawn 

by an officer upon the person having cherge of 

the public funds, directing him to pay an 

amount or money speciried to the person named, 

or his order, or to bearer. In substanae warrant.% are mere promises to pay the amount 
Honorable George H. Sheppard, Faze 3 

specified; they are not bonds, nor are they 

negotiable instruments; they are only priaa 

facie evidenoe of an indebtedness, serving 

aa the oonvenient mode of conducting the publio*a business." 

Article 4365,.aupra, defines the extent and linitatlon of the power of the Comptroller of Fubllo Aooounta or 

the State of Texas to issue duplicate warrants. The statutes 

of the state sre silent upon the authority of the Comptroller 

to issue duplioate warrants exoept in the express lnatenoe of 

loss or destruction. Consequently, where a warrant la still 

goayaatence the Comptroller ho8 no authority to issue a dup- 

. 

In our opinion No. 0-3S5, it was held'thst: *It is 

our opinion that Article 4365 prohibits the lsauanoe of a 

duglioate warrant where the loss or destruction of the origlnal has not boen called to the attention and provad to the 

aatiafaotlon of the Comptroller In the menner provided In 

said statute." 

Under the faota and olrcumatsnoes stated in your 

letter, we are of the opinion that the proper 2rooedure would 

be for the owner of the warrant in question to Institute proceedings for the possession of the warrant egainat the perty 

holding said warrant rrom him. 

In vfew of the forgoing, your question is reapeotively answered in the negative. 

Trusting that the toregoing @il.ly answers your lnquiry, we remain 

Yours very truly 

ATTORNEY GX?U?%L OF~kAS 

Dy -ML 

Ardell Piilliama 

Assistant 

APPROVED oPlNmN c co~Mnr88 

tw-