OFFICE OF THE A7TORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

186 

&noraUe J. N. fiauldwia 

@unty Attorney, Johnson County 

cleburne , Texas 

Dousir: 

Yio have rscslvsd your rs 

and quot. from ssas as follows: 

"OILS Of the iasmbsrs Of th lonars~ Court 

or thls oounty ha holssale lumbar business ior ; hs oprates 

a truok and goes east Taxas 

and buys lumber e buys various 

kinds of lumbar 

suitable ror br 

8 buys Umber 

ous lumber yuds in 

ld bridge lumbar to 

ias In this *lolnlty. Hs 

iereot lumber yards in 

ke whatover kind of lumme of the lumber mld to 

on ha sold to one of the 

re load of bridge lumber. 

Jurls 

"The other three nrembars of ths Comaisslomrs~ 

Court halve heretofore bought from these local yards 

some of the indention1 bridge lunaer that this Comlssloner sold to the yards, and ueed it in repairing and 

building bridges in their resgaotlve preolmts. I tiso 

understand that this partloular Comalssl~na~ has purohased rrom sane at the looal yards suas of the idsatloal bridge lumber that he had previously sold ths ya#&s, 

and used it in re;?alrlng and building brld@es in hls 

preolJlot. Ths smterial in eaoh of suoh lnstanoss was 

paid Soor by the County, and the price paid ror the 

material was ths sake prioe that any individual wou3.d 
have had to pay Sor this kind of material. 

*I do not hiue any InformatIon that tbsre existed 

any-ape-at or understendlng between the loss1 lumber 

yards and the Commlsalonor, thtit he, or any other CmmlssIoners or the oounty ~uld purohase at retafl any 

part of the lumber the ~yirrd wers buying from him. 

WKould the purebasing of this ldentleal bride luaber from the boa1 yerds by the other three nonbore of 

the Commissloaers~ Court, to be assd In bridge repairing 

and bulldlq In their respeotlve prsolnots, be a violation of either art. 571 or Art. 373 of our Penal cads? 

Vjould the purshaslna of this ldentlosl bridge 1-0 

bar rroathe looal yards by this partloular Comlssloner, 

to be used in &id(s repalrln(l and buIldisg Is his prsolnot, bs a tlolatisa of elther Art. 1191 or Art. 37S, 

OS our Psnal Oods?* 

Artlole 571, Psnal Cods OS Texas, reads as followsr 

*Any ofiloer or any sounty or OS asy olty or town 

who shall oootraot dlreotly or indlreotly, or beoome 

La any way latrsted is say oontraot ror the purohsss 

oi any drait or order on the troasurcor suoh sosatyr 

alty or town, or ror asy jsry oertltlsato er any other 

debt, olaia or dsmand for whloh said seunty, elty or 

town uy or oan in any event be made llabl?, shall be 

lined not lass thur ten nor more than twenty tlass the 

amount of the order, draft, jsry osrtiiloate, debt, 

olals or llablllty Bs purohased or oontraoted ior. 

Within the term 'oifloer, ' 18 lnoludsd sr-offloer8 ontll 

they have made a ilnai settlement of their oS?IoIal aoOOunts.” 

Artiole 373, Penal Code of Texas, reads as follows: 

*IS any officer of may oounty, or of any crlty or 

town shall beooiw in any manner peeuniarlly lnterestsd 

in any eontraots made by suoh sounty, olty or tom, 

through Its a&ents, or otherulse, Sor ths eonstruotion 

or repair of any brldse, road, street, allay or house, 

or any other.work undertaken by suoh oousty, city or 

town, or shall be&we tnterested in any bld or propt~al 

for suoh work or In the purohase or sale of anything 

t 
-de for or on ecoount oi aloh oounty, city or town, 

or who shall oontruot for ore noelve any mney or 

property, or the iepreseatatlvs of either, or any 

emolkaent or advantage whatsoever la oonelderotlon 

of such bid, proposal, oontraot, purchase or sale, 

he shall be flned not less than fifty nor more tkaa 

rive hundred do11ars." 

Under the above faote subaitted by you, it seems olear 

that the bridge lumber purobased by ths ~mmls~loners for the use 

sad benefit or the oounty was purohased IFofii your looal lumber 

yard and not~fron your soarmiseloner~. Under well dsttled prlaolplea of law we must prssums, la the abssnee of facts to the oon- 

,trary. that your oommlssloner owned so interest in such brldEe 

lumbar at the tlms s&me was purohased for the oouaty. Yea also 

state in your lstter that you know of no sgrwment or udlerstandlnt, 

between the lumber yard and the eommlrslonor meking the sale of such 

lumber to the luaiber yard, that would lndleste same was other than 

a Eons fide sale.. 

We do not believe that the aots-desorlbed in either of 

Jour questions oonstituts par se violations of the hereinabove set 

out penal statutes. 

Trust&a6 we have answered your iaWry satlsfaotorlly, 

we are 

Yours very truly