December 7, 1961 

Honorable Alton 

County Attorney 

Lubbock County 

Lubbock, Texas 

R. Griffin Opinion No. ~~-1216 

Re: Whether a child under slxteen years of ago who'has 

completed the ninth ~grade 

and whose services are 

needed for the support 

of his parents is required 

to attend school under the 

compulsory attendance laws, 

. -.. . . Dear Mr. Griffin: ana relatea questlon. 

Youhave requested an opinion of this Department on 

the following two questztons: 

"(1) Is a child under sixteen (1.6) years of 

age who has completed the ninth (9th) grade and 

whose services are needed for the support of his 

parents, required to attend school under the compulsory school attendance laws? 

"(2) Is a child over sixteen (16) years of 

age required to attend school until he has completed the ninth (9th) grade?" 

The "Compulsory School Attendance Laws" to which 

you refer In your letter are codified in the Civil Statutes 

as~Article 2892, Vernon's Civil Statutes, and the corresponding penal provision as Article 297, Vernon's Penal Code, and 

read In part as follows: 

"Every~chlld in the State who is seven (7) 

years and not more ~than sixteen (16)'years of 

age shall be required to attend the public 

schools In the district of its residence, or 

in some other district to which It may be 

transferred as provided by law, for a period 

of not less than one hundred and twenty (120) 

days annually. . . ." 

Article 2893, Vernon's Civil Statutes, and Article 

298, Vernon's Penal Code, read in part as follows: 
Honorable Alton R. Griffin, page 2 (~~-1216) 

11 

. . . 

"5. Any child more than sixteen (16) years 

of age who has satisfactorily completed the work 

of the ninth grade, and whose services are needed 

in support of a parent,or other person standing 

In parental relation to the child, may, . ,,,. be 

exempted from further attendance at school. 

We will consider your last question first, because 

it has been answered by this office In Attorney ‘General’s 

Opinion V-954 (1949), In which It was held that a child whd 

attains the age of sixteen or over before the beginning of 

the public free Schools In his district Is not subject to 

the provisions of the compulsory attendance law, whether or 

not he has completed the work of the ninth grade, We are 

enclosing a copy of this opinion and your second question 

Is correspondingly answered In the negative. 

As to your first Inquiry, you reverse the above and 

ask whether a child under sixteen years of age, who has completed the ninth grade, etc., Is required to attend school 

under the compulsory school attendance law. We are of the 

opinion that this question should be answered In the affirmative. 

You are referred to the original caption of the 

compulsory school attendance act of 1915, Acts, 34th Leg., 

ch, 49, p. 93, which reads as follows: 

“An Act to compel attendance upon public 

schools of Texas b 

of 8 and 14 years. 

$: children between the ages 

In Butler v. State, 194 S.W, 166, (Tex.Crlm. 1917), 

It was held that a child who attained the statutory age of 

fourteen before the beginning of the public free sc,hools In 

his Qistrlct was not,sub,ject to the provisions of that compulsory attendance law, This case was decided when the law 

which Is now codified as Article 2892, Vernon’s Civil Statutes, 

and Article 297, Vernon’s Penal Code, provided that every child 

of not more than fo~vrteen years was subject to the corn ulsory 

attendance law, In 19X5, the law W.&U amended (Aots, 4 E th Leg., 

ch. 160, p, 409) to substitute “aeven years” for “eight years”, 

and “sixteen years” for “fourteen years”. 

We point out the foregoing because we bellave that 

it is the legislative intent , and the construction of such by 

the courts, that the governing factor should be the age of the 

child at the beginning of the school term which confrolti, In 
Honorable Alton R. Griffin, Page 3 (~~-1216) 

arriving at the legislative intent, it is of primary Importance 

to ascertain the purpose for which the statute was enacted. 

Harris County v. Tennessee ProductsPipe Line Co., 332 S.W.2d 

('('1 I Civ. App. 1960) The apparent purpose of this statute is 

simply to compel thl attendance of children between the ages 

of seven and sixteen In the public schools of Texas. 

We recognize that there is an apparent inconsistency 

within the provisions of~the statute itself regarding the effect 

of the provision as to completing the ninth grade. However, in 

Wood v. State9 133 Tex. 110, 126 S.W.2d 4 (1939), the Court 

used the following language: 

"It is the settled law that statutes should 

be construed so as to carry out the legislative 

intent, and when such Intent is once ascertained, 

it should be given effect, even though the literal 

meaniflg of the words used therein is not followed. 

. . . 

Thus, we are of the opinion that a child under sixteen years of age who has completed the ninth grade is subject 

to the compulsory school attendance law, and a child over sixteen years of age is not subject to such, regardless of whether 

or not he has completed the ninth grade. 

SUMMARY 

(1) A child under sixteen (16) years of age 

who has completed the ninth (9th) grade is subject 

to the provisions of Article 2892, Vernon's Civil 

Statutes, and Article 297, Vernon's Penal Code. 

(2) A child over sixteen (16) years of age 

is not required to attend school under Article 

2892, Vernon's Civil Statutes, and Article 297, 

Vernon's Penal Code, regardless of whether he 

has completed the ninth (9th) grade or not. 

Very truly yours, 

EBS:dhs 

WILL WILSON 
. ^ 

Honorable Alton R. Griffin, page 4 (~~-1216) 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

W. V. Geppert, Chairman 

Henry Braswell 

Malcolm L. Quick 

Joe B. McMaster 

REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

BY: Houghton Brownlee, Jr.