rtm. wiiiie O'Real

CountyAuditor Carson County Panhandle,Texas

Dear Madam: 'OpinionHo. o-1919 Re: Whether the~commlssionarsl court is, authorized: -(l)to lend money to-theass-istanoe

of an indivi- '~ dual in the nature of support of
a pauper vithout.

requir,ing

the ~Sndividual

receiving the aid to
~, sign a pauperls affidavit; (2) to .empley anassistant in the office of the county home demon&ration agent; ,(3) to emple a.csuntywelfare worker; and (4 7 whether the salary of the county judge for acting as superintendent of pub110 1nstruction;Article 3888, Revised Civil Statutes, is to be Included in calculatingthe maxlmum amount that the count judge
can drav under Article 385 3, Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes.

In yeur letter~ofJanua~ry 

### 28, you submit four questions t&'thls departmentforan.opinlon thereon, and we will discuss them In the order in which they are presented In your letters. QuestionNo.~,l. 'I's, It 'lawful

for the county to lend financialassistanoeto an indlvidual Fn the nature of support of a pauper .vlthout

requiringthe Individualrecelvlng the aid to sign '8pauper'saffidavit?'Mrs. Wlllle O'Neal, .Page 2, O-1919

Article 2351, Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes, relating to powers and duties of the cornmissIoners' court, in part reads:

"Each commissioners1 court shall:

"11. Provide for the support of paupers and such Idiots and lunaticsas cannot be admitted into the lunatic asylm, residents of their county,who are unable to support them-, selves. By the term resident as used herein, is meant a person who has been a bona fide inhabitantof the county not less than six months and of the state not less than one year."

The statutesdo not make any provlsion concerning the signing of a pauper's affidavitby one who is to receive support as such from a county. Whether he executes a pauperr's affidavit or does not, appears to be a matter left entirelywithin the discretion of the commlssionersl court. The fact that a.person executes such affldavltwould not be conclusiveof ths question that he Is or Is not a pauper, or that he Is or Is not entitled to supportby the county,and certainly Is not binding on the county. This question Is to be determinedby the commissioners' court, and we think it wlthln their dlscretlonas to whether or not such affidavit shall be required of the person seeking county aid on such grounds. The statutequoted contemplatesa satFsfactorydeterminationof the question of whether a person is entitled to support from the county by whatever investigationor proceeding the commissionerat court chooses,not necessarily dependent on the person's own affidavit or statement. The law, of course, does not contemplatecounty funds paid out to supportpersonsmerely upon their own statement or affidavlt.

In answer to your questionWC. 1, it is therefore the opinion of this departmentthat after the commissiolrers' court has satisfactorily determined from all reasonable
sources that one needing support as a pauper Is a resldent of the county and unable to support himself, it Is within the authority of the court to so find and furnish such necdssary aid without requiring a pauper's affidavit executedby such person.

QuestionNo. 2. "Is it lawful for the county to employ an assistant in the offioe of the Coutity Home DemonstrationAgent?'Mrs. Willie O'Real, Page 3, O-1919

Article 164, Vernon's Annotated Clvil.Statutes, provides:

"The Ccmmisslonersl Court of any county of this state is authorLzedtoestablish and conduct co-operative demonstration

work in Agricultureand Home Economlas in co-operation wlth~theAe;i?Fcultural':and-Mechadic~l College of Texas, upon such terms and conditionsas may be agreed upon by the CommLssLonersl Court and the Agents of the Agrl.culturaland.Meohanlcal College of Texas; gnd may employ such :._, means, ,and

may appropriateand expend suoh~s.ums of money as may be neqFessary to effqctively. ' establish:

and c~~..on:~~uc~,demhn~tr.atin~.~brk~ In Agricultureand Home Economics In their respectiveoounties." i

The above statute.isan amendment of.Article164, Revised CFvil Statutes; -1925, which artlole~ aspcodified limited the expendit.tuFe of funds by a county, "'net.exceed-,~ ing one th,ousand

1dollars

peryear, for farmers Go-operative. demonstration

work Ln tlm county.

. ." By the 1920:amendment of said article,Article 164, supra; this limitation
was omFtted,,tionsequently, the on1 the expenditureof oounty funds un er our present statute, 3 1,lmltatlon

placed upon is the constitutFona1 limitations'oftax levies for county purposes. We assume that your request ,ralses' no question
as to the legality of such amounts appropriatedto meet the expenditures

mentioned.andas setup in the county budget, but deals solely with the authority of theecommissioners~ court.toemploy an assistantto the County Home D&monstration Agent and pay the salary mentloned.

The above a&gives broad powers to the commissioners~ court and leaves t:o.'-'their judgmentthe question as to what is "necessaryto effectivelyestablishand carry on such demonstration work Ln Agricultureand Rome Economics In their respectFvecounties,." That' conductingand carrying on such work as, pro.v$ded-by

the Dsgislatureis"county business"as within the contemplationof Article 5, Section 18 of the Constitut~ion, of Texas> has neverbeenquestloned.

I&~answer'

to your"i$~~~nd,~ue~t~lon,'you~.a~e.r~s-'~.. pectfullyadvised 'that ,it, i.s within~the:

power and authority: of the cbmmissioners 1 court'todetermFnewhether or not the employmentof an assistantto a County Home Demonstration Agent Is %ecessary to the conduct and aarrylng on of co;+Mrs. Willie OcI?eal, Page 4, O-1919

operativedemonstration work" in the county under the provisions of Article 164, Vernon'sAnnotated Civil Statutes.

QuestionNo. 3. "Is it lavful for the county to employ a welfare worker?"
ArticleV, Section 18, of the Constitutionof Texas, creatingthe commissioners1 court, reads in part as follows:
"

. The County CommLss5.oners so chosen, with tf;e'couhty

judge, as presiding officer, shall compose the county Commisslonersl Court, which shall exercise such powers and jurisdlction over all oountybusiness, as is conferred by this Constitutionand the laws of the State, or as may be hereafterprescribed."

It till be noted that the above provisionprovides that the commissioners1 court shall "exercisesuch powers and jurisdictionover all counts business as is oonfefied by thins

Constitutionand the laws of thi s State, w as may be hereafterprescribed."

Construingthis provision,the Supreme Court in Bland vs. Orr, 90 Tex. 495, said:

,'tlhe Constitutiondoes not immediately confer jurisdiction upon these (meaningcommissioners ooupts over the county business and subject that jurisdictionto 'suchregu- .latlons

as the Legislature may prescribe,'
nor authoritygeaerally over such business. The proviSionfrom Seation 8 of that lnstrument (alreadyquoted) prescribed: flrst, that the commlsslonersl court shall exercise such power& and jurl.sdLctlon over all county busLn&ss as'

La conferredby ths .CbnstLtution.

. It also gives them such powers as are Eo&erred 'by the laws of the State.'.

. ."

It appears settled law of this state that the commissi.oners

( court has no general oontrol over cmnty business,but only such powers of control as Is conferred by the Constitutionitself and the laws of this State.Mrs. Willie O'Neal, Page 5, O-1919

We are unable to find any statutoryauthority, expressly or lmpliedlyauthorizingthe commissioners' court to employ the services of a welfare worker. It has been the policy of the state to be concernedby general legislation in all matters relating to the health, sanitation and relFef of its citizensasa whole. The Legislaturehas not seen fit to vest la the commlssioners~ court authority to expend county funds for employing case workers,performing duties relating to W. P. A. or relief projects and in the absence of such legislation, we are unable to say that the commissloners~ court, chargedwith the care and support of the indigent of the county as provided in Article 2351, Section 11, have any such implied authority.

In answer to your third question,you are respectfullyadvised that it is the opinion of this department that the commissioners1 court is not authorizedto employ
a oounty welfare worker.

QuestionNo. 4. "Is the salary authorized to be paid the County Judge for acting as au intendentof public instruction by Article 3I?'-

88 Revised Civil Statutes to be included In calculating the maximum amount that the County Judge can drav under Article 3883?”

We find that the above questionhas been answered In our opinionNo. o-67 rendered to your County Attorney, Honorable Frank R. Murray, Panhandle, Texas, approvedby the Attorney General January 11, 1939. For your FnformatFon, we are herewith enclosing a copy of. opinionNo. o-67, which
answersyour questionNo. 4, holding that su~ch salary paid to the County Judge for acting as superintendent of public lnstructlon la to be Included in calculatingthe maximum amount that the County Judge is allowed to draw under Article 3883, Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes.

Trusting the above answersyour request,we are

WJRK:GO:mjs APPROVRDFHB 23, 1940 /#/ Gerald C. Mann ATTORNHYGHNHRALOFTHXAS Yours very truly

ATTORNRYGHNE3ALOFTlXAS

BY /s/Wm. J.R. King

Wm. J. R. King Assistant

APPROVED OPINION COMMITTEE BY /a/ BWB CHAIRMAN