,A - ‘- , 

/. 

:. 

February 5, 1947 

Hon. T. M. Trimble, First Assistant 

State Superintendent of Public Instruction 

Department of Education 

Austin, Texas A. 0. Opinion No. V-63 

He: , 

County Commissioner, authority to serve as trus- , 

tee of independent school 

id district. 

.? Dear Sir: 

We refer ~you to your letter of recent date 

wherein you requested an opinion of this department eon 

- r .i theYfollowing submitted question: _ 

-- ., 

- : May a County Commissioner serve at 

the same time as trustee of-an independent 

school district? 

Article XVI, Section 40, Constitution of Texas, 

reads as follows: 

"No person shall hold or exercise, at 

: the same time, more than one civil office of 

emolument, except that of . . . county commissi0ni.w . . . I* 

Dual office holding is expressly forbidden by 

Section 4O;Article XVI of the Constitution where both 

offices are civil offices of emolument. Dual office holding is forbidden to an extent at.least by Section 33 of 

Article XVI wherein the accounting'officers of the State 

are forbidden to issue or pay a warrant upon the Treasurer for the payments of salary or compensation to a 

civil officer, who at the same time holds another office of honor. trust, or profit under the United States 

or the State of Texas. 

The Constitutional prohibition against the 

holding of more than ~ohe office of emolument (Article 

XVI, Section 40) isinapplicable to the question;under 

consideration for tvio reasons: (1) The office of County Cmmissiocei i; expressly excepted; (2) As the 

trustee serves without compensation, his is not an 
.- 

Hon. T. M. Trimble, Page ,2,~v-6) 

office of emolument. State v. Martin, 51 S. W. (2d) 

815; Attorney General Opinion o-3308. And since 

neither a County Commissioner nor a trustee of an in- . 

dependent school district are officers to be paid out 

.of the State Treasury, we do not believe Article XVI, 

Section 33 of the Texas Constitution is violated under the facts submitted. Attorney General Opinion Ro. 

O-3308 and O-3352. 

Bowever, it is aiso a fundamental rule'of law 

that one person may not hold at one time two offices, 

the duties of which are incompatlble~, and this princi@s 

applies nhether or notthe office is.named in the exception contained in Article. XVI, Section 40, Bieacourt V. 

Parker, 27 Texas 558; State v. Br~inkerhoff,,66 Texas 45; 

Thomas v. Abernathy Countg~Line Independent School District; 290 3. W; 152; Attorney General Opinions Numbers 

O-4957 and O-5145. -'Pruitt-v. Glen Rose Independent 

School District, 84 S. W. (Zd) 1004. 

This principle ef flaw, incompatibility of of- 

!&es, is expressed clearly-.in 22 R. Ct L. 414, par. 56; 

we quota from Knuckles v. Eoard of Educationof Bell. 

County, (IZentucky) 114 3. W. (2d) 511, at page 514., as 

follows: 

We have considered the statutes relative to 

the respective duties incumbent upon a county commissioner and a 'trustee of an independent school district, 

and we cati conceive of no sound basis upon which it 

"One of the most important tests as to 

whether offices are -incompatible is found in 

the principle that.the incompatibility is recognized whenever one is subordinate to the other in some ofits important and principal duties, 

or iS subject to supervision by the other, or 

where a contrarity and antagonism would result 

in the attempt by one person to discharge the 

duties of both. Under this<principle two offices are incompatible where the incumbent of 

one has the power to remove the incumbent of 

the other, though the contingency on which the 

power may be exercised Is remote, and It also 

exists where the incumbent of one office has 

the power of appointment asto the other office, or to audit the accounts of anbthzr, or 

to exercise a supervision over another. 
I 

*. 

8.. 

1. ~_;_. _. 

..-. -.~ 

-- . 

. . . 

.. . : 

Hon. T. hf. Tritible, Page 3, v-63 

may be said that their respective offices are lncompcltible. We have been unable to find any statute providin$ that either office is accountable to, under 

the dominion of, or subordinate to then other, or 

which provides that~ either office .has a right to interfere vith the other in the performnce of any official duty. Nor have; vs been appraised of’ any reason why the duties of ‘a county commissioner would be 

inconsistent or in conflict with the duties OS a tmstee of an independent school district. 

It is our opinion’ therefore that the two. 

offic’es in question are not’incompatibie, and that 

your submitted question should be, and is, answered 

in the affirmative. 

,_ 

smm 

One’person may hold at the same time 

both the offices of county commissioner and 

trustee. of an independent school district, 

the said offices being not incompatible. 

Very truly yours, 

ATTORRRY GRNERAL OF TEXAS 

.k.. 

BY< 

$?y&$&) :. ..’ :., 

Chester E. Ollieon 

Aseistatlt 

mo:mtmrj 

APPROVE3 PRB. 5, 1947 

ATTORW GERERAL OF TEXAS 

APPROVRD OPWIOB COMMITTRB 

BY BWR , CRAIRRAN 

1 . .