February 6, 1939 

Hon. John F. May 

County Attorney 

Rarnes- County 

Karnes, Texas 

Dear Sir: 

Opinion No. 0-161 

Re: Refunding premiums on deputy tax co>-~ 

lector's official bond for years 1925- 

1938 

Your letter of January 17th,'addresse&to Hon. 'Gerald 

C. Mann, Attorney General of Texas, has been received whereIn 

you state that the Commissioners I Court desires an opinion as 

to whether or not the expenditure of refunding the'premlum on 

the official bond of the deputy tax assessor-collector of taxes 

by the Commissioners' Court for the years 1925-1938, inclusive, 

would be legal or Illegal. 

Under the authority of Casey vs. State (Tex. Civil 

appeals) 269 SW 428, writ of error denied, and former rulings 

of this Department, such premium on the deputy tax collector's 

bond prior to the amendment of Article 3899, effective January 1, 1936, was not such Item of expense as the Commissioners' 

Court would be authorized to pay. 

You are respectfully advised, therefore, that It Is 

the opinion of this Department that any payment or expenditure 

of refunding the premium on the deputy tax assessor-collector's 

official bond for the years 1925-1936 would be illegal. 

Article 

Permit us to herein set forth certain portions of 

3899 as amended, effective January 1, 1936: 

"Art. 3899. Expense Account 

(a) At the close of each month of his 

tenure of office each officer named herein 

who Is compensated on a fee basis shall make 

as part of the report now required by law, 

an Itemized and sworn statement of all the 

actual and necessary expenses incurred by him 

in the conduct of his office, such as stationerg, stamps, telephone, premiums on offlclals' 

bonds, including the cost of surety bonds for 
- -- 

Hon. John F. May, February 6, 1939, page 2 o-161 

his Deputies, premium on fire, burglary, theft, 

robbery insurance protecting public funds, traveling expenses and other necessary expenses... 

Such expense account shall be subject to the 

audit of the County Auditor; if any, otherwise 

by the Commissioners' Court; and if it appears 

that any item of such'expense vas not incurred 

by such officer or such Item wasp not a necessary expense of office, such item shall be by 

such auditor or court rejected, In which case 

the collections of such item may be adjudicated 

In any court of competent jurisdiction. The 

amount of salaries paid to Assistants and Deputies shall also be clearly shown by suchofficer, giving the name, position and amount 

paid each; and. In no event shall any officer 

show any greatep amount than actually paid 

any such Assistant or Deputy. The amount of 

such expenses, togetherwith the amount of 

salaries paid to Assistants, Deputies and Clerks~ 

shall be paid out of the fees earned by such officer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

"(b) Each, officer named in this Act, where 

he receives a salary as compensation fork his' 

services, shall be empowered and permitted to 

purchase and have charged to his county all reasonable expenses necessary In the proper and 

legal conduct of hLs office, premiums on officials' bonds, premium on fire, burglary, theft, 

robbery insurance protecttng publtc funds and 

including the cost of surety bonds for his Deputies, such expenses to be passed on, ijre-determined and allowed in kind and amounts, as nearly 

as possible, by the Commissioners' Court one each 

month for the ensuing month, uponthe application 

by each officer, stating the kind, probably amount 

of expenditure and the necessity for the expenses 

of his office for such ensuing month, which application shall, before presentatlon to said 

court, first be endorsed by the County Auditor, 

If any otherwise the County Treasurer, only as 

to whether funds are available for payment of 

such expenses................. 

II . . . . . ..Eaeh officer shall, at the close of each 

month of his tenure of office, make an Itemized and 

sworn report of all approved expenses 'lncurrec.by 

him and charged to his county, ~accompanylng 'such report with invoices covering such purchases and re- 
-.- . 

Hon. John F. May, February 6, 1939, page 3 0-161 

quisitions Fssued by him in support of such report. 

If such expenses be Incurred In connection with any 

particular case, such report shall name such case. 

Such report, invoices and requisitions shall be 

subject to the audit of the County Auditor; If 

any, otherwise by the CommlssFoners' Court, and 

If It appears that any item was not incurred by 

such officer, or that such item was not a necessary OP legal expense of such office, or purchased 

upon proper requlsltlon, such Itern shall be by 

said County Auditor or court rejected, in which 

case the payment. of such item may be adjudicated 

in any court of competent jurisdiction." All such 

approved claims and accounts shall be paid from 

the Officers' Salary Fund unless otherwise provlded herein," 

It Is evident that the Legislature Intended that such 

condltlons contained in the above provisions should be cornplied with by the officer as a condltlon precedent to allowing, 

as a matter of right, such expenses as authorized therein. .~ 

It is our opinion that Article 3899, as amended, can 

be liberally interpreted to allow such officials, as an item 

of expense, the premium on the bonds of their authorized 

deputies. 

Such conditionsfound fn the provisions of the Article 

quoted seem to be substantlallg the same as contained fin the 

artlc1.e prior to the amendment and the courts have construed 

such conditions not intended as a limftatlon on the power of 

the Commissioners' Court in matters of this kind.. As it appears that the Commissioners f Court may use its sound discretion as to whether or not the facts other than the failure of 

the officer to comply with the above provisions would entitle 

such expense to be allowed, we are further of the opfnlon that 

while the county could not be held liable for the expenditure 

of refunding the actual and necessary premium paid on the 

deputy tax collector's official bond for the years 1936 and 

subsequently it Is within their sound discretion whether or 

not such payment could be made, the exercise of which by the 

Commissioners' Court would not be iilegal. 

Trusting that the above answers your questions, we 

remain 
e--t 

Hon. John F. May, February 6, 1939, page 4 o-161 

Very truly yours 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

By s/ Wm. R. King .'. 

Assistant 

WmK:AW 

APPROVED: 

S/Gerald C, Mann 

ATTORNEYGENERAL OF TEXAS