‘A CDRFJEP GENE 

0~ TEXAS 

June 25, 1948 

Hon. Weldon B, Davis 

County Attorney 

Austin County 

Bellvllle, Texas 

Opinion Ro. V-617 

Re: Legality of defraying 

the expenses of BPploging a county nurse 

fpom the jury fund. 

Dear Sir: 

ject 

Your request fop oup opinion on the above submatter is, in part, aa follows~ 

"The Commissioners Court of Austin 

County, Texas, has been requested by 

some of the county citizens to employ a 

graudate registered numc) to visit publfa schools fn the county and to investlgate health aond%tfona and sanitary surroundings of ~ueh sohooPsp etc,, all. as 

provided under Article 45288, R, C, se of 

Texas, Seetfon 3 of the same article provides that the ComiIssfoneas Coust shall 

be empowemd to appropriate from funds of 

the reepectlve count%ea, the necessary 

wney to cover the salary of such nurse, 

not to exceed $1.800.00 a year fop any one 

nurse, and In addftlon themto, the Conmlssions~s Cowt may appropriate additlonal funds to covep the expensea of such 

mwse fncumed In the visiting of schools, 

etc. 

"You will notice that Section 3 

above mentione& of ArtfcPe 4528a, provides Df~~m any funds of the Pespective 

oounties D R ktfcle 8* Section g9 of OUP 

State Constitution provides, among other 

p~ovislons of such section, that a COMty, city OP town may levy a tax of not 

to exceed fifteen oents on the $lOO,OO 

valuation to pay jurofs. 

"Questfona Since Sectfon 3, AleI- 
Hon. Weldon B. Davis, page 2 (V-617) 

cle 4528a above referred to, uses the 

vords Ofporn any funds of the respective 

couutles 0 p could the Commissioners Collpt 

legally levy a two pep cent jury tax to 

defpag the expenses necessaxy,,fop the 

employment of a oounty nupse? 

AFtlcle 4528a, V. C. 9. ppovlder:: 

"sece 1. That the Comlrslone~s 

Court of the various Counties In the 

State of Texam shall have the authority, 

when in their judgment it shall be de,emed to be necessary OF advisable, to employ one OP more Graduate Registered 

nurses whose duty It shall be to visit 

the public schools in the county In which 

they are employed, and to Investigate the 

health conditions and sanlhb suproundlngs of such schools, and the personal, 

physical and health condition of pupils 

thepeln, and to co-opeaate with the duly 

organized Board of Health and local 

health authorities in general public 

health nursing and perform such other 

and fplpthep duties as may be required 

of them by the Conrfssfoners Court. 

'See0 2. That said nui%es when so 

appointed shall be employed on a monthly salary to be fixed by the CommLssioners Court and shall at all times be subject to Pemoval by the Commfsafone~s 

Court without prfor notice, 

"Sec. 3. The CommlrslonePs Court 

shall be empowe.Ped to apppoprlate from 

any funds of the r?espectlve Countfes 

the necessary money to cover the ealaPy 

of such nurses, not to exceed the sum of 

$1,800~~ to each nose, and In addition 

thereto may apppoprlate additional funds 

to COV~P all expenses that may be proper 

and necessary in the visitin of such 

schoola, and Qenepal Pnblio fie alth mupaing including tpanap$rtstfon and other 

Incidental expenses0 

Aptlcle VIII, section 9 of the Toxaa Constitu- 
Hon. Weldon B. Davis, page 3 (V-617) 

tion provides the maximum rate of taxes for aounty ptirposes, for roads and bridges, for permanent improvements and for juries. The courts have repeatedly held 

that the CommiasionePsD Court cannot transfsr these oonstltutional funds and it cannot spend tax money for one 

purpose raised ostensibly for another gurpose. See 

Aqlt v. Hill Count 

liama, 202 9,W. T' 

116 S.W, 359, and Carroll v. Wil50 D 

We quote the following from Attorney Ceneralss Opinion No. V-332: 

"Article VIII, Section g9 authorizer 

the levy of a tax Onot exceeding fifteen 

(15) cents to pay juror~.~ In cons truing 

Article VIII, Section 9, the courtm have 

uniformly held that the p~ovlslons of this 

Sectlon of the Constitution Dwere designed, 

not merely to limit the tax rate for certain therein clesfgnated purposes9 but to 

require that any and all money rafsed by 

taxation for any such purpose shall be 

applied, faithfully, to that particular 

P-Poses as needed therefor, and not to 

any other purpose or nse whatsoever.D 

Carroll v. Williams, 202 S.W. 5Ok, 506. 

See also Ault v. Hill County, 102 Tex, 

335, 116 3.W. 359. 

"The JUP~ Fund of the county la a 

constitutional fund composed of tax money 

levied for the sole purpose of paying jurors. 

The Legislature is therefore prohibited by 

Article VIII, Section 9, from authorlzlng 

such tax levy to be used for any other purpose than Dto pay jur~rs.~ Therefore, it 

is our opfnfon that the portion of Section 

3 of H. B, 683, Acts of the 50th Legfslature, authorizing the Commissioners Court 

to pay the salaples of the investigators 

OP assistants and stenographers out of t#e 

Jury Fund is unconsti%ut%onal and void. 

Sines the jury fund of the county fr composed 

of tax mOn8y levied fQr the SOPS pwpose Of paying juPOPS, and in view of the foregoing a,athoritles, It is 

our opinion that no portion of the jury fund can be 

used to defray the expensea necessary for the employment of a registered nurse to visit public schools in 
. . 

Hon. Weldon B. Davis, page 4 (V-617) 

the oounty, 

Blo portion of the jury fund may be 

expended for the purpose of eaiploying a

reglsteped nurse to visit public schools 

in the county. Artible VIII, 8ectioq 9, 

of the Texas Constitution. 

Yours very tmalJ, 

ATTORRRY QEl#ZRAL OF TEXAS 

APPROvH)s