r 

August 8, 1958 

Mr. Frank Scofield Opinion No. wW-488 

Chairman 

Livestock Sanitary Commission Re: May the Livestock SaniFort Worth, Texas- tary Commission, under the 

appropriation made by the 

55th Legislature, employ 

and designate inspectors 

as supervisors, and related 

Dear Mr. Scofleld: questions. 

In your letter of July 10, you asked if, in our 

opinion, the Livestock Sanitary Commission could employ personnel under the appropriation for "Supervising Inspectors" when 

such personnel would not supervise additional men, but would 

"give complete supervision of several counties in such specified districts where they work". As we interpret your request, 

you asked to be advised if the Commission may assign "Supervising Inspectors" (paid not to exceed the applicable salary 

schedule) duties other than that of supervising employees of 

the Commission. 

The pertinent provisions of House Bill 133, Acts of 

55th Legislature, Chapter 385 (General Appropriations Act) 

contain the following appropriation to the Livestock Sanitary 

Commission: 

"For the Years Ending 

August 31, August 31, 

1958 1959 

.I . . 

. . . 

"12. For the eradication or control 

of any contagious, 

infectious, or communicable diseases 

of animals or live 

poultry, excluding 

indemnities $250,000 $ 250,000 

Plus Unexpended Balance 
Mr. Frank Scofield, Page 2 (~~-488) 

"13. For brucellosis 

eradication and control where livestock 

owners voluntarily 

pay half the costs, 

there is hereby apDrODriated as the 

State's share thereof, 

the sum of 100,000 125,000 

Plus UnexDended Balance 

"14. For the payment of 

indemnities as provided in general law 15,000 15,000 

Qrand Total, Livestock Sanitary 

Commission $459,860 $ 490,860 

"The appropriation made to the Livestock Sanitary Commission in Items 12 and 13 may be exDended 

for-personal services subject to the limitations 

hereinafter SDeCified. and for arofessional fees: 

for laboratory tests,-vaccines,*supplies and materials including those for veterinary purposes; rent, 

telephone, telegraph, postage, and freight or express charges; equipment, the operation, maintenance,, 

and replacement of trucks, and travel expense. 

(Emphasis added) 

"None of the moneys approprfated in Item 13 

may be expended for brucellosis eradication or control unless and untfl the Livestock Sanitary Commission has entered Into agreements as authorized by law 

with livestock associations or owners, or local and 

federal governments, which agreements shall stfpulate 

that costs paid by the State for brucellosfs inspections, vaccines, or control measures shall not exceed 

fifty per cent of the total costs thereof. Such 

agreements shall be filed with the Comptroller prior 

to the disbursement of any moneys for brucellosfs 

eradication and control from any of the appropriations 

herein made to the Livestock Sanftary Commission. 

"It is further provided that none of the moneys 

appropriated in Items 12 and 13 may be expendec, for 

employees of the Livestock Sanitary Commission except 
Mr. Frank Scofield, Page 3 (~~-488) 

in the positions and at salaries not to 

exceed the annual rates specified as follows: 

Supervising Inspectors, NTE 

Inspectors, NTE 

. . . . . . 

It will be noted that the provisions after Item 

14 authorize the Commission to expend the funds enumerated in 

Items 12 and 13 for "personal services". The third paragraph 

reveals the Intent of the Legislature to authorize the Commission to use portions of such funds for paying employees an 

amount not to exceed the stated sums. There is no provision 

in the Appropriation Act indicating how many such employees 

may be hired, nor are the exact duties of such personnel 

specified. 

The duties of the Livestock Sanitary Commission are 

set forth in the Penal Code, and include many duties to be 

performed by Inspectors. For example, Article 1525a of Vernon's Penal Code, in Section 1,authorizes the Commission to 

direct cattle or sheep owners to dip their livestock. Sections 

6 and 10 specify such dipping is to be done under the "supervision of an authorized Inspector" of the Commission. Section 

9 imposes the same duties insofar as they pertain to goats. 

Section 17 provides for the supervision of disinfecting of corrals and pens, and Section 18 provides for similar supervision 

when owners refuse or fall to dip their livestock. Section 

20 reads in part as follows: 

salaries of local County Inspectors to 

be paid iy'the County, but salaries of the said 

Chief Inspector and District Supervising Inspectors 

to be paid by the State." 

The same general scheme is evidenced in Articles 1525b, 

1525c, 1525d, and 1525f of VernonIs Penal Code. Such provisions reveal a Legislative intent that persons employed by the 

Livestock Sanitary Commission for such Inspection and supervisory work, and who are paid by the State, are properly considered as filling a supervisory position. Furthermore we 

feel the Commission has implied authority to so designate 

certain of its personnel, and to assign their duties. 

"Implied powers. -- It Is equally well settled 

however, that a law which confers a power or imposes 

a duty upon an officer or board carries tiith It by 

implication the authority to do such things as are 
. . 

Mr. Frank Scofield, Page 4 (W’W-488) 

reasonably necessary to carry fnto effect the 

power granted or the duty Imposed. Thus power 

to do certain work or to accomplfsh a certain 

result which cannot otherwise be accomplished, 

Implies the authority to employ such agents as 

may be reasonably necessary to accomplish the 

work or purpose specified, and to engape them 

for sSfch length of time as Is reasonably qeces34 Tex.Jur. 444, Public Officers, 

EZion 68. 

The Livestock Sanitary Comm1ssfon 4s authorized to 

employ personnel as "supervising inspectors" and to assign 

such persons to carry out the duties imposed upon the Commission as they may pertain to the "complete supervision" of the 

work in several counties, Including Inspection of livestock 

and facilities, and to pay them the amount provfded in the 

current Appropriation Act for "supervising inspectors”. It is 

not obligatory that the duties of such personnel be confined 

to the supervision of other employees. 

SUMMARY 

The livestock Sanitary Commission, under 

Its appropriation made by the 55th Legislature, 

may employ and designate personnel as "supervising inspectors" though their duties are not 

limited to the supervfsion of other Commissfon 

employees. 

Yours very truly, 

WILL WILSON 

Attornes General of Texas 

,a,& !@'?A2 

Tom I. McFarling 

Assistant TIM:br:mg 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

Geo. P. Blackburn, Chairman 

Henry G. Braswell 

L. P. Lollar 

Wayland C. Rivers, Jr. 

Linward Shivers 

REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

BY: W. V. Geppert