Honorable Homer Garrison, $r. ” 

Director, Department of Public Safety 

Camp Mabry 

Austin, Texas 

Dear &. Garrison: 

Opinion No. b-1649 

Re: Dieposition of fees 

collected under H. B. 

~rJo. “40‘7,‘Acts of the 

Regular. Seasloti oft the 

46th Legislature.. : 

Your letter of June 27, 1939, addreseed to 

thle office, reads as follows: 

*HouBe Bill 840’7 paeeed .bg the Regtilar 

Session of the 46th Legislature and known ‘~ 

a8 the lCertlficate of Title Act’ provides. ,. 

in part as follows: 

Each applicant for a 

or relssuance thereof 

shall pay to’thb deslgnat6d agent tht3 sum 

of Twenty-five .(25b) Cebte “which shall be 

forkarded to the Department together,wlth 

the appllcatlon for certificate of,tltle 

within twe$,$;four, (24) hours af.ter same 

hae~ beeri received by him an&I the Department shall return t.o the designated tigent 

each month Ten~(lOb) Cents for;ePoh,appli-, 

cotion to which a certiflcate’,df tltl+,~hae 

been issued, and the balanae shall be, paid 

over to Treasurer of thi% State to be upedlted to the General Revenue Ftiud bf this 

State. 1 

“This Depirtment,deaires tin opinion on 

the following q2e~tiona: 

“1. sliotiid’ ‘the entire’ 25,d “ie pro.ti&d 

In Section 57 be deposited In the State 
Honorable Homer Garrison, Jr., page 2 (O-1049) 

Treasury and the 106 be returned to the County 

Tax Colleotor by State warrant? 

"2. Should the De rtment of Public 

Safety deposit only 15 8" of the 25~i collected 

In the State Treasury and deposit the 106 

of the 25d aollected in the banks and return 

the amount to the Tax Collectors by certified 

checks? 

"3. Should the Department of Public 

Safety deposit 15ji of the 2gb collected In 

the State Treasury and return the lo& to the 

Tax Collector In any manner the Department' 

might deem best? 

a4. should,the Department of Public 

Safety deposlt'the entire 25b In the State 

Treasury and remit nothing to the County 

Tax Co$lector lf an application accompanied 

vlth a 25b fee Ls sent to the Department and 

a Certificate of Title is not issusd? 

"If the answer to Questloh lo. 1 is in 

the aTfirmatire, then3 

"5. Would'the. Tsx Collector have to 

assums the discount Of a warrant drawn In 

his favor as his part of the fees collected 

for a month?", 

House Bill 100. 407 is a comprehensive Act 

consisting of 66 scations and is knowp as the "Certificate of Title Act.," Its purpose Is declared by Sectlon 1 to be *to lessen and prevent the theft of motor 

vehicles, and the lmportatl~n~lnto this State of and 

traffic In stolen motoryvehlcles, and the sale of encumbered motor vehicles witliont the'enforced disclosure 

to purchaser of any and all,lleas for whhich any s~uch 

motor vehicles or the tlree,~radios, parts, or appliances thereof stan&3 as~sectilty.* Its p~ovislons are 

deslgaed to effectuate that purpose by a system of applications for and the lssuanoe of oertlflcates of title 

to "every kind oT motor driven or propelled ~Wehicli 

now or hereafter required to be reglstered or llcehsed~- 

under the laws of the State." By its pro'vlal.ons appllcations for certificate of title must be filed vith 

"County Tax Collector" (s) who are designated as agents. 

A uopy of an application, together with copies of all 
Honorable Homer Garrison, Jr., page 3 (O-1049) ,, .,, 

accompanying title papers .- . . 

offered In support thereofi 

18 Bent ng tne agent, together with the appllcatlon~~~ 

fee of twenty-five cents collected from the applicant, 

to the Department of Public Safety, vhlch may aloge .' 

Issue such a certlflcate of title. Section 57 provides, 

for the dlstrlbutlon and dlsposltlon of the fee so collected and remitted. The qtiestlons you have. submittea 

call for a construction of this section. 

We have examined said section In connection 

with the provisions of the entire Act and especially 

with reference to Sections 1, 2, 13, 24, 25, 26, 27, 

31, 32, 38 and 39.~, We have encountered no difficulty 

In arriving at what we believe to be the leglslatlve, 

inte.nt as gathered from the words of the statute. 

We answer your first question In the negative 

for two reasons., In the first place, It Is made perfectly clear m the plain wo~lng of Section 57 that 

only fifteen eents ,out of each fee of twenty-five cepts 

Is to be deposited ln.the State Treasury. In the next 

place, It Is equally~clear that ten cents 0P the fee 

Is to be returned to the 'oounty tax collectbr' that 

sends the fee to the Department. It Is not state money 

but Is considered as a fee belonging to the collector 

vho;sends it In and Is to partly compensate him for 

services rendered and expenses Incurred ia performing. 

prescribed duties. The Department holds this moneys, 

ten cents out of every'fee collected In trust for the 

collector that remits it. The only reason we can assign for this proaedure Is found In our answer to your 

fourth question. 

We answer your third question In the,afflrmative for this reason: !@he statute Is silent as to how 

these remlttaanoes are to be made. 'fhey.must b&zde 

each month but that is the only requfrement. 

answer makes It unneceesary to answer your second ques- ,, 

tlon. 

We answer your fourth Question as lollover 

The pertinent part of the particular section under examination ppovldes that *tie Department shall return to 

the designated agent ()aounty tax aollector') each 

month Ten (10) oents for each appllcatlon to which a 

certLfl.eate of title has been Issued." The ,DepPr*ent 

may.refuse to Issue a certifloate of title for any Of 

the reasons named In Section 38. An applicant so deriled such a certificate le given the right to,appeal' 
Honorable Homer Garrison, Jr., page 4 (O-1049) 

to the county tax collector of the county of his domlclle for a hearing on his application. If h$s appllcation Is by the collector denied, he may, within five 

days, but not thereafter, appeal to the county court 

of the county of his residence. The procedure to be 

followed In such cases Is set out In Section 39. It 

Is not clear whether furtherappeal is contemplated 

from the judgment of the county court. 

It Is our opinion that when an application 

has been finally denied that all of the fee of twentyfloe cents becomes the money of the State and should 

'be deposited In the State Treasury. The Department 

is not authorised to remit any part of said fee except 

where a certificate of title Is Issued by It. Rovever, 

ten cents out of every fee where the oertlflcate of 

title Is refused should not be deposlted in the Treasury until after It has been determined that no appeal 

will be taken, or If taken until the case Is finally 

disposed of and It has been definitely decided that 

no certificate will be issued. For, if the money Is 

once In the Treasury, It cannot be withdrawn except 

by a direct legislative appropriation. 

We call your attention to the concluding paragraph of Section 57, not quoted in your letter, which 

reads:, 

'Ro money collected 

ever be expended except 

tion of the Legislature 

_ shall _ never _ exceed ~_ _ _ that 

under this Act shall 

by a dire& approprlaand such appropriation 

amount which vas col- ~_ __ lected under this Act in the preceedlng two .* years." 

The above provision applies only to the State's 

part of the fees collected. It has no application whatever to the ten cents to be returned to the collector. 

Our answer to your first question makes it 

unnecessary to answer your fifth and last question. 

Hoping we have given you the Information requested, ve are 

BW&LM:lm 

APPROVED JUL 6, 1939 

Yours very truly 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

%FA%ZZ.Z 

Ry /a/ Bruce W. Bryant 

Bruce W. Bryant 

ATTORREY GERRRAL Assistant 

APPROVED OPIRIOH COMMITTRR BY /a/ R.W.F., GRAIRMAR