4710 

THE ATTO R&Y GENERAL 

AUS-ITN 11. -

WI&L W-ON Am- GWIZECAL Octobv z9 lg60 

Honorable A. W. Walker 

County Attorney 

Dickens County 

Spur, Texas 

,Dear Mr. Walkers: 

Opin-ion No. WW-952 

Re: Voting rights of 

persons who have 

resided in the State 

more than one year 

but have-changed 

their residence from 

one'county to another 

less than sti months 

before the election. 

Youhave requested an .opinlon on the following 

'question: 

Is it legal for a person who has been's 

residen.tof the State of'Texas 'for more than 

12'months but who has resided in Dickens County 

for only one month to vote on State and National 

offices in 'the General Electlon'in November In 

-the election precinct of his residence In Dickens 

County, Texas? 

In the brief accompanying your request you refer to 

Attorney General's Opinion No. o-2666, dated August 31, 1940, 

and ask in effect whether that opinion is still a correct 

statement of the law. Citing Article VI, Section 2 of the 

Texas Constitution, Article 2967 of the Revised Civil Statutes, 

and the case,of Little v. State ex rel. Parsell, 75 Tex. 616, 

90 Oii N 0 2bbb 1 th 

~v~swfrZ~50~~8coLL.ypt~ o~ot~~~%!?ii3~~~~s t~t~asFZZ~~ 

of the election may vo~te In the helection precinct of his new 

residence for all state offices and for all district offices 

whose districts Include both counties. The reason,for your 

questioning whether this holding is still correct Is explained 

in the foliowing quotation from-your brief: 

"My concern in this matter is based'on the 

fact that Article 5.~15 of the Election Code Is 

worded differently from Article 2967 of the Revised Civil Statutes, which was in force in 1940. 

You will notice that Article 5.15 of the Code 
Honorable A. W. Walker, page 2 (WW-952) 

provides that the voter must make an oath that 

he has resided in the county where he offers 

to vote for six months, while Article 2967, 

which Article 5.15 replaced, provided that 

the voter must make an oath that he has resided in the district or county where he of- 

'fers to vote for six months. In other words, 

the words 'district or' were left out of Article 5.15. However, Article VI, Section,2 

of the Constitution still reads the same old 

way. Also, see 15-B Tex.Jur. 387-388, Sec. 

31, footnote 20. In addition, see said 1940 

opinion and Attorney General's letter opinions, 

JULY 11, 1932 (Vol. 336, p. 518), July 1, 1936 

(Vol. 372, 

382, Pi. 617 

ynwO), and August 6, 1938 (Vol. 

. 

At the outset it should be observed that the only 

-place at which.a person may vote 3s eat the place of his resldence at the time of the election. (Throughout this opinion, 

residence means legal residence or domicile; 8s~ distinguished 

from actual 'place of abode while absent from one's domicile.) 

When a person changes his residence from one.countyto-another, 

he immediately loses his right to vote In the county of his 

former residence, either by absentee~ballotor by. returning 

to the county to vote~on election day, even thoughhe.may not 

be able .to.vote in the county of.hls new,resldence until he 

has fulfilled'the requisite length of residence to permit 

~h$m to vote, there., Art. VI,. Sec...2, .Tex..,Cons,t.,;. Arts. 2.06 

and 5.05,.'Election Code; Sartwelle.v~.Bunn;120~~S~W.2d~130 

(Tex.Civ.App. ,lg38). 

.Thenature of the rlght.of.suffrage~~ (frequently 

called a privllege~rather than .a right)'@ stat&in the.following -.uotationfrom the..oplnion InSolon v; &ate, 54 -Tex. 

,Cg.ni. &! 1, 114 S.W. ; 349,. 352~ (1908),~wj1ic+ &Jso cites~numerous 

other support$ng~.authorlties: ::. .~ 1,~ '. 

,"#&; &&;,;mre is It& & ;&& ,;tio '~$& ,;& 

~: .not. anecessary or~flxed' In&den% of~,.diti$&shippo .- 

oti:lnhereht:dm each and every individual,:,but::~that_ 

voting is the. exercise, of. p.ol.itical- .power,..arid hog. 

one Is entitled to vote,~unless the people .in their 

sovereign capacity, have conferred on hlmthe right 

to do .so. .It may be 1ald;down asa~general propositlon'thatthe rightof suffrage.may.be regulated and 

modified or withdrawnby the.:au~thorlty~,whlch,con-. ,. 

ferre~d It,. *.+ * ,In the,:case :of .State,~v~."Dil~on, .32 

Fla. 545i 14~'So:. 383; 22 .!L.R.A.' ~,124,~~,,.~n~,~treatrng : 

this general subject, the court ~say: ;:',~'The: wright to 
! 

4711 

Honorable A. W. Walker, Page 3 (WW-952) 

The extent to which the Federal Constitution controls 

the right of suffrage is summarized in the following 

rrom Voting and Election.Laws, 

Fublicatlons. In E 

by Constance E. Smith 9 

uotatlon 

Oceana 

C.~, m 11 (see, also; 18 Am. Jur., 

:Xlectlons, gg 46, &';-2g C.J.S., Elections, gg 5-8): 

vote Is not an inherent or absolute right found 

among those'generally reserved in bills of rights, 

but Its possession is dependent upon constitutional 

or statutory .grant. Subject to the limitations contained In the.federal Constitution, the elective 

franchise is under the control of the sovereign 

power of the states, expressed in Constitutions or 

statutes properly enacted. Where a Constitution has 

conferred the right and prescribed the qualifications 

of electors, it of course is paramount until amended, 

and the'heglslature cannot change or add to~them In 

any way; 'but, where the. Constitution does not fix the 

right of.suffrage or prescribe the qualifications of 

voters, it is competent for the Legislature, as the 

representative of the lawmaking power of the state, 

to do so. These principles are well recognized and 

fully established by authority in this country.'" 

. 

'* * * !Ihe Constitution grants to the state 

legislatures the power to prescribe 'the times, 

places and manner of holding elections for senators 

and representatives,' and also the. power to~determine the manner of appointing presidential electors. 

These two grants of power coupled with each state's 

unquestioned authority to control all elections for 

state offices endow the states with decisive control 

over all elections; for, while it is true .that the 

Constitution,reserves to Congress the right to make 

or alter regulations for congressional or senatorial 

elections, Congress has only rarely exercised this 

power and then only in very limited ways. * * * 

"One reads the Constitution In vain for a concrete definition of who shall have the right to vote; 

there is only the declaration of the 15th and 19th 

Amendments that a citizen may not be denied the right 

to vote because of race, color, previous condition 

of servitude, or sex. A section of the 14th Amendment defining citizens as 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the 

jurisdiction thereof' is relevant, since citizenship Is inall states a requisite for suffrage. 

With the exception of these broad restrictions, full 

responsibility for determining voter qualifications 

comes within state jurisdiction;* * *.' 
Honorable A. W. Walker, page 4 (WW-952) 

Subject to the foregoing limitations, It is thus 

seen that in elections for federal offices as well as for 

state offices, the State may,grant or withhold suffrage as 

it sees fit and may impose whatever voter qualifications 

It chooses. 

Article VI, Section 2 of the Texas Constitution 

provides: 

"Every person subject to none of the foregoing dlsquallficatlons fiontained In Section 1 

of Article Vg, who shall have attained the age 

of twenty-one years and who shall be a citizen 

of the United States and who shall have resided 

in this State one year next preceding an election 

and the last six months within the district or 

county in which such person offers to vote, shall 

d a qualified elector;* * *." (Emphasis 

Prior to 1951, Article 2955 of the Revised Civil 

Statutes, which Is now Article 5.02 of the ElectionCode, 

contained this identical provision. Article 2967,:.R:C.S., ~, 

which is now Article 5.15 of the Election Code,~provlded 

that a voter who moved to another~ county after receiving his 

poll taxreceipt or-exemption certificate could vote in the 

precinct .of his new residence by making oath "thathe then 

resides. in the precinct where he.offers.to vote..and.has resided for the last six months in the district 'or county in 

which he offers to vote and twelve months In the .State." 

When the Election Code was adopted in 1951;. the words "district or" were dropped from Articles 5.02 and 5.15 of the 

Code. (In the historical comment under Article 5.02 of Vernon’s Election Code, It is stated that the word "district" 

was omitted becaus~e the word district is too indefinite.) 

The Constitution fixes the qualifications of an 

elector, and the Legislature is powerless to add to or take 

from these quallfic&.ions. Solon v. State supra. Ko 

Schneider, 110 Tex. 369, 218 S W 479 221'S W ,8b07f&); 

Texas Power and LightCo. v. Brownwoo: Publil Service Go., 

1sw 1 5 (Tex.Civ.App. lg.37 

&<&*2~de~&dent School District' $?Gefe f j6; )'WW 2 2d 

08 (1956) . Accordingly,~the - _. Constitution &d no; the staiutes‘must.be looked to in determining what residence requirements are Imposed upon voters, 

sion of the words "district 

and forthis purpose the omlsor" ~from Articles 5.02 and 5.15 

of the Election Code may be disregarded. Your question, 

therefore, is to be answered on the basis, of the 'residence 

requirements set out in Article VI, Section 2, of the Constitution. 
4712 

Honorable A. W. Walker, Page 5 &W-952) 

Voters who have moved from one county to another 

within less than six months precedin 

(17 

an election must be 

broken down into two categories: those who have resided for six months within a district which Includes the 

county of their former residence and the county of their 

new residence (under present governmental organization, 

the district may be either a congressional, senatorial, 

representative, judicial, supreme judicial, or State Board 

of Educationdistrict); ,and (2) those who do not have six 

months' residence in any one of these various types of dlstricts. (Throughout this opinion it is assumed that the 

voter has resided in the State for one year and is otherwise qualified to vote.) 

Little v. State ex rel. Parsell, 75 Tex. 616, 12 

S.W. 965 (1tQC) d fines the voting rights of.persons In 

the first categ&ye In that case, complaint had been made 

to~the followingjuryinstructlon: 

!By~the language 'who shall have resided In. 

the State one year ~next preceding an election, 

and the last six months in the dlstrict,or county 

in which.he offers to vote,' is meant at.any State 

or district election a person would be ,qualifled to 

vote for State or district officers if he possessed 

none of the dlsqualif$cations mentioned in paragraph 

2'of this charge, and had lived one ~year'in the 

State next preceding such election, and'.the last six 

,months in then district in which he offered to vote; 

but at an election held for the purpose of~locating 

a county seat, and to elect county officers only, 

the test as to residence in order to be.a qualified 

elector would be one year in the State next preceding 

such election, and the last six months in the county 

,ln which he offered to vote." 

The Supreme Court held that the instruction was not erroneous, 

saying: 

'We think the court correctly interpreted 

the language quoted in the charge. It is found 

fin section 2 of Article 6 of the Constitution. In 

our opinion it admits of no other reasonable construction. When construed as meaning that a residence for six months in the district should qualify 

an elector to vote for district officers, we have 

no difficulty in determining which district Is 

meant; but if we should say that such residence 

gives a right to vote for county officers, we should 

be at a loss to know whether It Is the congressional, 

judicial, senatorial, or legislative district in 

which the voter was to reside in order to acquire the 
Honorable A. W. Walker, Page 6 (WW-952) 

qualification. If such had been the intention, 

the kind of district would have been named, or 

there would have been some language in the provision indicating some rule by which the question 

could be determined. Besides, the construction 

claimed by appellant that six months' residence 

in the district entit r ed the voter to vote for 

county offices alsg WOUld have rendered the words 

*or county' superfluous, because every county in 

the State is, and will in all probability continue 

to be, a part of some district. Since the dlstrict Includes the county, it was unnecessary to 

have used the word county if it had been intended 

that a residence in the district should give the, 

qualification to vote for county officers." 

Article VI, Section 2 of the Constitution was also 

construed in United States v. Slater, 6 Fed. 824 (Clr. Ct., 

D. Tex. 1881). which held that a voter who had resided for 

six months in a congressional district but less than six 

months in the county could legally vote for congressman and 

for all state officers. The Court said: 

"Dut if, being a citizen of the United States, 

a residence of one year in the state, and the last 

six months next before the election within the district, will give him a right to vote in the election precinct in which he resides, for what officers 

can he vote? Cur present constitution provides, 

(article 6,.~ 3:) 'All qualified electors of the 

state, * *~ * who shall have resided for six nionths 

Immediately preceding an election within-the limits 

of any city or corporate~town, shall have the right 

to vote for mayor and all other elective officers.' 

It is clear that a residence in the district for six 

months does not give the right to,vote for city or 

town officers, unless the residence has been In said 

city or town;'and, by parity of reasoning, such resldence would not give the right to vote for county.officers unless said six-monthsl~residence had been ', 

within the county; and, by a like parity of reasoning, 

such residence would give the privilege of voting for 

district officers and for state officers, he having 

the other qualifications , and having resided the required six months in the district, and the required 

one year In the state, next before the election, and 

duly presenting himself In the election precinct in 

which he resides. And this rational conclusion is 

made irresistlbl~y strong by the previous uniform 

practice of permitting qualified electors~ of.the 

State to vote for state and district offices, where 
4713 

Honorable A. W. Walker, ~page 'i' (WW-952) 

their residence was not such as to authorize 

them to vote, fork county offices at the time and 

place of ,thelr offering to vote." 

Later decisions of our courts have established that 

voters who have resided In the county for six months may vote 

in elections. of political~subdivlslons within the county 

.whlch'are denominate.d,:~~as~ "ditricts" without having six 

,months ~I. residence:~ln:.lthe pollt.ical ~s'ubdlvls,ion: ~': Warren v. 

Robinson,' 32“:S.W.~2d 871 '(,Tex:Civ'.App. 193O);'Shaw v. Taylor, 

'14b S W.2d 452(Tex.Civ.App. 1940); Cranier v. Graham, 2b4 

S.W.2h 135 Texc;Civ.App. 19%; error ref 

302.S.W.2d 627 (1957). 

Duncan v. Willis, 

157 Tex. 31 ; In-&e last-cited case, 

which Involved a' school'dlstrict election, the Supreme Court 

clarified the meaning of "district" in Article VI,,Sectlon 2 

of the'Constitutlon, ~8s follows:- 

.~ .‘.” 

.‘_ 

"Petitioners' .asslgnment again raised the 

mooted construction of the word 'district8 appearingin ~the-con~stltutional section.. 'In Little 

v..State..~exirel. Parsell,~:"j'5 Tex. 616, 12 S.W. 965, 

this~ Court construed the term 'dlstrictl~ :as meaning, 

a.pol~itidal subdivis~ion embracing&e. ormore' counties 

and'%& 6ne..~referring to subdivisions..of., a"county such 

as the school district here involved~.".:,This.,constructlon ~w~~~. ~&LB~,~ssi?d~~~ln .Creme,r vt Graham;',Tex:Civ.App. 

264 S.W.2d~l35;'136'wherein~it'was stated't@t .~%vhether 

rightly or wrongly, 

Courg-,thatthe word 

ithas,been decided~fiy.,th-e‘Supreme 

"district" asused fin the..phrase, 

disJunctively..withrthe 'word ,"county.~ is ..me~anlngless, ' 

and that the ~authorltles supportthe.rule,that tan 

.elector must be a resident of the..State for one year, 

resident of the county for six months;..,and a resident 

of the subdivision of the county fiuch: as a'schoal' 

districg,whereln he votes at the time'he Votes, but 

'notnecessarily forsix months.' 'Applicationfor writ 

of error.ivis 'refused~in the Graham case and we regard 

the constructlon"of.the constltutlonal'phrase as settled. See Cremer.v. Graham, supra, and authorities 

cited therein. This construction undoubtedly ac-~ 

counts for the deletion of the words 'district or! 

from Artlcle~,5.02 of~the Election Code: Under the 

rule above~,set forth the courts below were correct 

In holding that the'five persons above ,mentioned were 

entitled to vote at the election in question.although 

they may not have resided In the Glenwood School District for a period of six months prior to.the date of 

the election." 

In Duncan v. Willis the Court 'took note of the deletion 

Of "district or" from Article 5.02 of the Election Code without 

expressly passing on what effect it had ondlstricts.,embracing 
Honorable A. W. Walker, page 8 (W-952) 

one or more counties. The Court's use of the expression 

"mooted construction" might suggest that it thought the construction of "district" had become moot by virtue of the 

deletion, but this evidently was not the Intended meaning. 

By discussing the construction which should be placed on 

the constitutional provision, the Court recognized that the 

word "district" continues to have force despite its deletion 

from the statute. 

It is our opinion that, under the foregoing decisions, 

a person who has resided for six months In a defined,district 

of the State which includes more than one county, but has resided less than six months in the county of his residence at 

the time of the election, may vote for offices of the distrift 

and for all offices which are voted on throughout the State, 

but he may not vote for offices of districts in which he does 

not have the six,months t residence or for county and precinct 

offices. 

The second category of voters--those who do not-have 

six months' residence in a defined district--presents the question of ~whether by virtue of one.,year's residence In the State 

they are entitled to vote'for~ statewide offices, although they 

may not vote for district, county or precinct offices. Several 

Attorney General’s letter opinions between 1930 and -19&C held 

that they may vote for state offices, while others rendered 

during the ssme period held that they-cannot vote for any office. ~The only authorities cited In support of the holding that : 

they could vote for state offices were Little v. State and United 

States v. Slater., There 1s strong argument in favor of the view 

that this should be the rule, but we are faced with the fact 

that the Constitution states the residence qualifications cvnjunctlvely as one year's residence in the State and six months' 

residence In the district or county. To be a qumfled elector 

for any~office or for sny,election, a person.must fulfill both 

conditions of residence. Neither the language of the Constitution nor the statements made in the cases',construing this 

provision justify the concluslon,that the six months' residence :; 

in the district or,county is waived as a qualification for Voting: 

in state elections. 

1If the~voter has the six months' residence in the 

district, he will be entitled to vote 'for statewlde,offlces : 

regardless of whether an office of that district is being 

voted on at the,electlon. :, For example, a person,who has 

resided In a;state senatorial district for six months may 

vote for states offices in a year for,which no election for 

State Senator Is held In the district. 
4714 

Honorable A. W. Walker, page 9 (WW-952) 

Texas is not alone in denying a voting right to 

persons who do not meet both state and local residence requirements. In every other State, in addition to residence 

in the State one must also have resided within a county or 

an election precinct for a required length of time ranging 

from 30 days to one year, with approximately half of the 

States requiring 3 months or longer.2 Smith, Voting and 

Election Laws, supra, pp. 15-19. 

7?ollowing comment: 

That, author makes the 

"Although no one would recommend abandonment of residence requirements altogether, It 

is often contended by responsible critics that 

some state regulations are overly stringent. 

It is estimated, for instance, that over five 

percent of the American voting population is 

unable to meet the residence requirement In 

most elections and the implications of such 

widespread disfranchisement in a democratic 

society cannot be ignored. One has only to 

look at the statistics of population movement 

In the United States, especially during and 

since the second World War, to know that the 

problem of disfranchisement of sizable portions 

of the electorate can only become more acute 

unless residence requirements are reduced to 

reasonable time limits." 

We are keenly aware of the seeming inequity of denying 

to citizens who meet the state residence requirement the right 

to vote for statewide officers because they have not resided 

in some one locality within the State for a period of six 

months. Rut to hold that a person may vote for statewide offices on the basis of one year's residence'in the State without regard to the length of residence in the district or county, 

it would be necessary to Ignore the second residence condition. 

However harsh or unreasonable this condition may be, the plain 

.requlrements of the Constitution cannot be ignored. Relief 

'must come through amendment of the Constitution. It is our 

opinion, and you are so advised, that a person who does not 

meet the requirement for SIX months' residence In the district 

or county is not entitled to vote for any office in the general 

election. 

2California and Wisconsin permit new residents of the 

State to vote In presidential elections with less than the 

normal residence requirements, and Connecticut permits former 

residents to vote by absentee ballot in presidential elections until they become electors in the State of their new 

residence. 
Honorable A. W. Walker, page 10 (WW-952) 

Adverting to the category of voters who have six 

months' residence in a district but not in the county, we 

have noted that Article 5.15 of the Election Code omits 

the words "district or" in making provision for voting by 

persons who have changed their residence since obtaining 

their poll tax receipts or exemption certificates. This 

statute now reads as follows: 

"Art. 5.15. Removal to another county 'or 

election precinct 

"If a citizen after receiving his poll tax 

receipt or certificate of exemption, removes 

to another county or to another election precinct in the same county, he may vote at an 

electl.on;general, special, or primary, In the 

precinct of his new residence in such other 

county or precinct by presenting his poll tax 

receipt or certificate of exemption or his affidavit of Its loss to the precinct judges of 

election, and state in such affidavit where he 

paid such poll tax or received such certificate 

of exemption, and by mating oath that he is the 

identical person described In such poll.tax receipt or certificate of exemption, and that he 

then resides In the precinct where he offers to 

vote and has res1de.d for the last ~slx .(6) months 

in the county in which he offers to vote and. 

twelve (12) months in.the State. But no such 

person shall be permitted to vote in a city of 

ten thousand (10,000) inhabitants,, ormore, unle~ss 

he has first presented to the tax collector of 

his residence a tax receipt or certificate, not 

less than four (4) days prior to such election 

orprimary election or made affidavit where he 

paid such poll tax or recelved'such certificate 

of exemption; and~the collector shall,thereupon 

add his name to the list of qualified voters of 

the precinct of his new residence; and unless 

such voter ha,s done this and his name appears in 

the certified list of voters of the precinct of 

his new,residence, he shall not vote." 

The.deletlon of'reference to residence, in the distr~lct raises two questions: (1) what form of oath shall 

the election judge requfre of the voter, and (2)must the. 

voter who has moved Into e city of lO,OOO.or more Inhabltants comply with the requirementfor~having hls~ name 

placed on the list of qualified voters. 

On the first question; it is- our .op,inion.'that the 

election judge should require the voter to make the oath 
4715 

Honorable A. W. Walker, page 11 (WW-952) 

required in this article, substituting "district" for "countyn. 

The elections judge should mark out on the voter's ballot all 

offices for which he Is not entitled to vote, before permitting the voter to mark his ballot and.cast his vote.3 In 

elections where voting machines are used, the clerk attending 

the machine should lock out the offices for which the voter 

is not entitled to vote before permitting him to close the 

curtains 'and ~cast his vote. (Section 2 of Articles 7.14, Election Code, requires that the machine "be so constructed that 

a voter cannot vote for a candidate or on a proposition for 

whom or on which he is not lawfully entitled to vote.") 

On the second question, it is our opinion that the 

tax collector should add the voter's name to the list of quallfled voters upon the voter's request and upon being satisfied 

that the voter has resided for six months in some district of 

which the county Is a part. 'While the oath which the voter 

makes at the polllng.place will disclose that he does not have 

six months' residence In the county, the tax'collector may 

properly place a notation to this effect alongside the voter's 

name on the list of qualified voters. 

With the deletion of "district", this statute leaves 

the tsxcollectors in a state of doubt as to their authority 

to add the names of voters who have not resided in the county 

for six months. It also leaves the voters In doubt as to 

whether this statute Is applicable to them. "No such person" 

refers to any citizen who has moved to another county or election precinct after receiving his receipt or certificate, but 

it could be taken to refer only to such persons who have resided In the county for six months efter the removal. If the 

voter has attempted to comply with the requirement but the 

tax collector has refused to add his name in the belief that 

the statute does not authorize this action, we think it is 

clear that the election judge should nevertheless allow him 

to vote upon satisfactory proof of his qualifications as an 

elector and of the reason why his name does not a 

the list of qualified voters. Att'y Gen. Op. V-1@3106;2). 

Election judges have authority to administer oaths for the 

purpose of obtaining such proof, and It would be advisable 

3 This procedure necessarily gives the election judge 

an opportunity to see the number on the ballot which the 

voter receives, contrary to the provision in Article 8.11 of 

the Election Code that the voter shall be allowed to take his 

own bal1o.t without the number being known to the election 

JUd43e. However, we are of the opinion that the voter should 

not be furnished with a ballot which would enable him to vote 

a full ticket, and he must surrender this safeguard to the 

secrecy of his ballot if he wishes to vote. 
Honorable A. W. Walker, page 12 (WW-952) 

for the election judge to preserve In affidavit form the 

voter's statement of the reason why his name Is not listed. 

Where the voter has made no attempt to have his 

name added to the list, the question becomes more difficult, 

While the failure of the Legislature to define Intelligibly 

the requirements imposed upon the voter should not deprive 

him of his constitutional right to vote, we have come to the 

conclusion that persons with less than six months' residence 

in the county are reasonably put on notice that they must 

comply with this requirement, and a voter who fails to make 

application to the tax collector Is not entitled to vote. 

In order to be a qualified elector of this 

State, a person must meet both conditions of 

residence set out in Article VI, Section 2 of 

the Constitution; namely, residence of one year 

Snthe State next precedingthe election, and 

residence the last six months in the district 

or county in which he offers to vote. 

A person, otherwise qualified to vote, who 

has resided for six months in a defined district 

of the State which includes the county of his 

.former,residence and the county of his new residence, but.,has resided less than six months In 

the county of his residence at the time of the 

election, may vote for offices of the district 

and for all offices which are voted'on throughout the'state, but he may not vote for offices 

of districts In which he does not have the .slx 

months' residence or for county and precinctofflees. A~person who does not mee.t the require-, 

mentfor six months' residence in the.distrlct 

or county is not,entitled to vote for any office. 

The only place a person may vote is in the 

.county of his~residence at the ,time..of the election. Upon change of residence from.one county 

to another;a person loses his right to vote.in 

the county of his former res$dence,evan,though 

he may.~be unable to vote in the county of his new 

residence. 

Yours very truly, 

wILI.WILSOW 

AttorneyGeneral~of Texas 
4716 

Hbnorable A. W. Walker, page 13 (WW-952) 

MKW:bh 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

W. V. Geppert, Chairman 

J. C. Davis, ,Jr. 

,.,Rilqy EUgene.Fietcher. 

Robert H. Walls 

Iola Barron Wilcox 

RETIEWED FOR TH&Al'TORN~ GENERAL 

BY: 

Leonard Passmore