Gerald C. E%nn 

Attorney General 

Donorable Euaene Bra&v 

Assistant Co&y Attoiney 

Eunt county 

Greenville, Texas 

Dear Sir: opinion NO. o-2973 

Be: Salaries of county officers of 

.EZunt County, Texas 

Your request for opinion has been received and 

carefully considered by this Uepartment,. ,\Be quote from your 

request as foilows: 

, "I respeatiully request opinion from you 

as to salaries to be paid County Cffloers in 

Hunt County, Texas, such facts as are neoassary 

,;_+_.,:, .: :,.q.. .ar.e ,,,. 8 et.., mat ,,,.. ~,.. k&wdn. ..~.~~.~,~q~~sk.,~,~~..~~~p~~~:.,~~~ I :.;:; -. ~* .i~~_ 

Taunt County, Texas, aoaording to the'laat 

preaeding FeUeral Census has a population of' 

@,717. The total taxable valuation for 1940 

is $20,1&2,000. All County Officers are and 

have been compensated on a salary basis slnoe 

the General Salary Law went into effect in 1936. 

Al.1 preolnot offloere are still compensated on 

a fee basis. During the year 1935 all County 

Officers except County Judge earned fees of 

office in excess of $4,250.00 per year. county 

Judge earned Sees of $3,100.00 during that year. 

The earned tees of' the County Treasurer during 

the year 1935 were in excess of $2,000. The 

or population of Hunt County ,aaaording to the 1930 

Census was 49,016. 

" . . . 

Tn~er the above law and state of facts 

quoted it is i;u7 opinion that it would be the 

duty of the Commissioners Court to set salaries 

of !;heriff, Tax Assessor and Collector, County 

Clerk, District Clerk. County Attorney at an 
Honorable Xu(;ene Brady, Page 2 

annual salary of not less'than $4,250.00 par 

year and not more than $&,292.50 per year. That 

it would be the duty of said court to set the 

County Judge's Salary at a salary of not 166s 

than $3,000.00 per year snd not mope than $&,292.50 

per year. 

NArtlcle 3887a provides: 'In all oountiee 

in the state of Texas having a population of 

more than 48,540 and less than 48,800 acaording 

to the last preceding or any future ?ederal Census where the Commissioners Court shall have 

determined or shall determine to compensate the 

County Attoneg of such county upon an annual 

salary basis according to law, such Court shall 

fix the salary of such County Attorney at not to 

exoeed $Z,&OO.OO per annum.' This artlcls wa6 

passed in 1937, Forty Fifth Legislature, Seaond 

Called Session. It is my Information that this 

Article never beoams a law for the reason that 

it was passed at a special session of the Legislature and was not within the Governor's aall for 

that 6peOial 6e88iOn. but notwlthetanding that I 

m -of 'the ~oplJl~~~ .%&bo,gai& ,~~ale::,~ul~..ag~~.~ :~ '~ " 

the less be inoperative for reaaone set out and 

d5.a&seed below. 

"Article 3883d provides: Section 1: 'That 

from and after January 1, 19&O, being the effeotive date of this Act, in all oOUnti0S in this 

State having a population of not less than 48,530 

and not more than 48,930 acaording to the last 

preaeding Federal Census, the Commissioners Court 

shall have the povler and authority to flx the Sdaries of the Shari??, the tax assessor-collector, 

the aounty clerk, the county judge, the distriot 

clerk, and the oounty attorney; provided, however, 

that the salary of the sheriff shall not be flxed 

in excess of the sum of *J+,250 per annu'c, nor less 

than the SW of 33,600 per annum; the salary of 

the tax assessor-collector shall not be fixed in 

excess of the sum of $&,OOO per annum, nor less 

than the sum Of $3,600; the salary of the County 

clerk shall not be fixed in excess of the sum of 

$4,000 per annum, nor less than the sum of $3,300 
.- 

:'!onorable 3qene Brady, rage 3 

PEIT ~dlUI?l; the salary of the county judge shall 

not be fixed in excess of the sum of $3,200 per 

annuT nor less than the sum of $2,700 per annum; 

the salary of the district olerk shall not be flred in excess of the sum of $3,300 per annum, nor 

lese than the sum of $2,700 per annum; the salary 

of the aounty attorney shall not be fixed in exoess of the sum of $3,000 per annum nor less~than 

the sun of $2,700 per annum.' 

"It Is my opinion that both of the last two 

quoted articles are unoonstitutional in that they 

are in fact speoial laws even though they purported 

to be General Lawe, as examination of the oen6u6 

figures for 1930 show that at the time they were 

passed they applied to only one aounty, Bowl8 

County, and there exist6 none66onable ba6i6 in faot 

for suoh a olassifioation a6 set out by you in your 

opinion No. O-1020 and O-899. 

*I also believe that they should be held nnoon6titutional under following oase6: 

"wood ~6. &U-f6 

123 SK (2d) 429. 

"Brownfield va. 

and many other oases 

Independent Sohool Diatriot, 

Tongate, 109 SW (26) 352. 

referred to in these opinions. 

"For these reasons I believe that Artioles 

j88jd and 3887a referred to above are unoonstituMona1 and that it would be neaessary to go baok 

to the General laws as set out above for the deter: 

&nation of salaries to be paid County Offiaers in 

this county. 

"Article 1645 provide,s for the appointment of 

County Auditor, 'who shall be compensated for his 

servic,ss $125 for each million dollars or major 

yorticn thereof on the assessed valuation. The 

annual salary to 

tax Toll.' 

be co,mputed fro:% the last approved 

'As set out above the last approved tax 
.- Honorable ?ugene Brady, Page 4 

roll of thla county Is $20,142,000. Therefore 

under this law the County auditor would be antitled to aompannsatlon In the amount of $2,500 

per year. 

*Article 1645d, Section 1 provides *In all 

oountlee in this state having a population of not 

less than 45,000 inhabitante nor more than 50,000 

inhabitants acoordlng to the last Federal Census 

as same now exists or'may hereafter exist the 

County Auditor shall receive an annuaI salary 

from county funds of $4,000 to be paid in equal 

monthly lnetallments out of the General Revenues 

of the county.' This aat was passed by the FortyFifth Legislature In 1937. 

WArtlcle 1645e, Section 1 provldear 'That in 

countlee having a population of not lean than 

46,600 nor$more than 49,000 aoaordl.ug to the lart 

preaedlng Be6oral Cansus the oompeneatfen of ea& 

county Auditor shall bs 83,600.t This aat bmmme 

efteotlre October 25, 1937. 

*For the rea(1ona met out above It ie my opin- 

.,, Zion :,m*. .b&&G,~:~:*~ Ja8.t ..*m.:. pufbw. :m.*&*Re.L-, 

In taot apeofal lawa an&are theeefoxv WW@~~~~Utional and that it would be necessary to rely on 

drtlcle 1645 as set out above In settfng the salary 

of the County Auditor of this county. , 

*Article 3943 which was etreotlve on August 

24, 3.935, provides: 'That the Commlsslona allowed 

to the County Trearurer ahall not exceed $2,000 

annually. This article taken in connection with 

Artlole 3912e quoted above sets the limit wlthin 

whloh the Commlsslonere Court may set the Tre~urt3r’a Salary. It his fees in 1935 were in exeea8 

of #2,000 It 18 my opinion that it would bs the 

duty of the Commissionore Court under suah law to 

set the salary oi the County Treasurer at $2,000 

per year. 

"1 shall appreciate an opinion from your office as.to the amount of' compensation that should 

be allowed the County Officers lieted above in Bunt 
r-- 

county. I will appreciate having this opinion 

before the first of January as there are so 

many special laws into which this county has 

dropped since the laat Federal Census that the 

Commissioners Court is at a loas to settle the 

salaries that should be paid and desires to 

settle this matter before the first of January. 

"Please send me copies of your.Opinlona No. 

O-1020 and O-899." 

Article 3912e, Section 13, Vernon's Annotated Texas 

Civil Statutes, reads in part a8 follower 

The CommLaaionere~ Court In oountles hav- 

.- 

ing a population of twenty thourand (20,000) lnhabitants or more, and less than one hundred and 

.nlnstp Thousand (190,OQO) inhabitante according 

to the last preceding Federal Cenaua, la hereby 

authorized and it shall be Its duty to fix the 

aularles of all the following named officera, towltr sheriff, assessor end collector of taxes, 

oounty judge, .county attorney, including orfiainal 

district attorneys and oountp atCorneys who per- 

$qrpl the ,,dnti.aa, ~..~.~A,~b.,.,a~~~ysi;,ldl~$~~',-','- .:' 

alerk, oounty clerk, t?xqnarer, hide and a 

inspector. Eaah of said officera shall be paid 

In money an annual salary In twelve (12) equal 

Installments of not less than the total sum ear%- 

.ed aa oompensation by him in his official oapaoltg 

for the fiscal year 1935, and not more than the 

maximum amount allowed suoh officer under laws 

existing; on August 2l+, 1935; . . . and provided 

that in counties having a po ulatlon of thlrtyseven thousand five hundred P 37,500) and less than 

sixty thousand (60,000) aooordlng to the last preceding Federal Cenaua, and hating an aaeeaeed valuation in exaess of Twenty EAllllon (420,000,000.00) 

Dollars, according to the last preceding approved 

tax roll of suoh county, the maximum amount dlOWed such officers as salaries, may be increased one 

(1s) per cent for each One Xilllon ($1,000,000.00) 

Dollars valuation or fractional part thereof, in 

excess.of said Twenty l:;llllon ($20,000,000.00) Dollars valuation over and above the maximum amount 
iionorable Eugene Brady, Page 6 

allowed such officer under laws existlng,on 

JQuwst 24, 1935.” 

Article 3883, Vernon's Annotated Texas Civil Statutes, reads In part as r0n0n.3: 

"Except as otherwise provided in this Ad, 

the annual fees that may be retained by precinct, 

county and district officers mentioned in this 

Article shall be as follows: 

" . . . 

- 

“3. In counties containing as many a8 

thirty-seven thousand five hundred and one 

(37 501) and not more than sixty thousand (60,- 

OOO! inhabitants, or containing a olty or ttnm 

of over twenty4lve thousand (25,000) luhabitants: County Judge,.Distrlct or Criminal DLstrlct Attorney, Sherlrf, County Clerk, County 

Attorney, District Clerk, Tax Collector, Tax 

Assessor, or the Assessor and Collector of 

Taxes, Thirty-tire Hundred (#3500.00) Dollars 

meh.; ~Ju~ti~e:.:& 4the,,Saaer~ :md .~Oonrtab&i~d&gh~~ur~- ~~ ..' 

Hundred ($1800.00) ~Dollars eaoh. (As ameuded 

Acts 1930, &..lst Leg., 4th C.S., p. 30, oh. 20; 

Acts 1931, l&&d Leg., p. 822, oh. 3401 Aats 

1933, 43ra Leg., p. 731, oh. 220, 1 1.)" 

Article 3891, Vernon's Annotated Texas Civil Statutes, reads in part as follows: 

nEach offlcer named In thls~ Chapter shall 

first out of the current rees of his office pay 

or be paid the amount alloweU him under the provisions of Article 3883, together with the salaries of his assls,tants and deputies, and authorized expenses under Article 3899, and the amount 

necessary to cover aosts of premlurn on whatever 

surety bond may be required by law. If the current ieea of such office collected in any year 

be more than the amount needed to pay the amounts 

above specified, sane shall be d.eemed excess fees, 

and shall be disposed of in the ma,nner hereinafter 

provided. 

” . . * 
Zonorable Eugene Brady, Page 7 

*In counties containing 

seven thousand, tire hundred 

a.8 meny aa thlr*- 

and one (37 501) 

and not more than sixty thousand (~o,ooo~, or 

containing a city of over twenty-five thousand 

(25,oOO) Inhabitants, district and oounty offlcers named herein shall retain one-third of 

such excess fees until such one-third, together 

with the amount specified in Article 3883, 

amounts to Forty-two Hundred and Fifty Dollars 

($&250). . . 

rull 

n(As amended Acts 1930, 4lst Leg., 4th C. S., 

p. 30, oh. 20; Aote 1931, 42nd Leg., p. 870, oh.. 

368; Aots 1933, 43rd Leg., P* 734, oh. 220, I 2; 

Acts 1935, 44th Leg., pa 752, oh. 327, t 1.)" 

The last two above quoted provisions of law w?re in 

force and effeot on Augtut 24th, 1935. 

C 

We quote fmm the ease of Baoogdoohee Oounty vs. 

Wnder (Beaumont Court of Olvll Appeals) 140 SW (2d) 972, 

(writ rerused), as follow8: 

.., ,3ll~.~.roll~,.,r*a~ . ax*~>.rl~out &aput*r..;.i.,v.~ 

Appelloe, Windor, was the duly eleoWd, q&ifled and aotlng County Glemk of Raoogdoohes 

County during the years 1937 and 1938. lkoogdoches County was under the salary act law, 

Article 3912e, section 13, Vernon's Ann. Cl~ll 

Statutes. and Article 3S91. R.C.S.. Vernon?6 

- 

earned es-oompensation o? his ofiloe the au&-of 

$3.286.16. On January 13, 1936, at a regular 

session of the Colmniesloners* court, an ardor 

was entered by said court fixing appellee*s salary at $3,286.16 the amount earned as salary 

by the county judge of said oounty In 1935. 

Later In said month, January 31st, at a oailled 

.session.of said court, his salary was fixed at 

,';3,350 per year. On January 11, 1937, the 

cotissioners' court in regular session fixed 

his salary at $3,000, for that year, and on 

January 10, 1938, said court fixed his salary 
:ionorable 'Eugene aradg, PatIe 8 

at $3,000 for said year. This was $286.16 lees 

than the minimum salary f'or 1935, and 8350 less 

than the salary as fired by the order of January 

31, 1936. Appellee prayed 

the difference between the il 

udgment for $572.32, 

3,000 per pear for 

1937 and 1938, and the minimum or $3,286.16 as 

fixed by the order of January 13, 1936, or In 

the alternative for judgment for $700 If the 

order of January 31, 1936, passed at the called 

session be found proper. 

:$572.32. 

The judgment was for 

"We think the order fixing appellee's salary 

made at the regular term of January 13, 1936, 

was in accordance with the law, and that the 

amount then fixed as the annual salary of appellee, 

$3,286.16, under the facts and the'law was proper, 

and is controlllne. here. Article 79120. seotion 

Opinion No. O-2582 of this department dealt with a 

situation relative to the salaries of the officers of Travis 

County, Texas, where the population of that county had increased Pron 77,777 Inhabitants in 1930 to 110,686 inhabitants aaoording to the 1940 census. This opinion holds that the change 

in'the population of Travis County, as shown by the Iredoral 

Census of 1940, has no efPect. whatever upon the salaries of 

the district and county offioers named in Article 3912e, Section 13, V.A.C.S.. and that the .maximuc: salary to be allowed 
P 

:;onorabj.e -::ui;;ene Brady, PaAe 9 

such officer was the meximum allowed the officer by laws existing August 2L, 1935, to-wit, $&,750.00. We enclose herewith a 

copy or said opinion. 

Opinion Ho. 0-2560 of this department holds that 

the commissioners court of Limestone County, Texas, should fix 

the salaries of the ofricials of said county named in Artiole 

3912e, Sec. 13, V.A.C.S., for the year 19&l; that the minimum 

salary of each suoh offioer oannot be lees thsn the total cum 

earned as compensation by him in his orrioial oapaolty for the 

fiscal year 1935 and that the maximum salary of each above mentioned officers oould be the maximum amount allowed him under 

laws existing August 24, 1935, plus one per oent for each one 

million dollars valuation or fractional part thereof in excess 

of rlfteen million dollars. This opinion dealt with a situation 

vihere there was a deoreaae in population. We enclose herewith 

a copy or said opinion. 

We agree with you that Article 3887a, Vernon’s Annetated Texas Civil Statutes, ia a 1ooe.l or epeoial law attempting 

f- to regulate the arrairs of a oouoty and therefore unoonstltutlonal. The population braokets provided by said aot applied to only 

one county in the State of Texas aooordlng to the Federal Census 

of 1930,, that county then being Bode County, Texas, and nom ., ., .,~ .,appx-i es' .to,; aa :~&&$ ."'e~y.“~txe ~'stPtcr~.~;*f:.la~~~~,,~~~~~~'~.to

the 1940 ~lrederal Census, that county being Hunt County, Texas. 

As a basis for our holding we refer you to the authorities oited 

in Opinions Nos. O-899 and 1020 of this department, whioh are 

enclosed herewith. 

Y!e agree with you that the section of Article 38fijd, 

Vernon's Annotated Texas Civil Statutes, cited by you fn your 

letter, is a local or apeoial law attempting to regulate the 

affairs of a county and therefore unconstitutional. The population brackets provided by said seotion of the act applied to 

only one county in the State of Texas according to the 1930 

Federal Census, that oountp then being Bowie County, Texas, and 

now applies to only one county in the State of Texas according 

to the 19&O Federal Census, that oounty being 1iun.t County, Texas. 

As a basis for our holding we refer you to Opinion Eo. O-1020 

of this department which specifically passed on the abovo section of the statute, and held same to be unconstitutional. 
J 

Ilonorable Eugene Urady, Pa:::e 10 

Vie agree with you that the seotion of Artiole 1645e-1, 

oited by you in your letter, is a local or epeoial law attempting to regulate the arfalrs of a oounty and therefore 

unconstitutional; The population braokete provided by said 

seotion of the act applied to only one county in the State of 

Texas aooording to the 1930 Federal Census, that oounty then 

being harrison County, Texas, and now applies to only one 

oouhty in the State of Texas aooordlng to the 19&O Federal 

Census, that oourity being Hunt County, Texas, As a basis for 

our holding we refer you to the authorities olted by Opinion 

has. O-899 and 1020 or this department. 

We agree with you that Artlole 16l,fid-1, Vernon’s 

Annotated Civil Statutes of Texas, Is a looal or speolal law 

end therefore unoonstitutlonal. The population braokets provided by said Artlole appliad to Bowie, Collln, Harrison, Hunt, 

Lamar and Potter Counties, Texas, aocordlng to the 1930 Federal 

Census, and now applies to Oollin, Ellis, Htmt and Webb~Couuties, Texas, according to the 19&O Federal Ceneua, We think 

the caue of Besar County vs. Tynan, et al, 97 SW (2d) 567, is 

authority for this holding. May we point out that the population braoket used .ln said aot affords no rair basla for the 

olasslfioation based upon a real dlstlnotion between oounties 

In that braoket and oountles with o ulations,qboyq or $@JW *h*,,,bmak&ei ,,,,'Phe :=es. ‘y&&b;.,fi& 8, f 0' j$y.21atf&g";ij;i' :,eg&-f&ot 

that the greater the ~populatlon of a oouuty the more onerous 

are the duties of the officers. The maxImum salary prescribed 

by the act is greater than that prescribed by the general Law8 

for counties with a greater population, and the aot disoriminate8 against those counties and the orrioers therein. We enclose herewith a copy of Opinion No. O-735 which disoueses the 

case of Bexar County vs. Tynan, et al, supra. 

Article 3941, Vernon’s Annotated Texas Civil Statutes, 

reads as follower 

*The oounty treasurer shall reoeive oommiseiOna 

on the moneys received and paid out by him, said 

oommlasione to be rixed by order of the commissioners oourt as r 0ihff3t For reoeiving all moneys, other 

than sohool funds, ror the county, not exceeding two 

and one-half per cent, and not exceeding two and onehalf per csnt f”or paying out the same; provided, that 

he shall receive no commissions for receiving money 

from his predecessor nor for paying over money to his 

successor in 0rrice.w 
Rormrablo Eugene Brady, Page 11 

Article 3942, Vernon's Amotated Texas Civil Statutes, rsads a5 follow5: 

"The treasurer8 

bc treasurers of the 

fund and also of the 

for their reapeotive 

the ssv33?al counties 

or the several counties shall 

available public free who01 

permanent oounty sohool timd 

counties. The treasurers of 

shall be allowed for reoelvlng 

and disburslne the sob001 lunde one-hall ol one 

per sent for reaelvlng, and one-half or one per 

cent for dlabursing, aaid oomnlsslons to be paid 

out of the avallable sshool fund of the oounty; 

provided, no sommlssions shall be paid for reoefvlng the balanae tranualtted to him by his prsdeoessor, 

or for turning over the balanoe In his hands to his 

sueoessor: and provided, that he shall receive no 

ooumisslons on money tnnererred.3 

Artiole 39&3, Vernon's Annotated Texas Civil Statutes, 

reads in part as follows: 

"The oom~Isslona allcwsd to any County Treasurer shall not exceed TWO Thousand Dollars (#2,OCW) 

.~ :. -we,+,, ** : ,:)i:.. ,,.~~:~.“,;,“;,,,:.;‘i.;,., P,,~::.::,~ A... ;:,.,:,~,i ~,~:...i>:~ ,.,. >L::.,c:< ,.,. ,,/.,, ?,: ;~ 

You are respestfully advised that under the raots 

stated it is the opinion oi this department: 

1. It 1s the duty of the 001vmi5sioners' oourt or 

Hunt County, Texas, to set the salaries of the sherlrr, Tax 

Aase3sor and Colleator, County Clerk, District Clerk and County 

Attorney at an annual salary of not Less thari $4.,250.00 and 

not .m_ore than F&,292.50. 

2. It ia the duty of the co5&ssioner31 court of Hunt 

County, Texas, to set the annual salary of the County Zudge or 

Hunt County, Texas, at not loss than $3,100.00 and not more than 

c&,292.50 per annuv. 

Th3 County Auditor'5 salaq should be set at 

!J2,500.00 &m annum as provided by Artfcle 1.645, Vernon’s 

Annctated Texas Civil Statutes. 

In your letter vou stat3 that the treasurer earned 

~XKW than ~2,uOo.oo ror the year 1935. How3v3r, you have sinoe 
Honorable Eugene Brady, Page 12 

informed us that the oomtnlsslonera~ oourt by a valid order 

limited the oommisslons of ths oounty trsasuror to a sum not 

to exoeed $600.00 ror ths flsoal year 1935; that there wars 

no drainage dlstriats in Bunt County in 1935 and am none 

there now, and that the oounty treasureP of Hunt County did 

not c&loot or reoelve any drainage dlstrlot oommalssion in 

the risaal year 1935. You also state that the sum or $600.00 

was the salary actually earned and reaelved by the treasurer for the ilaoal year 1935. In visw of this additional inrormatlon you are respeotiullj advised that It is the oplnion of this department that It Is the duty of the oommlssioners * court of Hunt County, Texas, to set the annual salary 

of the oounty treasurer at not leee than $600.00 and not mom 

than $2020.00 per annum. 

We wlsh to express our appreciation ior the splendid 

brief submitted by you whloh has aided us in the preparation 

OS this opinion. 

Very truly yoursr 

AT!TORNEP GF2iERAL OF TEXAS 

By /s/ Wm. J. Fanulng 

Wm, J. Fuming 

WJF;AW Aaslstatlt 

ENCLOSURES 

APPXOVED DEC. 20, 1940 

/(I/ Grover Sellers 

FIRST ASSISTANT 

ATTO?NEY GENERAL 

A?T'ROVZD OTIITO!J COSk3~E 

By BVlS Chairman