OFFICE OF ‘IWE ATTORNEY QENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

22 

Ronorablo 1. Y. 'mimble, First Assistant 

State Superintendent of Publio Instruotion 

Austin, Ta.aS 

mittillg the toll0 

rrm ~0n0~bie' vi 

dressed to your 

uly 15, 1945, oubtained in a letter 

epresentative;ad1 School Super- 

:- \ 

loyedT\L)/ - 

Sohool Boar& have the 

position or diamzss 

SOD 8ithout the ooneent 

b&s 

aut22~ 

he County Superintendent have 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 Superintendent of Publia Instruotlon may, with the approval of the County Board 

of Xduoatlon, employ on4 or more 8ohool supertlsors to l 8818t ln planning, outlining, rod 

8U~S?Vi8ilt$ th. work Of thr Pub110 I%'40 SOhO 

. ia the oOUXlty which ~18 under the 8UpOlV18lon Of 

the County Superintendent of Publlo Instruction, 

8ald oupOX%iIor or OUpOPVi8OM 8hall at a&% t&m48 

wrk Wdel' th4 8UpOrvl81otl aIAd dire&ion of th4 

Couuty 8uperlntendent of Fubllo Imtruotion, a8 

Other a88istMt8 are repulrod t0 do, and mid 

h8v4 evidence of proflolsnoy In rural 8oh401 

sup4rvl81on and must be the holder 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 IUUUIer as that Of th4 COUnty Superintondent of PItbllo Instruotion and 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 18 one 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 a mrterial differmoo betwoon a publlo off100 and a pub110 

A8 raid by Chief Justloe N41?8hall, 

em loyment, 

*A P 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 oharacterlstic rbioh di8tlnguishea an 

0rfi08 frtxa an employment or oontraot ir that 

the oroatlon and oonferring OS an offios involv48 a delegation to the lndlvldull OS 8om4 

Of the SO04~i~ rUZIOth8 Of gOVOrrPnent, t0 b0 

exeroleed by di[t Por the benefit of the publlo; 

that mm 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 rupervisor hr. been dolegatad no sovereign Pun.- 

tionr of government to be exoroleod by him for the publio 

ben4Slt. HO 18 Oldy M 4 lIQlOl ~O 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 time8 work undef the 8up.rv1810~ and dlreotion 

of the County Superintendent of 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 

4ontlnulty of 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 Sieven th&@ the app;lntiy 

Fth,D%lMlW8 Of the-.DDOintitlfZ 

powr, has,-In the atriot mmnlng 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. 

Ill th( 0 

64 8. 1. @g$, t 

84 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-8 a be&king Jm. 1, 1898, wa8 removed by the enme oourt on Jan, 4, 1898.’ The oourt held that ho 
could be removed without notice oc oauae, aa he was the mere 

agent of the court and subjeot to it8 orders, no qualiPioation8 

OF torn for the appointee having hew prasoribed by etatute. 

h the oa88 of Joba8on vr Oina et al. (Ky.) 49 S, W. 

470, it w&8 hold that the County 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 dieoration and 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 i8 made for reatOw 0s an inombent, the appolntlte power osoe88arily oarrlsr with it the remomxl power, 

In 8uoh a oa8e the lncumbeat hold8 at the pleasure of thr ape 

polntiog oftioer and may be removed by ~&XI at any time, 34 481, 

Jpzr., 9e 594. In the absenoe Or any oonstitutlonal or atatutory protirfon, the power 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 bha eonourrepao OS, the 8anate, both eonrt5tuting the 

~oWV? or the Irb8id& 

0 remo?(b# tie** the taurQ 

l dmlttaand d, 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 determine who may remove such emqlogee. 

The intent of the Legislature oontrol8 the language 

used by it, and in oonetruing a cltatute, aourta are not neoesaarily confined to the literal meaning 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 particular meauing 

depend8 u9oaand 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 Oden v. Gates, 119 Tex. 76, 24 3. W. (2d) 

381, the Court, in construing the meanlug 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 its meaning must nacsssarily depend upon the 

aontext and evident purpose intended. 

In 39 10x. Jur., 9* 809, par* 113, it is stated that 

"Anotner fundamental rule requlrsr thbt a otatute be conetrued 

a8 a whole and that all of it8 part8 be harmonlsed if po88ible.' 

Theretore, en bet murt be viewed In it8 rntiretyr Eaoh part of 

a statute must bo oonsidered in oonneotion uith 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 San AntOnlO, 110 Ter. 618, QQS 9.1. 

166; 39 TexLI J~P., pg 168, parI 90. 

‘In a proper 008~~ the 9 Q * intent may be illferred from the taot that an 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 ot will prevail over its Letter. **SC 

The intention of the Legislature controls the 

language used by it, end in construing a statute 
Bonor8blo Tr Y, Trimbls, 36gs #6 

the Court ir not necessarily oonfinsd to the 

1it4ral. laeanfng o* the words used, especially in 

respeot of isolated or particular provisions. 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 in Article 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 1 of ea?d article 

the follorlng langu~gs 16 used: 4Th4 Countg Superintendent, 

tendant of PublioyInstruoiion may, -- with the eppsoval bf the 

Oounte Board of Education, employ one or more school 

VIaOrs~‘Tfz.- 

ZYpix 

In Uords and Phra4elr Vol. 3, p. 230, it is stat4d 

that ‘Th4 term lapprovol~ ia rnroeptible of different meaninga, dapendent upon the aubjoet matter and oont4xt oonoernlq wbioh the term in employed and the objeot and purpose to 

be mbrorved or aeooleplfahed, Ordinarily, the term in ltr 

most obvious lasting, is to ooaUnond, oonfira, rrtifg, sanetim, 

or to consent to aom4 sot or thing don4 by another. 

It appears thererors, th4t the tegialbture, in not 

requiring th4 4onfLmation of the County Eoard, but only its 

a roval, in oonne4tionrith the naployment of on4 or more 

2&l- o 8upwvi40~4, ~hi14 rrquirlng both 

rtion of arid Board in the eaiplo witi of 

-the lord vapproval* in Scot f on 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.n 940: 

tlon 1 end omit the words 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 

oonflrmed by 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 our minds that the employment OS school 

supervisor8 ir rested in the County Sohool Superintendent, 

after ouch employment he4 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 the duties of said aohool 

rupervisors and whlah pertain to their suparvision. They ml-8 to 

aesai8t in plenulng, outltilug, end 8u 4rvlsinS the work * 4 + 

vhlch is undar tha sqm?vision of the is ounty Superiiltend4nt" and 

:i?P 

et'7nrtti48 ~01'4 under the supervl8ioil snd .iiisection of 

ouii%y-%&m4nd4ut i+ 4 * as other assistrixta are required 

to do." 'phi8 ir 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 vary muoh in 

point l The county Board or Trust44a , muting under the provlalons 

of Artiole 2'790, Revised Civil Statutes, eleoted Mrs. Nseper aa 

asristent county superintendent aftar ahe had been selected and 

norminetod by Yr, Stewart, tbs oounty 8uperintendenb. Her salary 

of 

% 

100.00, por month was paid from danuery 1, 1931, to April 1, 

193 . On April 2, 1232, Rrr.~ Heeper ras notified by Rr. Sterart 

thet h4r wevicee mere 00 longer aeeded end thet rhe ws dieoharged. She insietsd thet h4 hrd no right to diaoherge her. 

The Oounty Boerd of Trustees thereafter pa884d en order ellowlng 

her selery through July, 1932, and uhioh order inatruot4d th4 

County Su erintendent to ap3rore warrents in payment of raid 

8alery, f t l lso provid4d that her eervioer be disoontinued et 

the end o? said period. Thereefter the oounty superintendent 

refused to approve aeld wevrent8. A writ oi mendmuur wa8 den-d 

In thr triel co-urt end ita,judgmsnt was effinned on appeel, Th4 

following quotetlon froze said oese is vary 8ignificent: 

sThs statute should not be construed a8 dsnylng to the supsrintendent the power to employ and 
. . 

29 

Honorable T. MI Frlmble, page #3 

diaoharge hia assistant, unleer theit oonetruction is required by its language, for, laoking 

in that power, hs haa no mtmna OS reourlng 

obsdlanos to his instruotionr.m 

ours. f 

(mcleracorlng 

Therefore, Ln answer to the first question propounded, 

you are advised that a rum1 rohool ruperrisor cannot be enplayed for x eriod of time. Ha only holds hi8 posltlon at 

the ple=o of %---- t e appoiiiiiii offiaar, not bo exceed his currel+term oi orfloe, and may be removed by him at any ttnre. 

The second question la answered in tha net;ative. 

fn answer to the third question, you ape advised that 

the County Superintendent doer have the authority to dismiss 

the Rural 3ahool Supervisor without the consent of the County 

School ?%oapd, but he om.not “abolish’ the position of Rural 

School Supemiaor , The position was created by 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 truly youra 

Assistant