OFFICE OFTHEATTORNEY GENERAL OFTEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Honorable Alfred N. Steinle 

County Attorney 

Ateacoaa County 

Jourdnnton, Texae 

Deer Sir: 

06, attorneys* iser 

th6 84x10 and 

01: not pmit adrad .fr0m parre-lnvestnrent of the oa8h la 'the 

s8h001 ma or the wqtnty sh0uia bboma 

the Permanent hrnd or the hw!llable 

TO amwer your fir6t i+WtlOn we deeat it neoembary 

that we review the oon6tltutionbl provlelon anb laws unUer 

whiah the countiqs or thle State hete been apportioned land 

for school purposes. By virtue of-an Ad approved January 

28, 1839, oertain leaguea cr land were granted to W&Y~.X&~~OWJ 

oounties of the State rt3r purposes of eaumion. 
Honoreble A$fred .R. Steinle, page #S 

was enlarged upon by the Act of Jenuary 16, 1850. At en 

election on August 14, 1883, Section 6, Article 7, was 

adopted end became s !art of our present Constitution. 

This provision reads, in pert: 

"All land heretofore or heraaiter granted 

to the several counties of this State for educetional purposes are of right the property of 

said counties, res?ectlvely, to which they were 

granted end title thereto la vested in said 

oountlee ena no adverse poasea8lon or Mmltation 

ahall ever be available a'gainstthe tltle,of any 

ooutlty * l * Eac~coQnty may Sell or aiSpOSt# or 

Ii8 lend in whole or In part 1i1 a manner to be 

provided by the COlIEUi88iOnerS': oorirt OS the 

ohlllty. Said laid and the procee& thereof when 

cold 8hal.l be held byisaid countle8~a~one a8 a 

true% for .the benefit o$ pub110 school&therein; 

said proceeds tom be .inYe!sted in bonds of$h8 

u&tea StCIte8, the 8tat&@f ‘f8ZWOr Caadti88 

h 8aia Stite, or In SUch if&her 8eOUriti88~ and 

under atch re8trlatlqn8~as ~i+y be pre8Oribed Iiy 

law; aaU.the counties ehall bk.res mlble for 

all investments; the lntemst - .$ *ozIic.r~ ereon an 

revenue, eroqit the princ+l,':<~8htil be available fund~..~ .~ 

F%W5Uant t0 this COIIStitUtlOndl pr&l8iOn the La&Slature enacted Article 2824, OS then Revleed.Civil Statute8 ore. 

1925, whioh prescribe&the type oftinda in whloh the uo11opieoloaere* court8 of the varlouS.countlq8~+8re authorized to 

invest the proaeeda or the sale of the land granted to them 

for educational pu.rposeS. This artiole’?$ikerriee re+IIplV38i8eS 

that provision of the Conatltutlon relating to the Use8 of the 

income derived thererrdm. It etattd In clear language that 

*only the interest thereon to be ueed end.expsnded amllY*" 

iYe think the question well nettle 

8 unused, and that only the 

that the FOrpQa of %he 

Soho' fund must remain Intact an 

earnings *herefrom shall ever be expended. 

The returns from the investment of the Permanent 

School Fund become the "avalfable fundN end the manner of 

expending such income is limited by the provision of Article 
Honorable Xl?red N. Steinle, psge#3 

2827 CP the Revised Civil Statutes or 1925. We think there 

Is no westion but thet the interest collected on the ~ador's lien note retained by Atescoaa County beoame a part of 

the Xw:lleble Fund.nnd, as such fund, it passed from the 

jurisdiction of tie Commissioners* Court of the county and 

subsequent ex-pendltures therefron can be made solely upon 

the outhorlzation of the County Board of Trustees and the 

County Superintendent acting as their agent. See the oa8e 

of Oge et al vs. Froboese et al, 66 S. W. 6138, (rehearing 

denied). In our opinion this preoludes the CO!mi88ioner8* 

Court or the ccunty from ra8orting to the Avallabl8Tund 

Sol: the payment of ooste, expenses, attorneye' iserr and 

taxes which may have accrued agalnclt~the land heretofore 

granted to the county for educational purposes. 

Article e951,Sectlon 0, of the Revieed Clvl& Statutes of 1925, read8 as fOllw8: 

BohoolS." 

We, theretore, think that it beoame.the duty-o? tbo 

~IsIIIIb8iOn~8' Court to bring suit to reaover the land ln 

queatlon, and thatany expense incurred a8 a re8ult +r*? 

8hould be borne by the oounty. In SUppOrt Of thi8 cOnClll8iOu 

we cite from the case o? Toml$naon Ys.~Ropkin8,Coopty$-reported in Volum& 57 of the Texa8 Reports, at page‘.ElR, wherein 

the courtspeaking through Associata.Justice Bohner said: 

*The whole policy of the sereral acts, both of the Republlo 

and or the State of Texas, lti granting land'for the eatablishment~o? a general system o? educatfon Wa8 to make the 

land thus granted an available net ?und for this purpoee; 

ana it was not Intended that any part or it should be diverted to any other purpose, not even to the expense of lccating 

and surveying it.* These lends were granted to the VEiriOU8 

counties in trust ?or the benefit of the schools of such 

counties, and the counties have been made responsible ?br 

the sefeguerdfng of such tunas aa may hsve been derived rrcm 

the sale of the land granted to it. 
Honorable Alfred K. Steinle, page ,& 

"All agricultural or grazing school lend 

mentioned in Section 6 of this article owned 

by any county shall be subject to taxation except for State purposes to the same extent es 

land privately owned.*' 

Therefore, we think that if the lands of ktascosa County lying Within LaSalle County are 8lassi?l,ed as either agrioutural or grazing land, then it must follow that Ataaoorra 

Caunty la liable for the taxea'due LaSslle County, Pn the 

ease 0s~ Childress County YS. 8tate"et al, reported in 92 s. w. 

(2d) 1011, the Supreme Court said: *Where agrloultural school. 

land was sold by counties to individual8 who failed to comply 

with contraots of sale, whereup0n title to lands vverted to 

oounty; such land wuia not be burdened with ,taxee due the 

State during time land wa8 pri*atelp owned,* a$ the.same 

wQrt, speakingiurther, said4 

aOqtire title ~to sgrlcUlttlra1 

?A wuxtty which did noere80hool land situated in anoth8b 

oounty until February, 1933, .r&acqulrsd land m@jeot to 

tares due ench other aaunty ?or the years 1951 8x@ 1992, anl 

the county re-aoquirlng laad hed:.optiono? pfiylng taxee to 

proteat Its Interest or let land be .a01d @r.such taxe8 * *". 

In other word8, the courthela that a judgment r0r tare8 aoly 

ad lawfully 1eYled agfiia8t 88hOOl land could not be. en?oroed 

against the carnty to whom euOh~landa&.d been gra8ted, but 

this, in our opinion,.doee not relleYe‘~the..respoQaible oounty 

&? liability to the Penmnent Sohool l%nd o?‘it8 county. 

summing up these 

opinion, the expense8 

of the land belonging to the 

county must be pald~from the 

that the taxes duly and law?ully Isvied agblnst such~lsnd by 

&&lle County may be paid out of the revenue derived from the 

u, but that in the event there is no such revenue tmsuch 

taxes shall be paid from the @eneral.tid. See A,tlcie Ylnoa, 

Revised Civil Statutes of 1925. 

To answer your second question pre refer you to the 

last sentence of Section 6, Article 7, o? the Conetitutfon, 

which provides: i 
Honorable Alfred N. Stelnle, page #5 

"Interest thereon and other revenue, except 

the principal, shall be available funds." 

We think the expression "other revenue" Is intended 

to cover any revenue earned by the Permanent School Fund as 

a result of the investment of the proceeds o? the sale of 

lend granted by law to that county for educational purposes. 

Then it necessarily ?ollaws that our conclusion is that any 

profit earned by this fund should beoome a part of the Available Fund. 

very truly pUr8 

i?TORWEYGENKRALOFTEXM 

JyL-4 &---+- 

Clarenoe B. Crow 

A88i8tMt 

.APPRovJm: 

OPIWIOR COlIltamm 

BY B.W.B., Chsirmsn