TEEATTORNEY GENEJRAI. 

Gerald C. !&inn 

OgFTEXAS 

AUSTIN. TEXAS 

Honorable Burl Brlttaln 

Coupty AuMtor 

San Patricia County 

Sinton, Texas 

Dear Sir: pIion No. 0-9!Se 13 w 

: Validity of the Conuulssionerst 

Court Order, dated April 8, 

1940. 

Pour recent re uest for an opinion of this department on the question as 9 a herein stated has been received. 

We quote from your letter as followa: 

"InoloseU herewith is a certifleed copy of a 

Commissionerat Court Order dated February 12, 1940 

revealing the aotion of the Ccmnlssionerb~ Court 

relative to a petition to Bsploy a County.Servlce 

Office, algneU by E. W. Isabel and 126 other citizens, which was presented to the Court by Mr. 3-W. 

Fork 

@There is ala0 inclosed a certified copy of 

the Com&eeioner*s Courts Order dated April 8,~ 1940, 

which reveals the Mnal disposition taken by the 

Court on the petition presented by Mr. J. W. Ford 

on February 12, 1940. 

wWLll you please advise me whether or not the 

action taken by the Court on April 8, relative to 

the application and petition presented on February 

I.2 is conatitutlonal. 

"In as much as the Case Worker for this County 

did not apply to the Commlssioner~s Court for an 

assistant and nhen,advLsed of the employment of the 

assistant requested that he not be sent to her offQlz% f-Jz al&.. %rpp3ac% +.I2 'pp, +a b=L QllQuxw unb3.P 

subterfuge, but I want your opinion on the subject." 

We quote the above mentioned petition (omittin the 

names signedthereto) and the motion of the Commissioners f 

Court, bearing date of February $2, 1940, together with the 

order of the Conrmissloners' Court, bearing date of April 8, 

1940, all of nhich is duly~certified $0 by the Clerk of the 

County Court of San Patricia County: 
Honorable Burl Brittain, Page 2 

"There was presented to this Connwlsslonera~ 

Court, a petition signed by E. W. Isabel and 128 

other cltfzene of the County, -petitioning the 

County Commlssloners~ Court to employ a County 

Service Offlcer, to assist the County case Worker 

in working with ex-seavice men and their families. 

On Motion made by Corn. E. H. Jackson, seconded by 

Corn. W. E. Tedford, and all Commissioners being 

prewent and voting ‘Aye’ and none voting "Nay' 

petition received and ordered held for further information from other sections of the County, as 

most of the names were from Sinton and Odes. 

"Petition to Employ a County Service Officer. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS 

COUNTY OF SAW PATEICIO WHEFtEAS, there is a need 

among the ex-service men and fsmllies of San Patricio County, Texas, for a service officer to assist them in the securing of benefits to which they 

are entitled by reason of their service to the Government, in securing hospltalleatlon and medical 

care as well as benefits to which they are entitled, 

and: 

QlElZHEAS, the securing of said benefits dll, 

in numerous cases be of direct benefit to the County, 

In that the County is often called upon to assist 

those rho are entitled to medical and other care 

from the Federal Government by reason of their wartime service, which will relieve the County of this 

burden; 

'ETBEBEFOEE, We the underslgned resident tax 

payers of San Patricia County, Texas, respectfully 

fl" 

tltion the Honorable Commissioners' Court of San 

atriclo County, to employ a suitable person, famillar with the needs of ex-service men and their fsmllles and of the benefits to which they are entitled, 

to take care of this work." 

"There Game up for consideration the matter of 

employing an assistant Case Worker in San Patriclo 

County, and it appearing to this court that Mr. J. W. 

Ford is a suitable person for this position, and 

that it would be to the advantage of the citizenship of San Patricia County that such assistant 

Case Worker be employed, It is hereby ordered that 

Mr. J, W. Ford be employed as assistant Case Worker 
Honorable Burl Brittain, ~Page 3 

at a salary of $35.00 per month, effective April 

1, 1940; and that said employment be continued 

until December 31, 1940, unless the relief setup requiring the employment of Case Workers be 

sooner discontinued. 

*Motion made by Commissioner E. H. Lewis, 

seconded by E. H. Jackson and all commissioners 

being present and voting 

"Nay,' it is 80 ordered." 

{Aye’ and none voting 

We 8re of/the opinion that we c8n properly pass upon the validity of the above mentioned order of the Commisaioners’ Court without deciding any constitutional question 

that might be technically raised. A constitutional question 

till be passed upon only when neceesity arises; and the courts 

are loath to dealde such question8 unless they have been dlrectly raised and argued by counsel. Black Bros. VS. State, 

253 S. W. 576; City of H uston vs. #ouston City Street Bailnay Co., 19 S. W. 127; T8xas Jur., Vol. 9, p. 426. 

We quote from Texas Juris., Vol. 11, pages 563-4-5, 

aa follows: 

'Counties, being component parts of the 

state, have no powers or duties except those 

which are plainly set forth and defined in the 

constitution and statutes. The statutes have 

plainly defined the powers, prescribed the 

duties, and imposed the liabilities of the 

commissioners’ courts, the medium through which 

the different counties act, and from those 

statutes must come all the authority vested in 

the counties. 

" . . . . 

" CominIsaioners~ court8 are courts 

of li~t~d*j~rl.sdlctlon, in that their authority 

extends only to matters pertaining to the geners,l welfare of their respective oounties and that 

their powers are only those expres~sly or impliedly conferred upon them by law,--that is& by the 

constitution and statutes of the state. 

We have carefully examined the various statutes. 

and portions of the constitution with reference to the powers 
.- 

Honorable Burl Brittaln, Page 4 

and authorit of the Commlaaioners~ Courts, and 80 far as we 

have been ab 9 e to find, there is no power, right or authority expressly or implledlg conferred upon the Connnissioners~ 

Court8 to make and enter an order in the minutes of said 

court, as above Indicated. Therefore, you are respectfully 

advised that it is the opinion of this department that the 

order of the Commissioners~ Court, bearing date of April 8, 

1940, as above quoted, is invalid. 

Trusting that the foregoing fully answers your inquiry, we are 

Yours very truly 

ATTORNEYGENERAL OF TEXAS 

By ha/ Ardell Wllll8ms 

Ardell Williams 

Assistant 

AW:oe:wb 

APPROVED JGW 18, 1940 

/a/ Gerald C. Mann 

ATTORNEY GRNRRAL OF TMAS 

APPROVED: OPINION COMUITTRR 

BY: BWB ChRiZlllW3