The Attorney General of Texas 

May 30, 1981 

MARK WHITE 

Attorney General 

Honorable John A. Traeeer Opinion No. ~~-348 

Chairman 

Committee on Intergovernmental 

Relations 

Texas State Senate 

Austin, Texas 78i’ll 

Re: May state release claims on 

land deeded to former office of the 

State Superintendent of Public 

Instruction 

Dear Senator Traeger: 

Senate Bill 1027, which you submit with your request, releases any 

claim by the state to a one-acre tract of land deeded from an individual to 

“Ashbel Smith, Superintendent of Public Instruction and his successors in 

office.‘. . . ” You inform us that the successors of the original grantor have 

been in continuous possession of the land for many years. The bill provides 

for the restoration of title to a successor of the original grantor. YOU 

inquire whether the Texas Constitution prohibits the enactment of Senate 

Bill 1027. 

The office of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction was 

established in 1884. Acts 1884, 18 Leg., lst S.S., ch. 25 S8, art. 7, Sl2, at 38, 

41. The superintendent was charged with the general superintendency of 

business relating to the public schools of the state. Id. S13. In our opinion, 

he was empowered to accept grants of property for school purposes on 

behalf of the state. The state has power to acquire property, dispose of it, 

and place it in the hands of a custodian. Conley v. Daughters of the 

Republic, 156 S.W. 197 (Tex. 1913). 

In 1949, the legislature established the position of State Commissioner 

of Education and gave him the powers and duties formerly vested in the 

State Superintendent of Public Instruction. Acts 1949, 51st Leg., ch. 299, 

art. V, Sl, at 537, 543. See Educ. Code Sll.25. 

- 

On the facts presented, of which we have no direct knowledge, the 

tract of land described in Senate Bill 1027 belongs to the state, and we must 

conclude, in the absence of additional facts, is in the custody of the 

Commissioner of Education. Its continuous possession by successors of the 

original grantor does not give them an interest in it. Adverse possession 

would not run against the state. Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. State, 162 

S.W. 2d 119,134 (Tax. Civ. App. - Austin 1942, writ ref’dl. Nor ls the state’s 

title affected by the lapse of time, lathes, payment of taxes, or the 

dereliction of its offices. 5 

p. 1152 
Honorable John A. Traeger - Page Two (Mw-348) 

The constitution prohibits the legislature from giving away state money or 

property. Tex. Const. art. III, SS44, 51, 52, 55. See also Tex. Const. art. 3, .§56. 

Attorney General Opinion WW-185 (19571. ConsequenT Senate Blll 1027, which 

gratuitiously disposes of state property, would be unconstitutional if enacted. 

SUMMARY 

Senate Bill 1027, if enacted, would be unconstitutional 

because it would authorize the gratuitious disposition of state 

property to an individual. 

MARK WHITE 

Attorney General of Texas 

JOHN W. FAINTER, JR. 

First Assistant Attorney General 

RICHARD E. GRAY III 

Executive Assistant Attorney General 

Prepared by Susan Garrison 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

Susan L. Garrison, Chairman 

Carl Glaze 

Rick Gllpin 

Jim Moelliqer 

Bruce Y oungblood 

p. 1153