, 

March 20, 1947 

Hon. Royce Whitten 

County Attorney 

Lsmar County 

Paris, Texas 

Dear Mr, Whitten: 

Opinion No. V-92 

Re : Authority of the Commlssioners’ Court to determine sheriff Is bond and 

pay premiums on official 

bonds of sheriff’s deputies in salary counties 0 

Your recent request for an opinion of this Department reads as follows: 

“Please advise me as to whether or not 

the County Auditor or Commissioners’ Court 

has authority to set the amount of the Sheriff and his deputies official bonds. 

‘I call your attention to excerpt of 

your DspartmsntSs Opinion No. o-5110, To: 

Ray Winder, County Attorney, Cooke County; 

Date, February 18, 1943. This doesn’t answer my questlon In that said excerpt reads 

in part that the Sheriff may require his 

deputies to execute surety bonds but my inquiry Is when such Sheriff requires his 

three riding deput les 0 Chief Deputy and 

Day Jailer to make bonds In the sum of 

$5000.00 each, his Right Jailer, $1000.00, 

together with his own in the amount of 

$12,000, what right, If any, does the County Auditor and/or Commissioners’ Court have 

to refuse paying such premium?” 

Article 6866, R. C. 3. of, Texas, provides in 

part as follows: 

,~ ‘Qvery’ person elected to the office of 

sheriff shall, before entering upon the duties 

of his office , give a bond with two or more 

good and sufficient sureties, to be approved 

by the Commissioners’ Court of his county, or 

suoh sum as may be directed by such court, not 

less than $5000.00 nor more than $30,000.00, 
Hon.” Royce Whltten, Page 2, V-92 

payable to the Governor and his successors 

in office, conditioned that he will account 

for and pay over to the persons authorized 

by law to receive the same, all fines, forfeitures and penalties that he may collect 

for,,the use of the State or any county . . 

. s 

Article 6870, Revise& Civil 3tatutes of Texas 

provides as follows: 

“Sheriffs shall be respoaslble for the 

official acts of their deputies, and they 

shall have power to require from their deputies bond and security; and they shall have 

the sams remedies against their deputies 

and sureties as any person y,an have against 

a sheriff and his sureties. 

B;r virtue of the above authorities, the Commissioners’ Court shall approve the bond of the sheriff 

in an amount not less than $5000.00 nor more than $30, 

000.00, to be determined by the Commissioners' Court. 

Further, the sheriff shall have the power to require 

bonds of deputies, and If such power is exercised, it 

Is the opinion of this department that the authority 

to determine the amount of the bond la vested in the 

sheriff. 

Section (b), Article 3899, V. C. S., reads ln 

part as follows: 

‘*aoh officer uamsd in this Act, where 

he receives a srJ.ary aa comtnsatloa for his 

services, shall be entitled and permitted to 

purchase or charge to his county all reasonable expenses necessary in the proper and 

legal coaduot of his offlce, premiums on of - 

ficlals’ bonds, premiums on fire, burglary, 

theft, robbery Insurance protecting public 

funds, and including the cost of surety bonds 

for his deputies, provided that expenses lncurred for premiums on officials’ bonds for 

the county treasurer, county auditor, county 

road commissioners, county school superintendent, and the hide and animal Inspector, 

including the cost of surety bonds for any 

deput lee of any such officers, lgay be also 
, 

H&a. Royce Uhltten, Page 3, v-92. 

included, and such expenses to bs passed on,~ 

predetermined aad allowed la the tlms’and amount, as ne,arly as possible, by the Couanlsslonersl Court once each month for the ensuing month, upon the application by each of- 

’ ricer, stating the kind, probable, amount of 

expenditure and the necessity for the expenses 

0r his office for suoh ensuing month, which 

application shall, before presentation to said 

court, first be endorsed by the county auditor, 

if any, otherwise the county treasurer, only 

as to whether funds are available for pegmeat 

0r suoh expenses. 

” All such approved claims and l ocounti &hali be paid from the Officers Salary,Fund unless othervlse provlde’d herein.” 

Article 3899, supra, was amnded b Senate Bill 

Ilo. 270, Acts of the Regular Session of the t 5th Legislature, to provide for the payment of surety bonds for 

the deputies of those officers receiving a salary as compensation for their services. By a subsequsnt amendment 

Iu 1941 by House Bill 524, Acts or the Regular Session 

of the 47th Legislature, Article 3899 was further amended 

to provide that the premiums one official bonds for county 

treasurers, county auditors, county road commlssioners,~ 

county school superintendents, and hide and animal lnspecters and their deputies should be paid from county 

funds and In so doing provided further “that if any of 

thd officers so designated are on a salary rather than 

a fee basis, then all such bond premiums for officers 

and their depukles shall be paid from the General Fund 

of the county. Therefore, it will be seen that Section 

(b) of Artlole 3899 would be applicable to Tour county 

inasmuch as Lamar County has a population In excess of 

20,000 inhabitants accorditig to the 1940 Federal Census 

and must be compensated on a salary basis. 

v. c. 9.) 

(Art .~ 39120, 

In oodformlty with the statute abok quoted, it 

will be noted that the Commissioners8 Court is only authorieed to pay “all reasouable expense8 necessary.” While 

it may be oontendad that the cost of offfolal bonds for 

deputies may 0~17 be paid If they are required by law to 

exeoute such bonds, aevertlreless, the statute evidences, 

at least by implication, a legislative Intent that the 

coat for official bonds for deputies shall be paid, If 
,Hon. Royce Whltten, Page 4, V-92 

the same is a reasonable and necessary expense. More - 

over, Article 6870, supra, authorizes a sheriff to require a bond of his deputies at his option and dlscretion, (Attorney General Opinion No. o-5110, deted Februrary 18, 1943) and if such a bond Is required, it 1s 

the opinion of this Department that the cost of such official bond for a deputy is an authorized expenditure 

to be paid from the Officers I Salary Fund of your county upon a finding of the Commissioners1 Court that the 

sams is a reasonable bond and a necessary expense. 

Therefore, it is the opinion of this Departmsnt that vhen the county officials of a county are 

compensated on an annual salary basis, the premiums on 

the bonds of said off leers and their deputies must be 

paid by the county as authorized by Section (b) of Article 3899, V. C. S., from the Orfloers’ Salary Fund 

of said county. 

We are horewlth enclosing for you lnformatfon a copy of Opinion No. o-5055, written by this Department on January 29, 1943, which holds that bond 

pl?emiums for certain named county officials and their 

deputies in counties operat lag on a salary basis should 

be paid out of the Officers I Salary Fund of the county. 

- 

1. The amount of t,he off lclal bond for a 

sheriff is determined by the Commissioners1 

Court, and the amount of the official bond for 

a sheriff Is de 

iff. (Arts. 6i 

uty is determined by the sher66 and 6870, R1 C. 9.) 

2. The cost of official bonds of a sheriff and his deputies, compensated on a salary 

bas la, is an authorized expendlt ure, allowable 

by the Commissioners f Court from the Officers’ 

Salary Fund. 

BU:d jm:wB:mrj 

&cl; Assistant