OFFICE OF ‘IWEATTORNEY QENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN 

### 22

Ronorablo 1. Y. 'mimble, FirstAssistant State Superintendent of Publio Instruotion Austin, Ta.aS

mittillgthe toll0

rrm ~0n0~bie' vi dressed to your uly 15, 1945, oubtained in a letterepresentative;ad1 School Super-

:- \ 

# loyedT\L)/ - Sohool Boar& have the position or diamzss SOD 8ithout the ooneent

b&s aut22~ he County Superintendenthave the

aboli8h the porition of.Rural school Supsrvlror or to diasiss the Rural Sohool Superriror without the oonsent of the County School Board?’

Artiolo 8700.1, Seotion 8, Revlasd Civil Statutsrr, 1925, provide8 aa follows:

### 23’

.

Honorable I. M. Talmbti, page #Q

‘The County Superintendentof Publia Instruotlonmay, with the approval of the County Board of Xduoatlon,employ on4 ormore 8ohool supertlsors to l

8818t lnplanning, outlining, rod **8U~S?Vi8ilt$ th.**  work **Of** thr Pub110 I%'40SOhO

. ia the oOUXlty

which ~18

under the 8UpOlV18lon Of the County Superintendent of Publlo Instruction, 8ald oupOX%iIoror **OUpOPVi8OM** 8hall at a&% t&m48 wrk Wdel' th4 8UpOrvl81otl aIAddire&ion of th4 Couuty 8uperlntendent of Fubllo Imtruotion, a8 Other a88istMt8 are repulrod t0 do, and mid **h8v4** evidence ofproflolsnoy In rural **8oh401** sup4rvl81onandmust be theholder oi at ;z;t, a Baohelor of Scl4noe Degree or higher, **eupsrvisor** or sup4rvlsora may receive a sala of not to 4%044d!.&o Thousar,d Dollar8 ($2,000

7 per annum, to b4 paid out of the **same Fonda**  and in ti 8mn4 IUUUIeras that Of th4 COUnty Superintondent of PItblloInstruotionand other as818tWlt8.'

It 18 Quit4 oi4ar fraa raid quoted d&ion that the position oi Rural Sohool Supervisor, **or** 8ohool 8upsrvlaor, a8 set forth la eald sootion 18one of $ib~il$loyarant and not of publio office. We **qUo~4** fmm the ease of Robertson v. Ellis County, (Civ.Appc) $4 Se We 1097,not appealed8

l %re **18** quit4 amrterial differmoo betwoona publlo off100 and apub110 A8 raid by Chief Justloe **N41?8hall,** em loyment, **P** ***A though**  **M offi**  **18** M Omplopdlent, it do68 not follow that 9vel-y 4mployJwnt 18 an 0rfi04.* a?* Jfoohem in his TO& on Pub110 Offi8e1'8,8ay8; 'Th4 **lW8t.** lmporimt oharacterlsticrbioh di8tlnguishea an 0rfi08 frtxa

an employment or oontraot **ir** that the oroatlon and oonferring OS an offios in**volv48** a delegation to the lndlvldull OS **8om4 Of**  the SO04~i~ rUZIOth8 Of gOVOrrPnent, t0 b0 exeroleedby di[tPor thebenefit of the publlo; thatmm portion of the aoverelgnty of the oountry, either leglelativs, exeoutlve or judi018X,attaoher for the t&w being, to be exerolsad ror the pub110 benefit. Unless the powore**‘**

**_**

**.,** 24

Honorable T. l4.

Trrkbl8, p4i34

#a

conferred u-e of this rutye, the individual i8 not a pub110 0ssi04r.'

Said rupervisorhr. been dolegatadno sovereignPun.- tionr of government to be **exoroleod** by him for thepublio ben4Slt. HO 18 

### Oldy M 4lIQlO~O

l tO 4.8i.t in plalll.iing,OUtlining and ruperviefng the TO& of the Pub110 free Sohool8 in the OountJ rhiah 18 under the 8ll&WVi8iOil Of the CoUntJ Superintendent of FubUo Xnstruotion. 3ald maperrl8or or mpwvi8Or8 8hall at all time8work undef the 8up.rv1810~and dlreotion of the County Superintendentof Pub110 Xmtruotlon, as other 20 8i8tat U'S repuir4d to do.. wyment Is not fixed by l!~~~4~~~‘~ro~~e~art~~~~ dimt on 0s tlae, 1. not within any oonstitUt.iona~ provision, and is therefore aoo.xten81v. In duration with the tenure of the offloer appointing hlm, and unless sooner rSI?dOV8d, he holds until the expiration of the offloerts term, and ceases to hold at that tips ~nl.es. reappointed." 34 Tax. hr., pe 604.

%&no4 the Constitution do48 not provid. for 4ontlnultyof term8 bf oPflo4, eaoh tenr logally 18 .n entie* 84pPrat4 8nd di8tinOt frola all other tel?mPr Of ths 88lB4

0fPiO.r" 54 %X. JUr., p. 367.
uWhere th4 term of’office 18 not fixed bs law. the 

### offiorr 18 regarded ae holdi- at the ti’ili oi the'appolnting

### power,

to Six ZTP n 6 terns an an 0 Sieventh&@ the app;lntiy Fth,D%lMlW8 Of the-.DDOintitlfZ 

### powr, has,-In the atriotmmnlng of t& vord,-no *term*of oPSla4. A 00n8tltutlonal provision **that** ton%8 **of** 0ffi04 net fixed by th4 **OOn8titUtiOn** shall Rot 0~0446 a 8pOOifird **bbU&dool** nOt..&FiX4 the duration of an ofiioe held a~o-i?reaare of the 4x4.utiv4.' (lJnderaooPi%OurI.) 36 QIJ. 964, 94rR 9s.

Illth( 0 64 8. 1. @g$, t84 Of iCIhn8Ofl V. tb.vmrh, 81 me h* R49. 146, th mamger of the 

### workhoure, who~48 appointed by the County Court for two you-8abe&king Jm. 1, 1898, wa8 removed by the enmeoourt on Jan, 4, 1898.’ The oourt held that ho**could** be removed without notice oc oauae, aa he was themere

agent of the court and subjeot to it8 orders,no qualiPioation8 OF torn for the appointeehaving hew prasoribedby etatute.

h the oa88 of Joba8onvr Oina et al. (Ky.)49 S, W. 470, it w&8 hold that theCounty Superintendent,under a rtat-t

hb t0 0ppOblt **OX8Eh@f8** UX? Which **fixer** no **0rti80** for **8UOb** a9polatoe8, may reaote 

### ruoh exmIn8r8 without notioe or as81 county Superinhndemt had, In **OFI** removed irnl a tsllp Of OKI@ PI **To-8** 258, and-Boiij 'i;msr follomlng general nils: Whers t?tne power 0r appointment **18** oonfomo4 in geaonl term8 and without restrlotion, the power OS removal in the dieorationand attha will ot the appointing power, 18 Implied, and alway @X%&8 unlese restrained and **limited** by mm provision of law.'

**Ih*ro** the **law fiXO8**  no duration of 0rff09 or employm*Ilt, S& no p~00i~iOu i8made for reatOw 0s an inombent, the ap

### polntltepowerosoe88arily oarrlsrwith it theremomxl power, In 8uoh a oa8e the lncumbeathold8 at the pleasure of thr ape polntiog oftioer **and** may be removed by ~&XIat any time, 34 **481, Jpzr.,**  9e 594. In the absenoe Or any oonstitutlonal

### or atatutory 

### protirfon, thepower of ramooal **18** incident to the poser of

Kesnaa Y+ ?erry 24 

### fez.,237 

### et req,; Beeper v. wart (Cir,&J.) 66 Sr ‘I.!2d),818,

### Krror Refired.

t0 **IWJLWO**

OfiiO*r88 **ap.$WiUtO wttb**  OOIICUPP8MB O? **thr,** SWaate, **Was**muoh **d180U@8edr The** grsrt apqtlora uaa8 uhothar tb 9orsr ot 

### rem&al cdrided in the P*ertident aXon*, Or rith bhaeonourrepao OS,the **8anate,** both eonrt5tuting the ~oWV? or the **Irb8id&** 0 remo?(b#

tie** the taurQ 

### l dmlttad,

**and ths**  **prldei$ (1**  **ti J**  **ceodgnd,**

**ifr& $.,**  **$hB** fO?S8tdhUt:$W **-8**
that the power of reman1 war lnoident to the powrr **0r** appointment.* (tRIdrr8ooring 0~~8.) Keenan v. Perry, supra.

### 26

Honorable T, Y. Trlmble, page #8

We mut, therefore, detrrnine *ho employa the Sohool Supervisor, in **order** to determinewhomay remove such emqlogee.

The intent of the Legislature oontrol8 the language used by it, and in oonetruinga cltatute, aourta are not neoesaarily confined to the literalmeaning of the words used. 39 eex. hr., ppa lao-l&f. CM mrd i8 often used to %Qwees different ideas, Thrretore, in every ease, the particularmeauing depend8u9oaand muat be detemiaed by the context and subjeot matter, and the intent of the Legislature. 39 3%~. Jur., p, 196, par. 104.

Ia the cam of Odenv. Gates, 119 Tex. 76, 24 3. W. (2d) 381, the Court, in construing themeanlug of t’ne word ‘due”, a8 ueed Fn the statute then under oonoidoratiun,stated that it had a double aeming, was used on different oaaasions 50 exgresa distinot ideas, aad itsmeaning must nacsssarily dependupon the aontext and evidentpurpose intended.

In 39 10x. Jur., 9* 809, par* 113, it is stated that "Anotner fundamentalrule requlrsr thbt a otatutebe conetrued a8 a whole and that all of it8 part8 be harmonlsed if po88ible.' Theretore, en betmurt be viewed In it8 rntiretyr Eaoh part of a statutemust bo oonsidered in oonneotionuith every o,ther part, The legislative intent muet be detenxinod rrw a general view or the whole l

nuotment. Ry. Co. ~8. Mahatfey, 206 Tex. 394, 160 S, We 88li Spear8 VII.City of SanAntOnlO, 110 Ter. 618, QQS 9.1. 166; 39 TexLIJ~P.,pg 168, parI 90.

‘In a proper 008~~ the 9 Q * intent maybe illferred from the taot thatan act does not contain a oertaia provision." b9 Tax, Jur., 9. 178, par& 95.
‘In aase8 OS ambiguity, the intent and spirit of the l

otwill prevail over its Letter. **SC The intention of the Legislature controls the languageused by it, end in construing a statuteBonor8blo Tr Y, Trimbls, 36gs #6

the Court ir not necessarilyoonfinsd to the 1it4ral.

laeanfngo* thewordsused, especially in respeot of isolated or particularprovisions. In such 0~44 a oonstruotion is taometime4 given contrnrT to the latter of the law.4 39 Tex. Jur,, ppI 180-181, par. 95.

As used inArticle 2700.1, the word nag;roval*must be consider4d in tro conneotlonrr - first,with raferenae to r~tificatlon and seoond,vith referenoe to authorization or coneent.

It vi11 be notloed that in Seotlon 1of ea?d article the follorlng langu~gs 16used: 4Th4 Countg Superintendent,

tendant of PublioyInstruoiionmay, with the eppsovalbf the -- Oounte Board of Education, employ one or more school VIaOrs~‘Tfz.- ZYpix

In Uords and Phra4elrVol. 3, p. 230, it is stat4d that ‘Th4 term lapprovol~ ia rnroeptible of differentmeaninga, dapendent upon the aubjoetmatter and oont4xt oonoernlq wbioh the term in employed and the objeot and purpose to be mbrorved or aeooleplfahed, Ordinarily, the term in ltr most obviouslasting, is to ooaUnond, oonfira, rrtifg, sanetim, or to consent to aom4 sot or thingdon4 by another.

It appears thererors, th4t the tegialbture, in not requiring th4 4onfLmation of theCounty Eoard, but only its a roval, in oonne4tionrith thenaployment of on4 ormore 2&l-o 8upwvi40~4, ~hi14 rrquirlng both rtion of **arid** Board in the eaiplo witi of -the lord vapproval* in Scot fon 2 in th4 llsht of oonrent or autborlsrtion and not ratifioabionr ii% th4 Otherrise,vhgwords -with tl?e

ap rovrl and the oonfirmation Y I.n940: tlon 1 end omit thewords end the oonfirmation” in Saotion 2?-

Honoreble T. Y. Trtibl4s peg4 fl 

### 28

We CBA gerosiva M sound reason for this omission if tk Leglslatur4 intended for the employment of suah supervisors to be oonflrmedby the County Boerd. In view of thir omiosion in Section 2, and in the li:jht of thr Soregoing rules of construotion, it i8 014er to ourminds that the employmentOS school supervisor8 ir rested in the County Sohool Superintendent, after ouch employmenthe4 been **authorised** by the "approval" of **the** c0d2y **Board** 0r Bduoation.

WO think this oo~olusion is further suataimd 'Jy&ihose provi8io~ in Seation 2 uhioh enumerate theduties of **said** aohool rupervisorsand whlah pertain to their suparvision. They ml-8to aesai8t in plenulng, outltilug, end 8u 4rvlsinS thework * 4 + vhlch is undar tha sqm?vision of the is ounty Superiiltend4nt" and
:i?P et'7nrtti48 ~01'4 under the supervl8ioilsnd .iiisection **of** ouii%y-%&m4nd4ut i+4 * as other assistrixta are required to do." 'phi8ir further evidrnoe to our minds t&t the Legleleture intended thet ruch supervlaorr rhouldbe employaea of the County Superintendent and not of any other pub110 officials.

The case of Neepor v, Stewmt, supra, is varymuoh in pointl The county Board or Trust44a, mutingunder the provlalons of Artiole 2'790,

Revised Civil Statutes, eleoted Mrs. Nseper aa asristent county superintendentaftar ahehad been selected and norminetod

by Yr, Stewart, tbsoounty 8uperintendenb. Her salary of **%** 100.00,

**por** month was paid from danuery 1, 1931, to April 1, **193**

**.** OnApril 2, 1232, Rrr.~ Heeper ras notified by Rr. Sterart thet h4r wevicee mere 00 longer **aeeded** end thet rhe ws die**oharged.** She insietsd thet h4 hrd no right to diaohergeher. The Oounty Boerd of Trustees thereafterpa884d en 

### orderellowlng her selery through July, 1932, and uhioh order inatruot4d th4 County Su erintendent to ap3rorewarrents in payment of raid 8alery, ft llso provid4d thather **eervioer** be disoontinuedet the end o? said period. Thereefter the oounty superintendent refused to approve aeld wevrent8. A writ oimendmuur wa8 den-d In thr triel co-urt end ita,judgmsntwas effinned on appeel, Th4 following quotetlon frozesaid oese is vary 8ignificent:

sThs statute shouldnot be construed a8 dsnylng to the supsrintendentthe power to employ and

### . . 29

Honorable T. MI Frlmble, page #3

diaoharge hia assistant,unleer theitoonetruction is required by its language, for, laoking in that power, hs haa nomtmna OS reourlng obsdlanos tohis instruotionr.m ours.f (mcleracorlng

Therefore, Ln answer to the first question propounded, you are advised that a rum1 rohool ruperrisor cannot **be en**  played forx eriod of time. Ha only holds hi8 posltlon at theple=o of t e appoiiiiiii offiaar,not bo exceed his cur%---- rel+term oi orfloe, andmay be removed by him at any ttnre.

The second question la answered in tha net;ative.

fn answer to the thirdquestion, you ape **advised** that **the County**  **Superintendent** doer have the authority to dismiss the Rural 3ahool Supervisorwithout the consent of theCounty School ?%oapd,

but he om.not “abolish’ theposition of Rural School Supemiaor , The position was createdby the Legislature, and oan be aboliehed **by no**  lesaar ‘i over. Weaver v. Commia0lonera’ court of Naoo~docher County, **170.** Adopted by 

### Supreme Court. **Corn. App.)**  **146** 8. $I.(Zd)

Very trulyyoura

Assistant