Honorable D. C. Grew State Highway

Engineer Texas HighwayDepartment Austin, Texas

Dear Mr. Greerr OpinionNo. O-5329 Res Deparhnental

Appropriation

Bill of 1943. From what fund shall legislative appropriation

for the Texas Defense

Guard Workmen ’ s Compensation be paid? Appropriation for administrationof Certificate of Title Act.

Your letter of July 19, 1943, suhnite the following

questions

for the opinionof this departmentn
1. Out of what fund is the appropriation for administering

Workmen's

Cornpensation

Act for the Texas DeEense Guard to be paid, underthe provisions of SenateBill No. 332, Acts Regular Session, 48th Legislature? P 2. How much money has been appropriated by such Bill for the administration~ of the Certificate

of Title Division?
FirstQuestionr
The rider involved reads as follows:
"There is hereby appropriated for each year of the Biennium beginning September

1, 1943, and endingAugust 31, 1945, the sum of Fifty Thousand ($50,000)

Dollars for the uses and purposes of; and carrying

cut the prc- -&sions of.Senata

Bill Ms. 135, Acts of the Regular Sessionof the 48th Legislature

no salariesshall be paid from this appropriation. This approoriation,

however,is contingent upon such Billbecoming a. law, and should such Billnot Broome 61 law this appropriation shallbe of no force or effect,

and no part thereof shall be expended."

Senate Bill No. 135 has already become a law. The difficulty in determining

from what fund the moneys appropriated shallccmewises from that part of the Highwayappropriation sectionof the Departmental 14ppropriation bet which reads as follows:
"All revenues, fees, and grants in aid received for creditto the State HighwayFund duringthe biennium beginning

September

1, 1943, together with the balanceof such funds on hand at the beginning of each year ofHonorable D.C. Greer, page 2 (O-5329)

the biennium,

are herebyappropriated for the paymentof the specific appropriation

herein made for the &ate Highnay Department

and the Depar-cment of Public Safety, and for the establishment of a eysGf State Highmaysand the planning, construction,

end ma~intenance

thereofas oontemplated

and set forth in Chapter 1, Title 116, and Chapter186, General Lawa of the RegularSessionof the Thirty-ninth Legislature,

and amendments thereto."

Wa believethat the appropriation for carrying

out the provisions of Senate Rill No. 135 till come from the GeneralFund and not from the State HighwayFund for the following reasonsr
The Aot does not say that all appropriations to the State Sighway Department

shall come cut of the State Highwayfind. but thatsuchfund is appropriated

"for the paymentof specific appropriations

heroinmade." we - believe

that the tear aspeoif'io appropriations"

refers only to the 164 itemized appropriations for different-empioyees and for operating

expensesset out in detail in the first part of the Highway Depar+zaent

section

of the Act. If it were applicable

to all appropriations, including

the riders,there

would have been no ocoasion for the Legislature to have insertedtheword "specific." Such word would have been super'fluous.

Tfe are stsengthened

in this interpretation by the fact that there are appended

to the 164 itemized expenditures

six riders callingfor appropriations for various

purposesand every one of these exaeptthe rider in questicn specifies

from d-mt fund the appropriation shall mme. Four of these set cut that the appropriations are from the State Righvspy Fond; the fifth specifies that it is from the GeneralRevenueFund. If it had been intended that all appropriations

to the State Righwpy Departmentware

to ccma cut of the Strte HighwayFund, the use of thesna "specific appropriations"

and the specifioation in four separate ridersthat the appropriations were out of the State EighwayFund would have been mere surplusage. Under the rule that a statute will be construed

to give effeotto all of its parts, we do not feel justified in adopting

such a construction.
The purposeof SenateBill 135, which is to provide workmen'sccmpensmtionfor tho Defense Guard, is SC remote from any duty pertaining to highways thatwe do not feel justified in readinginto the Appropriation Act an intention to put the ontire expenseof administering this aid to the Defense Guard upon the State RtghwayFund. J&though the Guard on oocaaion of violencefrom within or wJthout,the

Statewould defend the StateHighways, yet such defense

would ba no different

from what it would render to all pncperty within the State,public or private.

SenateBill 135, itself, carried an appropriation

of $15,000from the General

RavenueFund to effectuate the Act until August 31, 1943. The fact that the Legislature in creating

workmen'soonpenaation for the Defenseruard and in makin& t!,e

initialappropriation did not provide

that it should come from the Stats iiighxny Fund is evidence,

in the absenoe

of language

tothe contrary, in the Departmental Appropriation

Bill that the funds thee&n appropriated mere to come cut of the GeneralFund.Honorable D.C. Greer, Page 3 (O-5329)

Section 1 of the Departmental Appropriation

El1 in its opening sentence

provides

that appropriations therein

made are to come out of the General

RevenueFund unless otherwise specified. Said sentence reads as follows:
"Section

1. That the severalsums of money herein specified or 80 much thereofas may be necessary, are hereby appropriated out of the moneys in' the State Treasury, not otherwise

appropriated

in the General Revenue Fund or SpatialFunds as may be shown, for the supportand maintance of the several

departments

and agencies

of the State Government, for the M-year periodbeginning

September

1, 1943, and ending August 31, 1945."
SecondQuestion:

The ridersappended to the appropriation for the StateHighway Department,

made by Senate Bill No. 332, includethe following:
"All revenues,

fees, and grants in aid received for credittothe State Highsay Fund during the biennimn beginning

September

1, 1943, together

with the balance

of such funds on hand at the beginning of each year of the biennium, are herebyappropriated for the payment

of the specific

appropriations

herein made for the State HighwayDepartment and the Department

of Public Safety, and for the establislnnent of a systemof State highways end ths planning, construction,

and maintenance

thereofas oontemplated and set forth in Chapter 1, Title 116 and Chapter 166, General

Laws of the R gular Session of the Thirty-ninth

Legislature,

and amendments

theretoo Fro&dad, however, that an amount not to exceedOne Hundred Seventy-five Thousand ($175,000.00) Dollars is hereby appropriated for the Certificate of Title Division.
"There is herebyappropriated under end by virtue of House Bill No. 205, Acts of the Regular Sessionof the Forty-seventh Legislature,

sufficient highwayfunds to carry out the terms and provisions of said Act, and the StateHighwayDepartment is hereby expressly authorized

to employ a sufficientnlrmber

of emplo~fies

necessary

to carry out the terms and provisions of said Act, but in no event shall salaries be paid in excess of the amount paid for the same or similar positions

in any department

of the State Government.e

B the provisions of Section57 of the Certificate of Title Act, twenty-ffve 25$ cents of each fifty (50$)

T 1 cents collected from an applicant for a Certificateof Title, or re-issuance thereof,isto be foraarded to theHighway Ds$artment for depositto the State HighwayFund, and from such fees. the Department,

under the provisions of said Section,

is entitled

to use sufficient

money to pay all expenses neoessary

to efficiently

administer and perform

the dutiesrequired by the Certificate of Title Law.
The effect of this Section is to requirethe establishment of a special

account

within the State HighwayFund. The fees provided are deposited to the creditof this speoialaccount within the HighwayFund, and are dedicated

to the paymentof the expenses necessary

to efficiently

administerHonorable D. C. Greer, Page 4 (O-5329)

the Certifioats

of Title Law.
The State Highway find proper is a special fund within the State treasury

which derives its revenues frommotor vehicle registration fees and gasoline

taxes, and is by law set aside specifically for the oonstruoticn and maintenanoa

of a system of Stats highways. Vernon'sRevisadCivil Statutes, Article 6674, Article 6674q-5,

Article 6694. The #l75,000.00appropriation is phrasedin terms of its proviso. A proviso is oonstived in oonnection with the section or alause

with which it forms a part, Its office or fun6ticnis to limit or restrict the meaning of that which has gone before. It is to be given effect,if possibla, according

to the clear

meaning of the language

used. Tidewater

Oil Co. v0 Sean, (Civ, Apps.) 148 S.W. (2) 184.
The sectionof the rider to which the $lT5,000~JC appropriation is appended

appropriates

all mvenues, fees and grantsin aid received for creditto the State HighwayFund, together with the balance

on hand in the fund, to purposes

whioh do not inolude the expenditure

of suoh moncym for the operation

of the Certificate

of Title Act. The lsnguage of the #175,000.00 appropriation

beginswith the words "Provided, however,

. . ." indioating clearly

the legislative

intent to imposea limitation or restriction

upon that which it had dons in the sentence preceding. The provisois tc be oonstrued as limiting

the authority

previously

oonferred

by the apFopriation of the whole HighwayPund, by providing that #175,000.00

of such fund should be devoted to purposes

not includedin the appropriation made by the first sentence, to-wit,to the administration of the Certifioate

of Title Act*
The first sentence of this paragraph

of the rider can have the legal effectof appropriating only that part of the HighwayFurd which is not dedicated by law to purposes other than the purposesfor which the appropriationtherein made, for the reasonthat the terms of existing law may not be changed by an appropriation

bill. StateV~ Steele,57 Tex. 203; Linden v. Pinley,92 Tax. 454; Conley

v. Daughters

of the Republio,

151 S. Ir.

883; Opinions

of the Attorney General,1916-18,

p. 119) 1928-30,

p. 209, Letter Book 60, p0 24; 1934-46, p. 46; OpinionNO. O-2573. The appropriation in the first sentenae can not be made out of that part of the HighwayPund which is composed of fees deposited

therein, under the terms of Section 67 of the Certificate of TitleAct, for such fees ly such Section,

though deposited

in the HighwayFund,arc dedicated by that Section to the paymentof expenses of administration

of the Certificate

of Title Act.
Porthe same reason, though the Legislature by the provisoindicated clearly

an intentto subjectthe entireHighwayFund to the paymentof the #l76,000.00

appropriated

to the Cerbifioateof Title Division,

since that portion of~thefund not composed of fees colleoted

under Section57 of the Certificate of TitleAct oan not by the appropriation bill bs devotedto the purpose of administering the Csrtifioate of Title law, the provisois valid only to appropriate the #175,000.00

from that part of the Hi~hvayFund composed of fees collected

under Sectuon 57 of the Certificate of TitleAct.
The result is that we have two appropriations for the Certificate of Title Division

PrQn Certificate

of Title fees in the Highmay FundsHon. D. C. Greer, Page 5 (O-532.9)

1. The provisolimiting the appropriation

to $175,000,00.
2. The paragraph

following

the proviso,

which authorizes

expenditure

of sufficientCertifioate of Title fees out of the HighwayFund to administer the Aot. Since there is a direot conflict betweenthese two provisions, which can not be resolved by the applioation

of any other rule of statutory construction,

we must apply the rule that in case of conflict between

provisions of the same enactment, the provision

last in point of position in the Act controls,

on the theory that it is the latestexpression of the legislative

will. Stevens

v, State, 159 S.W. 505. ?Ws the provisois superseded by the paragraph succeeding

it.

It has been suggested that the fonflictis to be resolved by regardingthe,proviso as an appropriation from the GeneralFund. To this we can not agree. It is not the province of construction

to vsry the meaning of unambiguous

language

in order to avoid conflict between

portions

of the law. This is legislation -- not interpretation. Duringthe presentfiscalbiennium the Legislature

has appropriated for the administration of the Certificate

of Title law all fees collected and deposited

under Section57 thereof. Duringthe fisoal year 1941-1942,

such receipts

amountto $342,181.75; the expenditures

for the same period, $185,765.15, Down through July 1, 1943, the reaeipts for the fiscal

year 1942-1943

were h53.617.75; the expenditures, #87,544.47. The balance currently on hand in the Certificate

of Title fee accountis approximately $270,000.00. It is a matter of common

knowledge

that the heaviest

burden involvedin the administration of the Certificate

of Title law -- the original registration

of titleson all nutomobiles in this State -- has bean practically discharged,

andthat the wrk is now settling

down to that involvedin the routinetransfer of titles, Since the burden of work in the administration of the Act will be much less than that involvedin the firstyears following its enactment,

it is unreasonable

to impute to the Legislature an intent to appropriate $175,000e00

in addition

to all fees collected

and deposited

under Section57 of the Act.

J"& ansmr your first question that the $50,000.00 appropriated

for administering

Senate Bill No* 135, Acts of the 48th Legislature, Regular

Session, is an appropriation from the GeneralRevenueFund.

We answeryour secondquestion that there is appropriated by Senate Bill 332, for the ensuing 'biennia, for the administration of the Certificate

of TitleAct all fees collected under Section57 thesof,that this is the only appropriation

made for the administration of the Certificate

of Title Law.
APPROVED

AUG 5, 1943 ~~~~~Is~~~S 4TTORNEY

GENERAL RW-MR$egw Very truly yours
ATTORNEYGENh'RAL

OFTBy /s/ R.W. Fairchild R.W. Fairchild Assistant