OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Honorable TOXI C, Eiw~ 

stat0 AWlltOr end gtriO~O~0p 

Aumtlnl Torar 

Deer Sir: 

a 0r thi8 dre u&l aoooant8 

te he8rurW in tha pap 

n baaed te rtate embeen l mrS.gnrd by 8tiia 

l q o earoo t hu a ve ark& 

hove #taOed general 

d.11 be l mwerod repv&ioh thrr.8p$mr ia SOUP 

-lb this provlrion nan6rtory opal 

the Steta Tr66aurexW 

Xta four rht question evldentlg you #r* r8- 

ferrfng to Artlolr 4372, a8 aam by the I.2~4 Le&ir- 
lature in 1931. sala article made4 aa lollo*.s: 

*The Treesurer ahall keep true accounts 

of the rfioa !pts and expanditurer of the pub110 -txmys 0: the 'Fres6ury. anC close his 

accwnts annus,llp on the Pat aey of Au,Tust, 

vlth the ?rop&r leiv.~l TC!UO~~TS for the n am, 

dlstln~.u:ehia~ batwoen the rtca2pt.t m2 disburtammts of’ each fl~scal ye)rr.* 

You arc advised that Artlole ~372 aakea it 

aanthtory upon the Stetc Trsasurtr to keep true auoounts 0r tbs rectl.pta and exptnaiturae or ths public 

treasury. Your ettentlon is also celled to the feet 

that the Le.$fslature has not left ths matter of the 

katrlng of t&c sccoucts to tfm State Prceeurer'fi dieartticn entlxalg, but has pesssa uummous artloles 

troa time to time which detfno thr type at racordr 

aacl acccmnts to be kapt by 88ia state Treemurrr. 

In oonasctioh with your queetlol number 1, 

you have asked the. followlAg quartloaa: 

“2. Dosa the ~rOri8ion *true aocountr 

or . . . ax~eadfturee of mbl.ic mxmym * 

nwm that the State Treasurer nnaet lgtp 

a rsoord/or account discloelng only the 

number and stunt of State warraats Paid 

by h&a (ISI State Traaeurar? 

,- 

“3. Or daen ‘true aoeounts or exptndltures Gf public liontya* man that the G,tsta 

Trtaaurdr must kae3: B record/or naoount attting out in detail the nuabcr ttna asouslt 0r 

east. state mrraat reeelvad ~(1 pid by &lm 

a8 Stste TraaaurerT 

“L. iioca this statute raau that the 

Stata Txtaaurar mmt also keep a reaord/or 

aocount setting out tha person, aorporntlon, 

bcnk, eta., who piTi8Ated such wplrrant to 

him cs State Trashlurer and wha rsoalved pa?- 

ZQent theram? 

"5. Gr doer this statute mean that be 

must alao keep an BCOOUat/Gf record showing 
Eonorablo To:.\ C. Tin&, 73~8 3 

that ti‘e stat.* ha8 aischrf0a ite obli?atlon 

to the payee or .euch warrant?* 

In answer to the above quoted qutrtlons, you are 

advised that Article k3e2 or Vernon's Lnnotatrd Clvll 

St~~tutca, a8 emended by tke L2nB Legislature in 1531, 

ccmtrols the type 07 reglwter to be kept by the Statr 

Treasurer to show the iosueoce and poymbnt of warranta. 

said articla reads as rollons: 

*?ha Tressurrr S!XIX keep rs&ieters of 

warrent 8 lowed, on6 for eaob class of warranta. 

The Cz::ptrollor~ehalJ furnish lists of warrant.8 

lbmod, which lists shall ba oosparaa with the 

rarrente nnd shall c.:nntftuts the Traacurar’r 

rea,lstars of wnrratita isstma. Tbb mounts of 

warrsnta lssurd aball br added by the Trsaourer 

and Fortd a~atmt the totals cf the warrent reglst~ss. The date or peymant of all wsrranta shall: 

be ata=peQ on tbe aborr regl8ters. The Trsraurcr 

shall krep e *warrant8 paid re@rrter.* In thir 

register the warrents shall be entered eaoh day 

arhmn paid; the number and amount OS asoh warrant 

paid baixg entered. S~arrantr shell bo maped bf 

olaesra and separate tot.816 of warrants paid fmm 

aaot fund shall be ehown, es wall as the grand 

tctel of all warrant.8 p0ia raoh day. The Traesurer shall furnish to tha Comptroller eaoh day 

a ccpy of the warroztta ytld register ehowiw the 

.~ 

werrants ra 14. The Traestmer shell keep e rag- 

: later of warrants cancelled, on whloh shall be 

entered the detalla of all warrants oancellaa.- 

It is tc be noted that tCe wwammta paid registera 

which the State Trrano~rsr !maet keep, under thasi;thority of 

the ebc9e quoted erticl4, mat state the number end mount 

cl each warrent paid. That iafor?ation concernhe eeah uerrant is to be entered cn the 3x9 v:hen the warrant is paid. 

In other wor00, th2 Laglnl3ture has mt left thle matter up 

to $56 Qiscretlon of tfie Treasurer with the broad Uutr On 

said Treasurer to keep trus aaootmts and sxpen~lturae Of 

public amaps, but baa (r.ons furthpr 6~:: has stated syrclficell~r xhst iafonetion ehsll be co::tafned in the warrant8 

piQ regSster. The Legislature haa not ptovfdad herein 

that t?lQ rarrante paid rsgleter shbll lndioate tc what 

person or fim the warrant was actually Fald. Under 
Honorable Tom C. King, Pete & 

Artlole 4382 eaoh armant is to be set cut aeparetely 

In the warrent raid reggister as to the number of raid 

warrant an4 amount. %ltl Tr66sUrer's re&itW Of Warrenta Issued In Zurnished hlrp by the Comptroller aster 

such varrenta sre Iseued. In this rcspctct It Is to h 

poil?tsd out that suah Warrant rsgiater, a oopy o: whioh 

tha Ccnptrollsr makes end furnish613 to the Treasurer, 

contains the information rsquired by Artlole 4359 as follow : 

*And such regloter shall consist of' 

en entry of the agaunt of the vsrrant, 

name of tha pags, epprcprlatlon to vhloh 

oharged, and such other inroraation ee may 

be daamd advisable by the Cos~troller.* 

A copy of thle warrant reglater Is kept by the 

Treasurer, end It In only wheu the warrant is eotually 

paid that th8 smue Is to be entered into the warrants 

paid rsgistrr. In this m(lnn6r ths Treasurer Iti protided 

wltha rroord xtilah shove When tha varl-ant was peid, and 

thereby when the atete has disoharged Its obl$Fatloa qa 

such warrant. The actual payment by the Traasurrr or tha 

varrent is under tht authority oi Artiol6 1371, Whioh provides In part as rollowa: 

*The Treaeurer shall count6rsIgn end pay 

all varrants drawn by ths Coqtroller on ths 

Trsasury wh:oh era authorized by law . . .* 

Ey way Of 8mnn6ry, th6T6fOl.6, the Leglelature 

ha8 llOt b.?ft th@ qU68tiOn Of the type Of Vtirl-eZit r6&ist62' 

to be kept to the disoretion of the Stat6 TreaSUr6r tandsr 

the gcaaral prorlelon that he kssp trua accounte of the 

sxy.anditures of pub110 m~nuys. but th6 LC@#JlatUre -S eons 

further anti has epcclflcally dsflned t&is type of regleter 

to bs k6pt by the State Trcaeurar and the infomation to 

be coatolned In such rsglstar. It ts tha opinion of this 

dspertmnt that Article L38!2 must be strictly omplied 

with by the Stat6 Treasurer In ksepiug the registers and 

oooounts. 

“6. Certain banks, werraat oespanIsa, 

sad finance aaupaniee here follov6d the 

prsctiae or 16udIm ':!omsy to atats em~loyeee 
iioncrable Ton C. King, Fqe 5 

nW.c3 loans %re nacurcd by 6:: aesipment 

by tha enployse to t&a vmrrent coapany of 

all warraute due much em,~lo,pos by t.be 

stoto. Thm i:rr:o uead by 3oan Cw Coapsny 

ramIs a6 tollws: 

** Pate 193- ;;0t6 $:w 

Vieaslrud front John Doe 

Date ~ed~l%uoe 

7i 

Comyny the above aaount 

as an adranc6d payment tI \ f 

to me for ths purohase 

of 8 wsrrant or check $ ‘P 

due tm by the Stats at 

Texas or Fedsrol Government In the amount and for 

the prriod stated below. 1 htreby oesttiy that 1 

have not &i~Qn 6n order or ae~l~ned raid warrant 

or aheck to any other lndirldual, firm or oorporation. I hereby authorize delitsry oi said mrrrant 

or check to ths above Company, and author&t6 said 

Coqxny to 6ndOr66 6638 tor 166 Kh6n rcosivsd. The 

dlsoount on this Item Is to be on the full amunt 

or warrant or check. For value r%O6iV6d. Thl8 order la Irrevocable until tiio above eaount is fully 

paid, Including 10% attorn6y’e roes. 

( ) Blue ( ) vh1ts 

J Fxpsrls 6 

.., .." . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

“This form Ie not aworn to before 6 notary 

publlo. 

*(a) Ia thle assI&msnt legal‘? 

*(b)~ U so, is it bind&w upon the Comptroller 

or Public Aooounts or 6 publla ofrlolal or anployeo 
vri:c df.s^rribcteo such warrunt 60 thst upon 

tlra pr&antrrsent to him nf this as6Qnment 

be aucit. deliver to th6 naslgnar all vzwrants 

cr eny earrant in his ~ometiuton in w)iich the 

asclgor Is tmated payee?” 

The instrument rhiah you mclaes 1~ on6 whit& 

the R~E~O ezplcpoe a1gr.a prior to the ioeuanas to him of his 

at&cc pay asrrant. The in8truwnt thursfore operates in 

tArOti& a9d in f8ct s8 a %Qhrp eZS.%&!UWRt, end LBURt br oonaidrr~~d SC suoh. 'hl VOiiditr Cf- CiGOh ifAStURiL8nt dSpSll6$ 

upcr, the assl~nebilitp.of th6 U,oLery of 8aid a-ployee, 

rhlch 6618ry th8 warrant repreasnta. It i8 t0 be pOiCt& 

Out that thei e~ri@3t8eEt Cal18 f@T the ~UrCh880 Or train8f6r 

of tr.o warrant or thank due the sapioyes. ml18 iastrumtrnt 

emi ths puestlon you cwkT&itczplatt, tb6reforta, that tba 

lrstrulnent Is an esnQnm6at of 6 wsrr6nt or check due the 

employeei because ot talery which .",a~ b6an earned. In thi8 

c.ancttion it is to be pointed out thet the unearned malarp 

of a public officio1 aannot ht sr;aigned. 5 COl?FUS Juris 

873 CoZtcin8 the fO~lUWiRg f8Z@Mg;e: 

"The r88aon for the rule is not 8 desire 

to protoot t&s private lntsreat of euch oftiarrs, but i8 one of publlo policy, based on 

the neoaslsity of sacurine, the aftioiraoy oi 

ths publia service by lnmuritg tbst the fundo 

provided for its ~latananoo shall be received 

by those who nra to perrormthh work, at t&t 

periods appointed ror tholr paymtints. 

mhpplicntione of rule. The rula that 

an offfoar camat n&e a raiid asai@Imant 

by cntioPp6tion of his serlery or fe6s be 

born ap?litd to siawny d-iff'arent c:aesee of 

offiaarn, including orzp offloers, naval 

orriosrs, superintendent in dapsrtmeo t of 

public cLariti66, assistant parlxmentarj 

ccunael for t&e treemurg fn EnglenS, clsrka 

in She United f?.tEtcE trst36Urg dO'?Oirt.aent, 

?napeotora cf cuetwA3, xlel5. Osrr16r5, 

If@thouor ka6~6rs~ couc:y es06s3,'cr6, 

civctry treamrerr; I c14rkd or tha peach, 

clerks of wurt, nuotcre In charicory, recefvers, Cistrict ar proaeouiir*: attOrn8ya. 

sheriffs ) paica.?l8n, STUI 5unioipal firan%n." 
Honorable Tom C. King, rake 7 

TLe Suprem Court of Texas in tbe case of 

Stats Blatlone Bank or El Faso VS. Ylnk, 24 s. if. 

256. held that thr above quoted rule applies in 

Teaaa, and stated as followa: 

(at pages 257-258) 

". . . .The law pmridoa ooapenaatlo n ror otricial l enlo a in order to 

enable the offioer to be free from the 

oarea O.r aaklng provlaion r0r his own 

rupport and that or hi8 rmily during 

the term of offloe, that he may devote 

his wsolo time to the dlachargr of the 

dutisa or his orrloe. Ir such orrlcer 

ia permlttea to arelgn Me arlary or reaa 

before earned., he as9 thus deprive hlmself aEd melif 0r thls support, and to 

aeouro it he muat look to $0300 other 

source. thereby aeprlvlng the atats 0r 

the careful end thoup,htful attention that 

the publio lntereat demnds. A hunsry 

man 1s weak in the precrencs of temptation, 

no setter what may be his ability to withstand it. in a sta to of IddepenUenoe. To 

deprive ruch an otrloer of the mana or 

daily support for hlmaalt and ramii~, 

while his bi;Pe aust be given to work in 

whhboh he oau axpeot no relief, would. be 

* 

.~ 

a strong induonment to resort to aathods 

whloh, ir not dishonest, ma0uia at least 

be inconelstant with the yubllc good, end 

the dlgnitg of his OfflOe bs deatroped bT 

losing the rcspaot and conflbence or the 

pub110 . . . .* 

sea also tha cam of Villliaaa vs. Ford, 27 

s. -2. 723. 

As to just whiah eaployeen are oonsldered 

pub110 officials under the holding of the Supreme 

Court of Texas lntha P’ln* oess, m:re, lo undecided 

in Tame. ‘i;e uan, however, see the extent towhioh 

the rule has bean axtended fn the quotation iron i Corpus Jurls, supra. The court ot Appeal8 0r tintu0ky, 

in th8 OOSO Or SOhIIiitt WJ. DOO~i43, 1LC 9. Wrn 197, 
XonorabLe Ton C. King, page 8 

hsld the rule to apply to e rlremn. In eo holding 

the court derined the tam “public oftlceP eu it is 

usrd in this oonneotlon, ae rolloios: 

(et @age 198) 

“The word8 *rubllo ortloer, 1 ma ueed 

In theme oplnlomr, man one rho rondera a 

pub110 servloe; o sertloe ln uhlch the canera1 pub110 ia lntersatea. For Ii It were 

not SO the reason for the rule would be 

wanting, ineemoh as all the opinions exprassly aeolars that the rule lo not 

adoptad for the benefit or the one rsndering the service. Is a tlrenan n public 

ofrlaar nithln this raanlng?R 

The Supreme Court or Missouri l tteca+lad the 

rule to an aselgnment made by a post orrlce mall aarrler. S8e State ve, Wllllamoa, 23 6. V. 1.054. 

The rule announced above, however, doer 

not apply to aalarlrs or *rages or tees or public ofriOera uhioh hava been earned, although the sans ars 

,unoolleoted. The Court o? Civil kppeela OS Teme, in 

the case of Sager ve. Glty or lFao0, LO S. W. 549, writ 

or error reruard by the’Suprane Court, so held. Tha 

oourt stated 8% follows: 

*- ~; (at page 550) 

“r . . . %(I do not hold that an officer cannot assign his earned fees or 

salary, beoause the right to do so would 

not produoe the ease results that wouLd 

follow the snrorced application Of much 

compensatloa to the payment of hle debts. 

If the money were in the treasury to 

pay tha oifloer for the services rendered, 

there would be no InUuoemeaf to sell him 

claln for less than its race valur; and, 

It the zoney were not on hand to po,y ror 

the services rendered, it might be neoessary for the wrrioer to dlsoount his 

clalrP, in order to &et the maans to support himself end f8~lly . . . ." 
Honorsble Ton C. Klll;~, pegs 9 

The ~a)r~e prlaalplo \‘a~) announced by the court 

of Civil kppsals of Texan ln the csss of Tho;apson va. 

Cu;u;;, et al, 35 3. 1. L12. The oourt atetrd as 

: 

/*It is 0lrarly Izaplird from thosa 

authorities and tbr others cite4 In sppsllant*a brief tbt when thr official 

aerviors era perfomod, and thr salary 

or 1~4 earned en4 due, publlo polioy 

does not prohibit their arrlgnment . . .* 

Th6 Oalvcston Court o? Clv5.1 Appssls In thr 

oar4 of Bated vs. Flrrt Stste Bank in Csldwell, 105 

S. 91. (26) 784, rrlt or error dismissed, bald thst a 

public oftloer’s fear ware sss~,aable after the nape 

ha4 bean eemrd, rsgsrdlese of the fact that they ha4 

not been oollected Prom thr Stnte Comptroller, snd b 

state warrant for the 88ms had not been Issued. Ths 

holding In that case aonoenad fees of a tax colfraotor 

which had been ase&ned after thal had been eerneu, but 

prior to the lssuaaco ot a state warrant by the Coaptroller In paymsnt of the BBIOO. 

Yourma advlrrd, therefore, that the tmeernsd 

ealery of a pub110 cftloial Is unersignablr, bat that 

ths portion of hia we&m or sslary which has barn earned 

may be eral$nad prior to the tiao e warrant In payment 

of the sass 1s 145u4d. In this eonneotlon your attention is again called to tha hat thst the parparted ln- 

,’ strummt considered in this opinion r’roltda thet ths 

warrant or oheok la due the e~ployre. 

Your attention la further called to the fsot 

that where wa&es or salary were properly assIgnable 

because the ease had been eornsd, but e Warrant for tha 

mm had not 88 yet been issued, Artlolc 6165s. Section 

6, Vernon’s Amotatrd Cl911 Statutes, would apply. Said 

article readi as follows: 

*Such bond when so aprrcsvsd by the 

county JuEgs eke11 be fitid, together 

with the said aft5davlt, in the County 

Clerk’s otfice in the County in which add 

loan broker is located end doing buslnese, 

an4 ths said bon4 shall be rsoordad at 

length by the County Clerk in a well bound 
book kept for tile t pur~:onri, TL<>t $.$Ct). rq$jsigarnent of weg.49 3x contract provi4ing 

for the purohase oT !:a;!es, mortgages, i‘cwr 

of Attorney to oollcot or o%br tra12~iar of 

the ealary or vmgas of 0 mrriled ixm 6n4 

each bill ot oale or chattel .aortgaEe u~an 

housetold or kitchen iurafturs cl H aarried 

aan shall be. said unless the rie.:;ie be msde 

end giran with the ~ooussnt of ttro wlf”e, on4 

such consent shall be evidenced by the wife 

jofninp, in the assiFnment. mr,rt~aga, Fowr 

of Attorney to colL0ot, or other trscsfcr 

cf salary or wfqas on:3 the aifriing GP her 

nma thereto RIX! by her xepera+:e scknowled&- 

ment thereon, taken plnd rrrrrtlf5.d to by II 

Frcpcr offlosr, substent5ally fn the rao4e 

provided for the acLnow2e4gment of H wife 

In the conveyance of D howsetenC.n 

The above Q:,iOtsd article snu?d apply wkcre 

wages 37 eolary wr6 balng saalgned prior to the loeuaaaa 

of the wnrrent in paym6nt o,C 3~8 E~zL:E. t:r necaerlty it 

would sot a~@g u;hera t!ze *.wwrant V:&S Carrued ffir the 

eam, beoeuee then t&e aeze nwld not operets 06 E ceg,e 

eeeignment, but would operate aiu the trsnsfcr of a SCRnegotleble instTum6ut or a8 the CaSkiii?&-in Of the e.%- 

~loyse’a rey chsck. 

IA order thrmt x4 z2y ha able *to ascerta5.r~ the 

validity of an aazignxent of a state warr:lnt, ?t is newefsary to sefd exactly vit,at type 02 eai instrument such e 

u0+~at LB. The btet exg?eanisn a~ to the cL;-ratter 

cf R stn:e warmnt ~88 3z<!tl Sp fu:'ga %orrow of the Court 

of Crimdnel Appsulrp .:-f 3~3s In the mse of F&mar 0. 

rt.ota, 58 s. vi. (22,) 95. Tie oourt I3tnte4 as follor~s: 

'2,626.95 was nnt a nngotiable instrument 

Tfi4 V::6rlYIlit ISSUQd tg the StTttt? fOS 

in the aansa that it scsu34 have sntltled 

nn imocant purchaser of the warrant to 

acquire f?ms tie st:ite the aniwnt ototsd 

on the fuse rf’ the wsrrant, but auah purch~x?iee w?wld aquiz-a z-in %ora thar, a ri@t 

tc: collect from the State tha ezwnt that 

MI owed the appellant, msaly, $,626.95. 

Lo authority tar t.he issurno8 of the war- 
Honorable Toa C. King, ~"6;s 11 

rant for th6 o?rAlnt stated in its race 

or to pay the full amcunt of such warmat 

eximtad. No purchaser of the wr:ant, 

whether In good faith or not, mild 

la&ally demand fro3 the state the ragment 

of mere then the amunt which xa8 owing. 

se6 EDOr. or Law Froo., vol. 11, r;. 531; 

volume 7, p. 818; volum 36 p. 895; 

Corpue Jurla, Vol. 59, & 8 406; 

Tar. JUT. vol. 11, Q. 6 t? 5, 8 118. 

T3pesklng or the negotiability of a 

werrant, in t%r saotlon of Corpus Jurls 

mentioned above, it la said: ‘It Is not, 

horetsr, a negotlablo lnstrumsnt In the 

mm84 of the law narchant 80 aa to shut 

out am against e bcne fide purohaeer lnqulrlas 6~ to ite validity or preclude 

detanmr or sat-offs whioh aould be 

assorted as against tha orlglnal paysa. 

l * * A.6 ag9inst tha 8tptr ths soeigaar 

aoqulres no greater rQhte than the party 

to whoa the warrant was originally ltwued.* 

Vroa the Ssotlon of Texas SurZaprudenoe mentioned, tha fol.lowlng Is quoted: 

%hll.r warrants are in thr ordinary form 

of oo~merolal paper, they do not poeseas 

the quslltles of such paper; they are not 

negotiable lnatruments.’ . . .n 

*- .I 

Thdr8 oau be no question but that etste warCent.8 are not negotlclbls lnatruments as t&a 8asa were 

known under the lau of mrohants. Your attantIGn ie next 

called to Article 569 of the Eevieed Civil Gtetutas Gf 

T6xnal which reada as followsr 

"The obl@es or easlgnae ai any 

written lnetrument not negotiable by 

the law Gf zmrchsnte, zay by asalgnmsnt transfer all his lntrrast tharain to another." 

!% era unable to find any reason why Art1010 

569 would not fgply to state warrants. Under the author- 
ltp of the above quoted article, it has been held that 

oredlt msnorandum may be assigned. See Rsd tbtor Co. 

v. Goad ‘Motor Co., 24 5. W. (2d) 67. 

It was alao held that tlar checks issued by 

en employer are assignable by en mployss. See Aldridge 

‘Lumber Coaprnp ve. Graves, 131 S. W. g1.6, writ of error 

d-kalassd by the Bupenr Court. 

Th5.s dspartmsnt ruled in en opinion dated 

July 1, 1937, addressed to the Honoresbla George A. 

Sheppard, Comptroller of Fubllo Aeoounta, Hhlch opinion 

wes written by the Eonorabls SoOtt Gaines, Flr6t Aaeiatant Attorney Cener al, that whlla W>te wnrrante are 

not nagotlablr lnstrumrnta, tha $838 my be aaslgnaa. 

Said o?lnion reade in part aa follows: 

“It is the ~41 Battled law of this 

State that Etate or oounty warranta are 

not negotiable inetrumenta but are NOnep.otlablr lnstrumsnta r;lthin th6 law 

marohant but the title to aucb wsrrmnt 

may be transferred by endorsement anb delivery, but an assignee would aoqulra no 

greater r1Rht.e than the garty to whoa the 

warrant wea origlnnlly ioaued. In other 

words, an ordinary State warrant drawn 

ayei-t the Stats Gsnoral Mvanue Fund 

.-in the hands of an ses&nee would bs 

eubjeot to the aazae defensss and off8ets 

whloh could be esssrted against the original payee. Spsrr v. Stata, 58 ?. X. 

(26) 95, 123 Tax. Cr. hip. 188; tit bt 

Belton v. Earria Trust and Ssvlngts 8 ark, 

273 6. W. 911, afflrsad 263 S. 

Laeator v. Lopez, 110 TOI . 186 ‘i’il;64’ S. 

V:. 393; Galloway PD. Sheppard, ‘69 s. P;. 

(26) 4l7 (wit of error dimalsaed). 

“Therafore t anrst-.erlng ycur flrat 

queatlcn, you are reeljeotfully sdvlsad 

that a warrant drawn against the State 

General Rrvenue Fund is not (I negotiable 

instrument in the sense that tha law marchant would shut out as ctpaiast a bona 

fide puroheser lnquirlas 8s to ita velldity or rrealuds defenses or set-offa 
whlah cou?d ba asserted a;la:nst the orl~lnal paycre. A4 o~vx!nrrt the state the 

aerf@nas aoqulres no prsatrr ri&ts thsn 

the- party to whom the warrant ‘was originally issued. ln other words stats 

werraata are not negotiable instr~enta 

l’urthar then that title may be transIerred by anQorsenrnt and delivery.” 

You Oomuwnt in your letter on the faot that 

the ions for the vaTrant sss&nment is not sworn to 

berore a notary public. You 6re advised that It la 

anneoaaeary t&t a written eesigmrhnt be morn to and 

ecltnowladged. Sea 6 Corpus Juris houndan 1099. 

You ore a6xt conoerned with wbcther or not 

aaah warrant asslgmant is binding upon th6 state 

aTent who delivers the warrnnt to the paye8. As a 

pneral rule, valid essl~nmente ere hindlng upon 

the debtor or peym, Then he la given mtloe or the 

aasifimtnt. This rule has been appllsd by the courta 

cf thla state to n sltustlon where a non-atgctlable 

instrument is transferred under Artlalc 569, mpra, 

sad it has been held that uadrr such artiole, If 

notice is clvta to thq debtcr. ho la bound theraby 

and has to deliver said rerrant to the esslcnee. 

Thie cono1uslcn lozlaally folloa;s frcm the statement 

of the court in the case ci Gulf C. k S. F. Fy. Co. 

v. Xldrtdgo, 80 s. 7:. 556, as follov:s: 

l - *Article 309 of the !?evirad Statutes 

of 1895 provides that the seslgme of any 

instrument asntionsd in the precediw erticle 

my maintain an action thereon in hla own 

mm, but ha shall allow every dltrcount and 

clefsnae arc?lnat the same whtah it would 

have been subjrot to in tha hands of any 

2rtvlous owner berore notice of the es.6ig.nsent was given to the defendant. The previous article referred to is artlale 308, 

which authorize8 e pledge6 or ase&nee of 

any lnstrmant not nagotlabla by the law 

narohant to transfer by aaaignment his interest to another. It is true that thsse provialons of the statute tiss the expression 

%rltten lnstrtment*, but we are inclined 
to the o:!iniol; tbst : L cm bt:. locksd to 

In corder $3 c?eta:r,f2e upori who9 the Supden r~.sGn to estotllrih the fact that rey- 

.mtnt V.-SE ?lacu Y it2 orating ;q- ?:ith;iut 

cctlca nr tt;;6 rar3~xlant. T&5 btGtUt6 

~rooieae thnt tti~ nzol~nzsnt la ::sde 

subject to 211 ::f the ,:efe.lscs bsfcra 

ZIOtiCo Or the S$~i~nclWIt MS ,c.iven to the 

Cefcndant . The use of the OXpZ-4Z6iOn 'notlce 

of RaL'fGment v:as cfvcn Co the .; efendcnt' 

izplies that the Cefsndsnt mutt bo &iven 

notice of the asalpment in order to preclude him rroa sasertlr,: a settlemsnt tloda 

?,,ith the ori,gi.nel creditor. The rule my 

pcsslbly be othsruioe 4th reftracce to 

negotiable Instruments. A debtor v&o 

settles cith the original creditor e nsnnegotiable claim, +lthcut notics thet it 

hae been trecsferred. ought to be yrottotsd; and we are Inclined to the 

opinlcn thet the burden of proof recta' 

upon the aanipnee to establish eom fact 

indlcatirdj that the debtor had notice at 

the ti?ne the oettle~ht ues zade with 

the origins1 creditor. . . .* 

The says eoccluaion my also be dram froa 

the langue@a of the %utrme Court $9 Texas in the cam 

L oft Sta;l2ord Coqreoa Cm;,eny VR. Farars 'L Yerchanta 

Katioml Bank, 143 2:. :':. llL2, El8 z=ollowe: 

"The rvcsi;lt v:aa cot *EirF:nable at 

Cow.c~n k:iv; and this ;.:urposa 7f Ikie Lezlsleture in ecacti~ tht article copied 

?ZiQB to zlske such lnetrment scsiqabla, 

eo that the pc-~son to :::hc?a aucb inntrtinents shosld be r.e:;able z&+ht asnign 

t.!is contreot, thus ;rlac.fnF. the so:ci,~ne4 

in tLe place of the assignor. Eut th6 

sani::nca :;f ruch contraat cwid not have 

suet? t!.e 7..:rsr thereof at cmmon Law, 

but Zust have used the mm of the origIna 

obll gee. TS enforce the right acquired 

under art?cle 3G8, the Ln&lelature enacted 
Bomrabla Tos C. King, paps 15 

artIel0 309, Reviaed Statee, Welch reads: ‘The aael~naa 

of any lnstmmant iasentloned in ths pracedl~ article may 

mintsin an action thcrron in his own name, but ha shall 

0110~ every discount and defense agr.ainst the saoa rhloh 

it w~ald have bean subject to In the hands of any prevloua 

owner bofora notice of the aaslgmen: ma given to the 

defendant; and In order to hold th6 aes?@or es surety 

for the paymaut of the Inatrumnt, the evolgnas shall uea 

bus dIlL~ence to aollsot the mm. 

" 

. . . 

wS~tIola 309 made it the duty of the bank, when It 

received the raoalpt, to give notice to the Cor,press Cozyany of the transfer in order to hold the obl.lgor responsible to the asnlgnca. 

. . . 

“In Sraarlngan v. Lucklap It wee said: 'It me the 

duty of the aaa&nea of a non-naectiable note to promptly 

rotlfJr the maker of such trsoafar. It 18 even held that a 

transf 6r, a%ve as ber.waen the pays8 and the lndorsae, la 

not cmpleta until such notice ws given . . .* 

* 

. . . 

“By a strong iicpllcation article 309, supra, euthorIzee 

the obllgor In a non-na&otlable contract to raoognlzs the 

oblleea aa ths owner of the pro;trt;l until notified of its 

aasigrlmsnt.” 

It la therefore the opinion of thla dapartaant th+t under 

be holdiwa of the above quoted casea and Artlols 569, If notice 

f an’ askl@mnt or transfer Is brought to the attention of the 

tste spent whose duty it 1s to deliver the werrmt, than eel4 

t&a egent Is bound thereby end mat pay the r!arrant to the 

8SIgtU!J@J. 

In this respact you are edvlaod. hl:wevcr, thet when 

otlcs of an asalgnment la pr6%6ntsd to the yayin;: want, whlhh 

gzlgnmnt shows on ita face to be nn aanignment of unecrnad aalr, or ra:zas 0r a public official, the ~-oyIc~ a6‘ent mat consider 

uch asalpment wa voi!l, and my not r:sy the saws to the asei@me. 

s pointed out by the Court cf Civil Ap?,ealo cf Texas in the case 

f s1111e v. Yaatharforcl Co,5praea Co., $16 s. -. 472, pnymsnt to an 

g~lgnee unc?ar B VOID ae~Ie,namat Is no pqment, and the fess are 

till oacollected fees cf cftlca so far as the eaployoa la concerned. 

gwevar, where the laatrusent rcrcltae ttnt the wor:~ant or check 1s 

us the azployee and there Is nothing lndlcqtlpl”, the same as being 

or unanrnsd salary, tba as-lgnment wuld have to be recognized 

ithln the ll~ltatlon of .irticla 6165~3-6, suym. 
Eoaorabla Torn C. Xl~8, pita 16 

“7. Xunt a warrant rroeivrd by a wwrant company under such en nafilgnmant be andomed by the payea or by some one leeally 

authorizad to endorna the ama for h1.m bafora 

tha State Treasurer is authorized to pay the 

aa%e to the holder thereof? 

“8. If 80, is the form hereinabove set 

out aufrlclsnt 80 aa to authorlza The John 

Doa Company to endorse a warrant received by 

thra by virtue of an aaslgnmant with thnt 

f ora? 

“9. If this form authorleas’ thin oompany 

to endorse such rerrants for tha payaes tharaof, which of the following steps should be 

taken by Ths John Doa Company before t?;a Weta 

Treasurer la authorized to pay warrants praaantrd to him aa Stnta Trees-r by The John 

Doa Company If the mama of the payaa of auoh 

wsrrenta has bean sndoraad upon the mm by 

The John Doa Cospany: 

*(a) Marsly present such warranta for 

papant? 

-(a) File erlodIoally a sworn statoment that they lp Tha John Dca Company) have 

written authorlzatlon for all warrants yra- 

+ aantad within thnt period to endorse the 

paj+as’s name thereto? 

“(0) keooap~ny aaoh warrant presentad 

for payment with a sworn atatament that The 

John Doa company is authorized to endorse 

the r;ayea’a nxde thereto? 

-(d) Accozipany each warrant Fresentad 

for payment with the orie,inal/or a carbon 

copy of the f;r.n heretofore set out ale.nad 

by the payee of such warrant?” 

In these three quaetions you are concerned with 

the typa of information tha Ststa Treaeurer should raquira before he rays a at!ita \%arront to anyone but tha 

payaa therein. There can ba no question but that when 
Honorable TOE C. zing, i:aca 17 

an assigcae nsrely presents the warrant to the State 

Treaeurar without any other evidence that the sem he8 

been properly eaiignea to him, the State Treasurer 

would be unauthorized to make paymmt on the warrant 

to the assl(;nea. This we8 the holding of the oourt 

in the cam of Attoyeo River Lllaber Co. v. Fayos, 122! 

S. ‘s?. 278. In aLscueelng non-negotiable instrumsnte 

the oourt stated as follows: 

n . The cheeks In question having none 

of ths'&mtial quellties of a negotiable 

lnetrumnt payable to bearer, the ners 

session of then by the app8llae --T-=- re 44tl no pmsumution that she ia entitled to the rlzhts 

of iha~pemon to whom they wore issued.-The 

evldenoe failed to show that appellee had aoqufr4a the right ana title 0r the original 

OvJner 0r said cheeks, and therefore rells to 

show that she was entitled to rscomr thereon. 

. . .* (Gc@arecorln~ ours) 

The 3iprs33 Court or Teree In the teas of Cragg 

v. Johnson, 37 Tex. 558, lc apeaklcg or a non-negotiable 

lnatrunett, said as tollows: 

". . . A ;GsreI transfer by delivery xl11 

not enable ths holder to rscover, without 

avsrrimnt end proof of such bone fide owner- 

.ship. . . ." 

Eowavsr, if tha warrent is endorsed by the peyse 

ii~a~~~ataiv4rea to the werrant oo~tpany, suoh endoreezent 

and dollvery would ba sutriclent to transfer said warrant. 

Your attention Is oelled to the feet that Ytate warrants 

read "my to the order or ." Ronorable Scott 

Coinerr In the opinion prsviouely wfroa, stated as 

r0ii0we: 

". . . but the title to suoh weri.ent aay 

ba transferred by erdorxmmt and deliv??ry, 

. l . 

*$n other v:oras stats warrants are not 

negotiable instrumnto further than that title 

zay bs transferred by endor;erent and delivery." 

In the cam of City of Belton v. ilerrie Trust end 

Savings &ink, 273 i. ":. 614, the court steted as r0ilows: 
"That zunlolpsl warrasts are not r.c~stisblo 

lnstruxente withPc the law mrchnnt, Suxtbsr 

thah that title nry be trennforred by-%?%%- 

i-ent ar.d deliver , is well settled." 

Yhs Y.aco Ccu:t of Clvll Apceols in the oam OS 

.:.00a V. Yparks, 4% 7:. 1,:. (~a) 142, stated 60 r0ii0wa: 

mEow4v4r, the rimre feOt tlxt the instruzeht wao nonnegotiable In the eense that a purchavsr of nrsgotlable popes who buys ror a valuable ooheideretlon eith,sut notloe, takes the 

earn free OS equities In ravor o?‘ the a&or, 

does not Atigste against a8 assignmht OS the 

obll~stlon evidmoed thereby by lndoreaztvnt 

and delivery of the lnstrumnt. .hethsr it be 

denoi&mtad a tote or not, it was the prlzary 

obllgi\tlan to pay mid was the svldenoe oS the 

debt. The fact tht it was trade payable to ,‘. 

T. ‘$a!iss or order, evldenoes the Intention of 

the parties that title thereto should pass by 

Lndorsament and delivery of the Instrument, end 

such was th;! effect thereof. . . .n 

St is th% opli;ion of t&a dapartxmt,thereSore, 

that while e rtate warrant is, not E negotiable lnstruzcnt, 

the sasx nay bo transferred by ecdwearent bnfi delivery. 

xc anf3w0s to your q,uf?etloz nu3her 8, Vu?3 ere unable to see any r6ason why the fo,rm which you include in 

your letter xould not bo aufficlsnt to authorize the ;ohn 

;;tje Co~~ang to endoree a varrant racaived by them by virtue 

or ec a;aigm.snt. 

In your question nutiber B you ar? concerzed viith 

the authsrity of tLa Treaaurar ta rnw!;rzim on endarseamt 

isae hy a warrant cooprng In thm naze of the cajree under 

tte authority of the previously dincussjcd dower OS attxuey. 

There can to EO question but that when the Treasurer ~227s 

e warrant endorsed in tbls manner he Eoes so at h:s porll. 

Au pointed out by the court In the ease OS ";fll.lo v. 

tatheriord col;pr0ss co. ‘ 66 i.. i;. 472, pnyE.0ct to &xl asei;oee mdga void nsskoz.?;ont IG no payzx~~t at all. ~hsreSore, the T~~esurer should require ouuh iniorzutlon conoerniog the nuthority to endorse pey(~s~3 nfU?ie on IY Wrrsnt 

88 he seeie will proteot him3eli. There o!in bc no qusnt:on but that the m~l;od yoti s&Jsest in nwher 9 (d) - 

that of acompnyiu& each warrant with t!lo oriLxinal or a 

co~,y of the authorization - r..c~.Q.d be the rret,hoc¶ Chnt would 
Honorable Ton C. King, psge 19 

beat groteot the Treasurer. Eow*var, any of the Eethode 

you suggeet w(xll% be rrufficlant 1P in iact authority for 

the *a%ors*&ent hd baen given by the pay**. The .problem which ttil8 question prosento is one of proof in ca8* 

of a conteet arising over a .ptxrtlcular warrant and not a 

problem of authority of the Treasurer, 

"10. If the fan: heretoSore 64t out 

is not sufrloisnt to authorize the John CO* 

Coqmp to endorm upon a atnte u-arrant the 

m&e of the payee, what steps would have to 

be t&en by that aonipany berore the S,t.ate 

Treasurer would be autt.orized to pay the sanie 

to The John: Co% Company? ::oul.d The ,John Eoe 

Con;pany hava to file with each state warrant 

upon presontsect ror payrkent, a 2ower of attortxy to endorse the ntir;e ot the payee upon 

the a&e?- 

This departnsnt is unable to find any reason 

why the enclOSe% authorization would not be auftlclent 

to authorize the John Poe Colr;panp to enborae the state 

warrant in the n-6 of the payee. The enfforsement fe 

part of the written assignment plan and as ha* Seen 

previouuly stated, ouoh aoslgnJn%nt Goeo not have to be 

aoknowladged or be und*r oath. 

"11. If your answer to question ntmber 

five ie In the negative, is there.any statutory or constitutional prohibition whioh 

V?OUl% prevent the Stat8 Tr*a8UMr irOni requiring a power of attorney to be tiled and 

by so doing keep an acoouot/or record shoaing that the st.at% ha8 discharge% it8 obligation to the payee of such state warrant? 

"12. Cr 1s there any statutory or Constitutional provision reqolrlng the State 

Treasurer to keep aooounte/or records ehowing 

that the state bee dlsoharged lte obllgatlon 

to the payee on a state warrant?" 

A8 prwiously pointed out in this opinion, Artiole 

4382 requires that the state Treasurer register each warrant 

isher the saw is .pld in a wwarraaC paid reglater" and 

Paid register is to 8hW the number an% amOUnt of eaid 

warant. This is the record that tha l%glaLature has 

pro-lded for acd whloh shows that the stqte hes dl8oharged 

its o?J.igation on a partioular warrsnt. %iowever, there 

is nothing in Article 43e2 or in any other 8tatute or In 
the Constltutton r:h:ch mwld prohibit the Ztote Treasurer 

from keeping a record Ehowin g to whom a particular warrant 

wed >ald, nlthcu&h, OS previously pointed out, the sam% 

is fret rec;uired under Article i,JP2. In line with what 

bee bean previcuslp stated, the State Treaeurer would heve 

to reco~nlze ar. er:sQpmat of a state pp varrant rer.srdless of the fact that t::e ssaignee did not fwnisb the 

Stcta Tre~surcr with the power of attorney eigne4 by the 

payae. There onn be no question but t!mt un3sr the decieions in this atate, end under Article 569, such a 

written ttseiezwnt aa is enolosed in your lettor aonld 

be auT?fcieat to aiwlgn ~oallblp a payee’s interest in a 

state pay warrent, an4 ouch nsalgnment wuld have to be 

recognized by the State Troesuror when the sma Is presented to hi3 =ith proper and sufriclent evidence of 

tke tmnefcr. 

“13. If a0 statute nr 00nstltutlnnal 

~rovislon rreocribes the .zanner xhereby e 

~ovexnmental ,Functlon ie to be performed 

2nd no 9ti:tut.s or constitutional provisicn 

3rohibit.e t?x use of the most eff~iclant 

,-nd business llks manner, shrul4n’t that 

mtthnd :f performInS such function be used 

so OS to best protect tho lntereot of the 

eta te:: !* 

Cndoubtedlg yaw Guestlo:: numbr,r 13 muat be 

azsvemd in ths cffiraative. ikcqavrr, 05 to Just what 

in t_?e most efficient and bmlnes3-lika msnn<:r of p:ar- 

? fcminp, 3 ~ertixulnr funation~io c ~u63tioc which in 

this csae wuld rest within tha dlecrotion of the 

5 t ” : f 3h,oi?Ur6r 80 long 05 !:s Octs within the wlea 

on9 lfaitatlone set 6own by the Legislature In the 

articlea dlncuhsed ~rsvioualg in this opinion. 

“14. !:ould the Stste Treasurer 

wx3 the sureties upon his official bond 

bo lloble to t.!w etete if payment was 

z%de \~f werrsnte proasnted for payment 

where e sworn stateasnt vrae tiled by 

the pr8sent:ng parson or corporetion 

that ttia rrcsontlng pareon had been 

nutborlzad to endorse thereon the naac. 

of the pzyse, if In fsct no such authorizatlc;n existed?” 
"15. i'OUld the per823 63 :xcocsGin~z tbC 

rarront for oayzmnt under siich a evxx e\eSewr?t b6 legally liabla to the st?t~:'~ 

Tne answer to your que5tlom a8 to tba liabilitg of :he :'tate Tre.esurer end the ye:'son cr+.emtlne 

the rorront mi@S depend in each lns?t%rre on tba racts 

or the pUrtlCUi%r CGSO, sad we preier not to atte-tpt to 

lay down a eencral rule of 1%~ based oo a hypo:hetic%l 

puastlon under th*se circunstanotn. 

“16. If your a.nsw.:r to question Five 

16 in t+ho ne@ativo, and your nnsw%r% to 

questlon Fourteen %nd Plftcen ara in the 

affixatlve, Uoen the ioct that a public 

offioia1 ana his ouretlen 1~1111. be 1~~.8llg 

!fable GG the st.at% for auoh publfc ofPicl%l~% 

non-fonsasca or nlaPeas%nce in the prformnca 

of R #overumntsl function or that scme beok 

or corporatlbn or perecn Hill be l%R"lly llaS1e 

to the aiate for breach of s warracty or for 

zisrepresentstlcns, juatifp lnefiXciant ~35 

unhueinaoe-lika jxrtormncs Gl a ~ovnrnnextel 

function when sn efPicient and hu~insss-like 

mnnsr of pzrfoxxi~p, ouch E?vcr:im%cL%l fwiction 

is n:)t p?ohlbited by etztute cr comtitotion?" 

;iven if ?2;e .?tate Treosbrcr or scrle 5:z2kinc~ c3ccem 

:cre ~-:Sconolly linbie in 8 prtlool.~~ case, Chi% aould by . 

:o %.<iRmY Justffy the Lteta Trfasurer's n.+t cc:s>!l.vln~ dth 

;be,Jew na to the tyT;e ~4 warrant roz.-rintcr% ho is to kaep. 

.%ers CRP, be no qoe~tfoc but that the Ctste Trcsaurcr should 

iahere strictly to Cbc rule% CJf %‘I?& ::soyln$~ cf verxant 

Qigister s ~.8 set out, by the ~~~gi~i~t~~r~, and 6130 ch0ula 

:dapjt such rula6 as i2e thinkS nscess~ry to st?tiEly hiwnelf 

Aat a rsli6 sssim-mmt or trensl‘er of %n e3oloyee's any 

;srrent he% been aade before he Fiiker p%y%i%nt en such % 

asrrant to c.%e not tbc Foyee therein. 

"17. If ttie State Tmxxwrer s~:ould 

!:6ec nc record ahcwing, tlis tthe Ot2t-e has 

fuI?llled its otILT%ticn to the Tease of 

c 7xrror.t and dot?% not xguire persons 

rr,%antlrq> u;arr:lnt% ubich Mse ?.ot been 

eodcrsed by the r;syee under %% %s!signm+nt 

to prssent neparote and actual uutborizatlcn t? endo: the saina in tha naas of 
iAs pay6a, isn’t tlif! Ctete Treszu:?r in effect 

mklng such person a pcg111~ a-Tent fsr the st:~te’i 

If 80, can he lcrolly do thls’~‘~ 

Under the eituotios you eecume i.n quggtlon number 

17, the 5tat.e Treasurer is not mski~: such a parson as you 

describe a ~ayin& s::ent for the state, becmms suoh payment 

by the State Treesurer is for the purpose cf Cischarglng 

the s:ate*a liability on tAti warrant. The peyzient by the 

state ‘Yensurer is to the lndlvidusl as asslgnsc~ or transfsrer of the peyea, nnd not to hi.?l OS DD agent to make 

pepent to the payas on the xarrsnt. The payment by 

the State Treasurer ie for the purpose of 3tschnrging 

tha stata’s liability under the mrrant in all cases, and 

it could not be sei,d then t&t ths Strcto Trcscsure= wes 

aaklw$ a paying eg&?t out of the po:con to when he saya 

the Warrant. 

:l’e trust thet ths nbove discusaim of the 

qu66tions fropounastd in your lettar ~111. sotiaractorily 

ansnar your Inquiry.