Honorable C. H. Cavnem 

stat.5 Auditor 

Austin, Texas 

Dear Sir: opinion No. O-6676 

Re: State Apportionments to counties 

operating under officers' Salary 

Fund and where there is a Criminal 

District Attorney or $ounty Attorney performing the dutiiee of District Attorney. 

We are in receipt of your request for an opinion on the abbve matter, said request being a6 follows: 

"In connection with an audit we are now making of the Judiciary Section of the State Comptroller's Department for the 

three years ended. August 31, 1944, we find it necessary to request an opinion from your Department a8 to the following apportionment appropriations: 

"Apportionments to counties where county officers are paid 

salaries and where there is a Criminal District Attorney or 

County Attorney performing the duties of District Attorney (for 

33 counties in 1940, per Sub-section B, Section 13, Chapter 465, 

Acts Forty-fourth Legislature). 

"Year Ended August 31st: 

"1942 $146,42y.O0 

1943 146,429.00 

1944 146,429.00 

"Article 3912e, Section 13B, reads as follows: 

"The compensation of a criminal district attorney or county 

attorney performing the duties of dietrict attorney, together 

with the compensation of his assistants, shall be paid out of 

the County Officers' Salary Fund, but the State shall pay into 

such fund each year .!+n amount equal to a sum which bears the 

same proportion to the total salary of such criminal district 

attorney or county attorney performing the duties of a district 

attorney, together with the salary of his assistants, as all 
Hoti. C. H. Caress, page f (0-6676) 

felay fees sollect.rd by such official during the year 1935 bear 

to the total fees cc;i.lected by such official during such year.' 

"We qucte, I.: part, from Attorney General's Opinion addressed 

tcj the CrLaptroile.r cf Pub1j.c Accouds under date of September 15, 

1936, relative to t,'ie: ix1usl.o~ cd stenographers, bookkeepers and 

invest!.gators a'assistants': 

"*Recel.pt is her+y ackzodedged op your letter of Sept&,er 

15, 1936 wherein you refer to subsection (b) of Section 13 of 

Sena+:e Bill NG. 5, Acts of thz Second Call& Session of the Fortyfourth Legislature and wish to be advised as to whether or not 

StenO@apheI'S, bookkeepers, and investigatorshould be considered as assistads unaer the terms Gf this Section. . . . . . . 

While stenographers, bookkeepers, and investigators are assistants 

In a limlt~d sense 0," the word In that they assist in the conduct 

of the duties of ihe office, we are of the opinion that the Legislature did not intend to include such employees $n the terms of 

Section 13 (b), supra. It is the opinion afthe writer that the 

Legislature interidea to include only assistant +listrict or county 

attorneys as that word is commonly accepted, that is, practicing 

attorneys who in some way assist in the prosecution of cases~in 

tte respective col;z%ies.* 

"We quote IL part, from your opinlda@-essed to the Camptroller ucaer date cf V&r& 9, 1936: 

"'When will the Comptroller be required to pay into the 

County Officers' Salary Funathe moneys provided for under Subsection B of Section 131 

"'We are of the opinion that the Comp%zoll.er's Department . 

should pay into the Officers' Salary Fu& of the respective 

counties the amount provided for in Section 13 (b) at the first 

.of each year, that is, on January First.' ~ 

"we quote, in part, from your opinion NO. o-6226, addressed 

to the Comptroller: 

"'You state that the maximum amount that could be paid the 

Criminal District Attorney and his aasietants by statute is 

$'j2,150.00 per annum, but the actual expenditures by Bexar County 

to the Criminal District Attorney ana his assistants is $45,500.00 

forthisyear........................... 

11 I . . . . . . it is our opinion that in making your allncation of the appropriation as provided by said,~statute, you should 

make your calculations of the distribut$ons on ~the amount actually 

paid by the county to the,Criminal District. Attorney ana his~aesistants and not on the maximum amount !&at the,law~ au$horizes.' 
. . 

Hon. C. H. Cavness, page 3 (o-6676) 

"In auditing the records of the Comptroller's Department 

pertaining to this salary apportionment for the three-year perlod ended August jlet, 1944, we find the following altuation: 

"1. At the beginning of each calendar year the Comptroller 

prepares a schedule of ealary apportionment for each and all participating counties. The lralaries used by the Comptroller in 

this schedule are those furnished by each county by letter from 

such county purporting to be the salaries which will be paid for 

the ensuing calendar year to Criminal District Attorneys and 

their assistants. 

"Thie, of course, means that the Comptroller is using what 

might be considered estimated salaries and which in most cases 

represent maximum salaries rather than the actual salaries paid 

as outlined in Attorney General's Opinion No. o-6226. Obviously, 

the Comptroller could not know what salaries had been paid until 

the end of the calendar year based upon each county's payroll. 

“2. During this three-year period some counties reported 

in their letters to the Comptroller for inclusion of salary apportionment calculations, salaries for abetractors, investigators, 

clerks and stenographers, all of which salaries were used by the 

Comptroller in computing salary apportionment to the respective 

counties. 

"3. Some counties included the names of 'Assistants' who 

were not shown in the Texas Legal Directory and/or the records 

of the Supreme Court of Texas as being licensed and practicing 

attorneys, which fact was discovered by us in checking the names 

submitted to the Comptroller back to the Legal Directories, etc. 

In one instance we found that a county included the name of an 

attorney who had not paid his Bar Association dues since 1939. 

"4. In checking the names and salaries shown each year as 

reported by the respective counties to the Comptroller for inclusion in salaries apportionmento the State Auditor's Forms 

NO. 383 and 383a, which forms report the fees received and the 

annual salary paid the County Officers and employees, we found 

that in many instances the salary listed in such letters to the 

Comptroller by the respective counties exceeded the actual salaries paid such County's officers and employees as reflected in 

~0rm.s NO. 383 ana 383a, 

"We also found that numerous counties had not furnished 

Forms No. 383 and 383a to the State Auditor each year as required by Statute, so in order to obtain the necessary data 

for audit purposes, we wrote each county which has participated in State Salary Apportionment requesting that they furnish us with a list of all salaries paid attorneye eligible 
Hon. C. H. Cavneae, page 4 (O-6676) 

for participati.on in th4.6 apportl.onment for the calendar years 

ended December lat, 194.1, 1942, 1943 and l&4. 

“In checking the replies to these confirmation lettern to 

thoae aubmitted. by the counties to the Comptroller, we found 

the 6am.e situation, to e:xi.st - t.he letters ured by the Comptroller reflected ealerfea whi.c’h were In, excess of the amounta actually paid. 

"5. In checking the salaries submitted. by the respective 

counties to the governing Statutes ,it appeare to UB that aome 

countfee have included ealariea for poal,ttona which are not eligible for participatl,on. in. the apporti,onment and in some inetancea 

the salaries submf.tted were in excess of the amounta fret forth in 

the Statutee. 

“In order to arrive at a definite procedure to be followed 

by the Comptroller in compu.ting State Salary Apporti,onment in 

the future and aleo to enable us to complete our audit for the 

three-year period ended August jlet;, I$&, we are attaching 

herewith a echedule prepared by ue frox ,the letters received 

from the respective countiee whhl.ch wan the basis for salary 

apportionment a8 used by the Comptroller for the three-year 

period under audit. This schedule shcws the names, positions 

and aalariee, by countfes, by years for t,he three years ended 

August 31at, 1942, 1943 and 194,&. 

“It will be eeen that, J.n thl,s sched~.:.e we have footnoted 

(by letter referencee) cowerin.@; certal,n ‘LcllLq~ties whf,cb. haave 

included salaries w:hich we do not believe are el!.gi.ble under 

the existing Statutes e 

“T:his schedule provtdes add!.tl,oeal. columns ‘Co be filled 

in by you a8 fol.lows: 

“1. On t.his mdm3ul.e please insert the Law references 

for each poaitio:n in each cou&y and advi,se whether 'aqy of 

such laws are unconstitut1,onal as tc partZ.c%.pation in State 

Salary Apportionment D 

"2. We ‘also ask th& you pl.ea~e fi1.J :fn the remai;nio.g 

three columns in this schedu.ie to chow the maxi.mum salary 

allowed by law for each of the positions for each courty 

eligible for parti.cipati.on in t,h,Li eslary apportLonmect. 

"3s The salary apportionment appropriati,ons for t,he 

three years under review refer to t’hirhy-three (33) countiea, whereas the attached schedule covera only thirty-one 

(31) counties receiving such apportbonment as computed by 

the Comptroller. Shou.ld two more counti.ea partl,cipate in 
. . 

Hon. C. H. Cavness, page 5 (o-6676) 

this apportionment? If so, please furnish the names of the counties, the applicable laws and the respective salaries to be included for such countlee. 

"4. What ie the effect of the Special Federal Census in 

Jefferson County on that county'8 apportionment - that Special 

Census increased the population from 145,329 in 1940 to 191,942 

as of June 15th, 1943, the date of said Special Federal Censue. 

“5. Based upon your Opinion No. o-6226 which is to the 

effect that calculations of the distributions should be computed 

on the amount actually paid by the county to the Criminal District Attorney and his Assistants rather than on the maximum 

amount the law authorizes, it appears to us that the Comptroller 

would have to wait until the end of each calendar year before he 

could calculate salary apportionment due the respective counties. 

Are we correct in assuming that this is the method which should 

be used, the salary data perhaps furnished the Comptroller at the 

end of each year through certified reports furnished by the County 

Auditors of the respective counties? 

“6. Since we found that some counties have been over-paid 

salary apportionment (which of course means that other counties 

have been under-paid) over the period of the three years under 

audit, can such errors be adjusted from any salary apportionment 

appropriation balance and/or from future salary apportionment 

appropriations, and for what period of time? Would such adjustments be retroactive to January lst, 1936, the effective date of 

the State Salary Apportionment laws?" 

We will consider the apportionments to the named officials of the 

various counties in the order submitted by you and cite the statutes that authorized same, a8 well as to call attention to any errors that may have been 

made in making said apportionments. If desired, you can then place such matters into the schedule submitted with your request, which is returned herewith. 

It will be necessary for us to refer to the various subdivisions 

of the statutes governing these matters but, instead of referring to each of 

the subdivisions, we will give the article and number thereof followed by a 

period and the number of the subdivision. All salaries will be considered 

on an annual basis without being so specified. 

It may also be necessary for us to refer to and attach copies of 

other opinions of this department, and when that is done said opinions, and 

each of them, will be adopted as a part of this opinion insofar as they pass 

upon questions here discussed. 

Bexar County. The Bexar County Criminal District Court was created 

and established by Articie 52-161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the 

State of Texas, and Section 12 of said article provides for the election of 
. . 

Hon. C. H. Cavness, page.6 (o-6676) 

a criminal district attorney of said county. Article 3912e-1 of Vernon'e Annotated Civil Statutes fixes the salary of said criminal dietrict.attorney 

at the sum of $7,400.00. 

We are unable to state just what positlone ln,the office of Criminal 

District Attorney of Bexar County were filled by any particular persons, as 

set forth on the schedule submitted, as home of the ealaries paid euch person6 

are lese than those authorized by law. In our opinion, Article 3912e., Section 

lg(f-l), fully authorlzed all of the salaries shown in the echedule, eince 

Bexar County had a population of 338,776 under tha Federal Censur of 1940 and 

such statute applied to the district attorney or the criminal district attorney, in any county having a population of not less than 325,000 nor more than 

500,000 according to the laet preceding Federal Census. 

Your schedule shows twelve assistantcriminal district attorneys 

for each of the three years. In 1942 the following salaries were paid: one 

assistant at $4,500.00, three at $4,200.00, two at $3,600.00, two's& $3,000.00, 

and four at $2,700.00. In 1943 the following salaries were paid eaid assistants: 

two at $4,500.00, one at $4,200.00, three at $3,600.00, three at $3,000.00, 

and three at $2,700.00, And, in 1944 the following salaries were paid said 

assistants: two at $4,500.00, one at $4,200.00, three at $3~,600.00, three at 

$3,000.00, and three at $2,7OO,OO. The statute above referred to authorizes 

the criminal district attorney to appoint nine assistants and to fix their 

salaries at a rate not to exceed the following amounts: two at $4,500.00 per 

.annum each, two at $4;200.00 per annum each, one at $3,600.00 per annum, one 

at $3,OOO.Q0 per annum, and three &$2,7OO.O0 per annum ea.ch. In addition. 

to those, the criminal district attorney was author.ized.to appoint, with the 

advice and consent of the' Commissioners' Court, the following additional assistants and pay them the.salaries stated, to-wit, one at * salary not to exceed $4,250.00 per annum; one not to exceed $3,600.00 per annum; one not to 

exceed $3,000.00 per annum; and two not to exceed $2,7OO.OO per annum; and 

one not to exceed $2,,400.00 per annum. 

House Bill No. 849, Ch. 271, pb 428, Vernon% Texas Session Law Service, passed by the last Legislature and which became effective ninety (90) days 

after June 5, 1945, date of adjournment, applies,to counties having a population of 225,000 or more*and less than 500,OOO~according to the last preceding 

Federal Census, and fixes the Galaries of criminal district attorneysin md.~ 

counties at $6,500.00 up to January 1, 1946, and at $7,400.00 after that date. 

Our Opinion No. o-6728, a copy of which we hand you herewith, holds House BFll 

. Noa 849 to be' in irreconci+able conflict with Senate Bill No. 246 insofar as 

said bills apply to Bexar County. Therefore, Senate BilI,No. 246 will control 

the salary of the criminal district attorney in Bexar County. 

Senate Bill No. 246, Ch. 312, p. 510, of said Law Service, applies 

to counties in this State having a population of not less than 300,000 nor 

more than 500,000 according to the last preceding Federal CenBus. This law 

became ef?ective on June 2, 1945, and governs the salary of the criminal district attorney fn Bexsr County after that date. This law authorizes his salary 

to be $7,700.00 per annum, and it also authorizes an increase of 15% on the 
. . 

Hoq. C. H. Cavnem, page 7 (O-6676) 

salaries of the assistants, 

15, 1945. 

such increase to be based on the salaries of March 

Said law also repeal6 Article 3912e-1, Vernon'e Annotated Civil 

Statutea, which in the law hereinbefore aet out a8 fixing the salary of the 

criminal district attorney for the years referred to by you. 

As to those two referred to on your schedule for 1944, one at a salary 

of $3,000.00, the other at $2,700.00, whether or not the apportionment made 

on their salaries wa8 legal, would depend entirely upon whether or not they 

actually served as such assistants.~ If they did not eerve, then they should 

not have been included in the apportionment, a8 the holding made In our Opinion 

No. 0-6226 that the calculation should be based on the amount actually paid 

is evidently correct. 

Article 3912e, Section 13, of said statutes provides that in counties 

having a population of 20,000 or more and lees than 190,000, the Commissioners' 

Court is authorized to fix the salaries of the county officials therein named, 

including the county attorney, criminal district attorney and county attorney 

who performs duties a8 district attorney, which ehould be not less than the 

total sum earned a8 compensation by them in their official capacity for the 

year 1935 and not more than the maximum amount allowed to such officials under 

laws existing on August 24, 1935. It wa8 provided further that in counties 

falling within a certain limit as to population according to the last preceding 

Federal Census such counties could have such amounts Increased in the event 

the assessed valuations were in excess of the amounts therein set forth according to the la& approved preceding tax roll. Article 3912e, Section 15, of 

said statutes, contains provieions relative to the salaries that such officials 

in counties having a population of less than 20,000 according to the last preceding Federal Census could be paid, but none of the counties herein referred 

to come within aaid article and section. Therefore, it will not be further 

referred to, Our Opinion6 Iios, O-2748 and 0-2546-A contain a full discussion 

of the rules and methods governing the-fixing of such salaries under the above 

referred to provisions, and copies of same are enclosed herewith for your informatfon. 

An exception to the rule set out in Article 3912e, Section 13, that 

salaries shall not be less than the total sum earned for the year 1935 and not 

more than the maximum allowed under laws existing on August 24, 1935, is contained In Article 3912e-7, which became effective July 5, 1941. This law applibd, however, only to Hldalgo and McLennan Counties during all of 1942, 1943 

and 1944 and to Jefferson County up to June 15, 1943, and 6ame will be further 

considered In connection with each of said counties. 

These rules do not apply, however, to counties whoee population is 

in exce68 of 190,000 a8 such counties come within the provisions of Article 

3912e, Section 19. 

Brazes County. This county had a population of 21,835 in 1930= 

Under Arficles 3883.1 and 3891, the county attorney of this county could have 

been paid a salary of $3,000.00. Under Article 3902.1, the first assistant 

county attorney could have been paid not to exceed $+,~oo.oo and other asaiatants nqt to exceed $1,500.0?. 
. . 

Hon. C. H. Cavness, page 8 (o-6676) 

Collln Coupty. Thie county had a population of 46,180 in 1930. 

Under Article8 3883.3 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid a 

salary of $4,250.00., The population of this county for 1940 waB 47,190 and 

the assessed valuatione for 1941, 1942, and 1943 were $21;730,930.00, 

$22,350,260.00, and $Z!2,352,325.00, respectively, therefore, under Articles 

3912e, Section 13, the county attorney could have been paid an additional 2$ 

for 1942,,m additions1 3% for 1943 and m additional 3$'for 1944, such per- , 

centagea baaed upon the salary of $4,250.00. Under Article 3902.3, the first 

asaietant county &torney could have been paid a ralary of $2,100.00, and other 

assistants not to exceed $1,800.00. 

Cooke County. The population of this county was 24,136 in 1936. 

Under Articles 3883.1 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid a 

salary of $3,000.00. The population l+ 1940 ME 24,909.. .The aeeeeaed valuatione for 1941, 1942, and 1943 were $18,896,250,00~ $i0,089,410.00, and 

$ly,487,,8oo.o0. Therefore, under Article 3912e, Section 13, the couqty,attorney could have been paid an additional 4$, 6$ and 5% of said salary for 

the years 1942, 1943, 'and 1944, reepectively. .: 

- Dallae County. !?he,Dallas,County Criminal Dietrict Court was created 

and established by Article 52-l -- 52-24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 

of the State of Texas, and Section 52-24 thereof provldee for a criminal district attorney; The 1940 population of Dallas County waB 398,564, therefore, 

the salary of the criminal district.attorney of Dallas County is governed by 

Article 3912e-2(b), which authoriZee.the fun qf $7,400.00 in all counties in 

<the State having a population in excess of 355,000 according to the laaet preceding Federal Ceneus. 

'The salariee paid to the various assistant criminal district attorneys for the years named varyin amount, and.we? are unable to charge any of 

said salaries against any particular person, but Article' 3912e, Section 19(f-l), 

which applies to cou$ies having a population of noflees than..325,000 and 

not more than 500,000, authorizes all of the salaries set forth in the schedule submitted. 

. 

Yoti show in your schedule fifteen assistant c&ni& district attor- 

* . neys in 1942 who were paid the following salaried: one at $4,5OO.Od; one at 

$4,200.00; two at $3,600.00; two at $3,39y000 each; one at $39708.00; two at 

$2,7OO.OO each; thrae at $2,472.00 each; one at $2,008,50; one at $2,162.50; 

and orie at $1,854.00. You ahow thirteen for 1943 who were paid the following 

salaries: two at $4,500.00 each; three at $3,600.00 each; one at $3,9OO=OOj 

done at $3,000.00; one at.$2,700.00; and three at $2,400.00. You show twelve 

for 1944 who were paid the following sqlaries,: two'for&4,500'000 eachj one : 

for $3,9OO.Ooj thfree for $3,600.00 ea?h; one for $3,000.00; three for $2,700.00 

each; and two for $2,400,00 each. TM above article authorizes the criminal 

district attorney to appoint nine aeaigtante and pay them the following salarieaj two at $4,500.00 perannum each;.two at $4,20OaOO per,annun each; one 

at $3,600.00 per annum; one at $3,000;00 per amm;, and,three at $2,7OO.OO 

per ennum each. *With the advice end consent of the Commissioners' Court, the 

same article'authorized.him toappoint aa many a8 six more aaai+anta,and pay . 
Hon. C. H. Cavueas, page 9 (O-6676) 

them the following,ealarlez: one at $4,250.00 per annuzq one at $3,600.00 per 

nnnum; one at $3,000.00 per annum; two at $2,7OO.OO per ahuum; and one at 

$2,400.00 per annum. In our opinion, the aalnrier pnid said amirtantz during 

the years mentioned were authorized under the law, even though the amount8 

paid were in zone caee6 lezz than the amount authorized. 

We note you refer to awze abatractere and clerks having been paid 

salarlee when they were not licensed a8 practicing attorneys. Unlees said 

abstractem and clerka ware practicing law, they would not be required to be 

practicing attorneys. .Siuce there is nothing to show that they were practicing 

law, that is, trying cases, or doing other things requiring a lax license, we 

presume they were just what their positions imply, namely: abatractere and 

clerks. Under the opinion of this department referred to by you, dated September 

15, 1936, and in which it x88 held that only assistant criminal district attorneys should be included in making up the apportionment, abetracters and clerks 

should not have been included therein. 

What has been hereinabove eaid as to House Bill Bo. 849 and Senate 

Bill Bo. 246, passed by the last Legislature, is also applicable to Dallas 

County, and the salary of the criminal district attorney of Dallas County should 

be considered on the basis of $7,700.00 per annum from and after June 2, 1945, 

and the assistants on an increase of 15% on the salsriee authorized to be paid 

on March 15, 1945, which would be those hereinabove set out. 

Denton County. The population of thik county x88 32,322 in 1930. 

Under Articles 3883.2 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid a 

salary of $3,500.00 per anuum. The 1940 population was 33,658, and he could 

have been paid a compeneation of 5$, 6% and 6$ of said amount for each of the 

years 1942, 1943, and 1944, respectively, under Article 3912e, Section 13, since 

the assessed valuations for the preceding yeare of 1941, 1942, and 1943 were 

$19,240,755.00, $20,041,05O.OG, and $20,170,6~5.00, respectively. Under Article 3902.2 the first aesiritant county attorney could have been paid not to 

exceed $2,000.00, and other aseistants not to exceed $1,700.00 each. 

Eaatland County. You refer to thie county as having had a criminal 

district attorney for the years in question, but‘said county at no t,ime was 

authorized to have other than a county attorney. Our Opinion No. Oi6374, a 

copy of which is enclosed herewith, holds that a county attorney wan authorized 

for Eastland County, and our Opinion Ao. O-5024, a copy of which is aleo enclosed, 

and which is referred to in Opinion Bo. o-6374, holds that Article 326k-7, 

V. A. C. S., the only statute that uould have authorized a criminal district 

attorney for Eastland County, was invalid. However;the person serving as 

county attorney or criminal district attorney of Eastland County, even if under 

the impression that he was legally criminal district attorney of such county 

was entitled to compensation, a8 held in our Opinion No. 0-3158, which deals 

with a similar situation in Grayson County, and a copy of which is herewith 

enclosed. Therefore, we will consider this county a8 having had at leaat a 

de facto county attorney and entitled to the regularly authorized apportioament. 
Hon. C. B. Cavneas, page 10 (o-6676) 

The population of thin coun$y wal 34,156 in 1930. Under ArtlcJee 

3883.2 and 3891, the county attorney tir entitled to a 8alary of $3,500.00, 

The 1940 population wan 30,345, therefore, under Article 39l2e, Section 13, 

he could have been paid an additional muu of 6% of 1942, 6$ of 1943, and 5% 

in 1944, eince the anlreraed valuatibnr for the years preceding each of those 

yeare were $20,360,000.60, $20,372,340.00, and $19,575,780.00, rerpectively, 

El116 County. Ellir County ir alro referred to 81 having had a 

criminal district attorney. The only rtatute authorizing a criminal dlatrict 

attorney for such county 10 Article 3264-11, which, ar held by our Opinion 

No. O-5024, hereinabove referred to, in UnconrtitutiOnal, or Article 326q, which 

is alno unconstitutional, 86 held by our Opinion no. O-5001, a copy of which 

is herewith enclozed. Your attention Se alao directed to the cane of Hill 

County v. Sheppard, 178 S. W. (2d) 261, wherein the Bupreme Court held Article 326s invalid. Therefore, we will only coneider aaid county as having been 

authorized to have a county attorney during the time involved. 

The population of thin county in 1930 was 53,936. Under Articles 

3883.3 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid $4,250.00 per annwz. 

The I,940 population wae 47,733, therefore, under Article.j912e, Section 13, 

he could have been paid an additional Sum of 8$ for e&h of aaid.years, since 

the assessed.valuations for the preceding years xere #27,709,750.00, $27,969,257.00, 

and $27,918,705.00, rezpectively. Under Article 3902.3, the first aasletant 

county attorney could have been paid not to exceed $2,100.00. We are unable, 

however, to find any authority for a tax deputy in e. county bf this eize. 

Said Article 3902.3 authorizes the appointment of other azzistants, deputies 

or clerks, who can be paid not to exceed $l,800.00 each. One of these could 

be called a tax deputy and he would not need to be a licensed attorney, unless 

he should be practicing law. , 

Falls County. We know of no-statute authorizing a criminal district 

attorney in this county other than those hereinabove referred to which have 

been held invalid. Therefore, this county will be considered aa having had a 

county attorney only. The population of this county in ~1930 was 38,771. Under 

Articles 3883*3 and~3891, the county attorney.could have been paic $4,250.00 

per annum. The 1940 population wae 35,984 and under Article 3912e, Section 

13, he could have been paid an additions1 15 of said amount. for the year 1944, 

since the asseesed valuation'for the ye&l943 wae $15;150,666.00. Under Article 3902.3, the first assistant county attorney could have been paid not to 

.exceed $2,100.00. 

Fannin County. The population of this co&y in 1930 ~6 41,163. 

Under Articles 388303 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid $4,250.00 . 

per annum. Under Article 3902.3, the first aseistant county attorney could 

.&ve been paid not to exceed $2,100.00. 

Freestone County. The population of this county for 1930 was 22,589, 

and the same statement above mad@ aa to there being no authority for a criminal 

diatltict attorney in this county applies here. Under Articles 3883’.1 and 3891, 

the county attorney could have been paid a salary of $3,000,00 per annum. 
Hon. C. H. Cavnesa, Page 11 (O-6676) 

Galveston County. The population of this county In 1930 me 64,401. 

Under Articles 3883.4 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid 

$4,750.00. The population of the city of Galveston In 1940 wna 60,862. Under 

Article 3887, which applier to countier having a population of lGO,OOG or leas, 

and containing a city having a populatian in exceae of 50,000 in which county 

there la no district attorney, there could have been not to exceed three a6- 

sistant county attorneya in Galveston County, two of whom could have been paid 

not to exceed $2,7OO.OO per annum each and the other not to exceed $2,100.00 

per annum. 

House Bill No. 798, Ch. 187, p. 253, Vernon's Texaa Session Law Service, passed by the last Leginlature and which became effective May 9, 1945, 

provides that in all counties having a population of 60,001 and not more than 

100,000 according to the last preceding Federal Census the county attorneys 

in such counties which do not have a district attorney, and where the county 

attorney performs ths duties of county attorney and district attorney, the 

county attorney shall apply to the Coxmisslonerr I Court of his county for authority to appoint such assistant county attorneys as he may require in the 

performance of his duties, and the Coamiesioners' Court is authorized to determine the number to be appointed and fix the compensation to be paid within 

the limitations named therein, which shall be a reasonable one, not to exceed 

$3,6OO.00 per BI~I~UP~. This law applies to Galveston County from and after its 

effective date. 

Grayson County. This county was at no time entitled to have a criminal district attorney, and we direct your attention to what has hereinabove 

been said as to the validity of the laws which undertook to create such an 

office. In 1930 the population of this county was 65,843. Under Articles 

3883.4 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid $4,750.00 per annun. 

Under Article 3902.4, the first assistant could bavebeen paid $2,400.00 and 

other assistants $2,100.00 per annum each. What has been above said as to 

House Bill No. 798 also appliea to Grayson County. 

Gregg County. The crinlnal district court of this county was created 

by Article 199, Subdivision 124, V. A. C. S. Section 21 thereof authorised 

the criminal district attorney of aaid criminal district court to be paid a 

salary of $4,250.00, and Section 22(a) thereof authorized a first assistant 

criminal district attorney at $3,600.00 per annun and a second assistant criminal district attorney at $3,000.00 per Mrunk. 

Harris County. The criminal district court of Harris County was 

created by Article 52-25 -- 52-88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of Texas, 

and Subdivision 52-43 thereof provides for the election of a criminal district 

attorney. The 1940 population of this county was 528,961, therefore, the 

salary of the criminal district attorney is governed by Article 3912e-2(b) 

which authorized sane to be $7s400.00 in counties having a population in excess of 355,000. 

The number and salaries of assistant criminal district attorneys 

in this county are governed by Article 3912e-2(f). Under this provision nine 
. 

Hon. C, H. Cavness, page 12 (o-6676) 

assistants could be appointed and paid the following compensation: tuo at 

$4,500.00 per annum eachj two at $4,200.00 per annum each1 one at $3,600.00~ 

one at $3,000.00 per snnumj and three at $2,7OO.OO per annum each. In addition, should the district attorney be of the opinion that ths number of such 

assistant6 is not adequate, hs could, with the advice and consent of the Commiraloners' Court, appoint the following additional assistants and pay them not 

to exceed the salaries mentioned: one at $4,250.00 per annumj one at $3 600.00 

per annumi one at $3,000.00 per annumj and two additional assistants at 62,700.oo 

per annum each. 

Under the schedule submitted by you, the following arrirtantr were 

appointed and paid the stated salaries for each of raid years: for 1942, two 

assistants at $4,500.00 each3 three at $4,200.00 each) two at $3,600.00 each) 

two at $3,OOp.O0 each) and five at $2,7OO.OO each: In 1943 two at $4,500.00 

each; two at $4,200.00 each4 two at $3,600.00 each; two at 4 3,OOO.OO each; 

and five at $2,700.00 each: And in 1944, tuo at $4,500.00 each; three at 

$4,200.00 each; two at $3,600.00 each; two at $3,000.00 each; and five at 

$2,700.00 each. It ie our opinion, therefore, that all of said assistanta 

and the salaries paid them were duly authorized under the law. 

Senate Bill No. 279, Ch. 85, p* 122, Vernon's Texas Session Law Service, which became effective on April 19, $945, applies to count,ies having a 

population of 500,000 or more and includes Harris County. Section 6 of said 

Act sets out the number of assistant criminal district attorneys that can be 

appointed in said county and the amounts of the salaries that can be paid. 

Harrison County. The 1930 population of this county was 48,937. 

Under Articles 3883.3 and 3891, the county attorney could have been @aid as 

much as $4,250.00 per annum. Under Article 3902.3, the first assistant county 

attorney could have been paid not to exceed $2,100.00, and other assistants 

not to exceed $1,800.~~ per annum each. 

Hidalgo county. We find no authority for a criminal district attorney in this county, therefore, what has been heretofore said in connection 

with Articles 326k-p, 326k-11 and 326s is also applicable here, as there were 

no other statutes authorizing a criminal district attorney in this county. 

Article 3pl2e-7, which became effective July 5, 19&l, provides that 

the Commissioners' Courts in all counties having a population of not less than 

100,000 and not more than lpO,OOO, according to the last preceding Federal 

Census, in fixing the salaries to be paid the officers named in Section 13 

of Chapter 465 of the Acts of the Second Called Session of the Forty-fourth 

Legislature, (Art. 3912e, Sec. 13), where such salaries are determined in compliance with the laws which existed on August 24, 1935, and are based upon 

population, shall,c&pute, and fix the salaries of such officers at the maximum amount which could have beenpaid under ,the laws existing on August 24, 

1935, according to the Federal Census of 1940, and thereafter according to 

the lastpreceding Federal Census. 
Hon. C. A. Cavnees, page 13 (o-6676) 

The population of this county in 1940 was 106,ogp. Under Articles 

3883.5 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid $5,500.00 per annum. 

Under Article 3902.5, the first assistant could have been paid $2,600.00 per 

annum and other assietants $2,3OO.OO per annum each. 

Hill county. No criminal district attorney has been authorized for 

this county, and we again refer to the opinions and statements hereinbefore 

referred to, and especially to the ca8e of Hill County vs. Sheppard, 178 S. W. 

(2d) 261, by the Supreme Court, which holds that the statute authorizing a criminal district attorney for this county is invalid. 

The population of Hill County in 1930 was 43,036. Under Articles 

3883.3 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid $4,250.00. The 1940 

population was 38,355 and under Article 3p12e, Section 13, he could have been 

paid an additional l$ for each year, since the assessed valuations for 1941, 

1942 and 1943 were $20,430,520.00, $20,438,op8.o0 and $20,357,450.00, respectively. Under Article 3902.3, the fir-et assistant county attorney could have 

been paid not to exceed $2,100.00. 

Jefferson County. The Criminal District Court of this county waB 

created and established by Article 52-160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 

of the State of Texas, and Section 11 thereof provides that the county attorney of Jefferson County shall be county attorney of this Criminal Dietrict 

Court. 

The population of this county in 1940 was 145,329, therefore, it 

would be governed by Article 3p12e-7 and what has been hereinabove said a8 

to Hidalgo County will also apply here as to the application of this Article. 

Under Articles 3883.5 and 3891, the county attorney could have been 

paid $5,500.00 per annum. Under Article 3902.5, the first assistant could 

have been paid $2,600.00 per annum and other assistants $2,300.00 per annum 

each. 

A Special Federal Census wa8 aounced for Jefferson County on June 

15, 1943, showing the population of this county to be 191,942. Article 3pl2e, 

Section 19, provides that "Provisions of this Section shall apply to and control in each county In the State of Texas having a population in excess of 

one hundred and ninety (1p0,000) thousand inhabitants, according to the last 

preceding Federal Census." Therefore, the salaries of the county attorney 

of Jefferson County and his assistants from and after June 15, 1943, are subject to the provisions of said Section. 

Article 3p12e, Section 19(d), provides that the officers therein 

named, including the "district attorney or criminal district attorney," as 

the case may be, shall receive a salary of $6,500.00 per annum, but no salary 

is provided therein for a county attorney in a county having a population In 

excess of lpO,OOO. Since the county attorney of Jefferson County is the county 

attorney for the Criminal District Court of said county and performs the duties 

of district attorney, or criminal district attorney, it is our opinion that he 
. 

Hon. C. H. Cavness, page 14 (O-6676) 

is entitled to the compensation prescribed for the dl#trict attorney or crlminal ditirict attorney, under the rule8 of law laid down in our Opinion No. 

O-3158 hereinabove referred to. It is our opieion that he was and is entitled 

to a salary of $6,500.00 from and after June 15, 1943. This holding also has 

eupport in the former law, in that it is provided in Articles 3883.6 and 3891 

that, in counties containing as many as 150,001 or more inhabitants, the dlstrict or criminal district attorney or ,county attorney can be paid as much 

aa $6,500.00 per annum. 

Under Article 3902.5, the first arrirtant could hrve been paid not 

to exceed 2,600.oo per annum and other ar~irtantr could have been paid not 

to exceed t 2,3OO.OO per annum each to June 15, 1943. After June 15, 1943, 

the appointment of amrietants to Criminal Dirtrict Attorneyr IQ Jefferson 

County, or to the County Attorney, and the amounts of their salaries, in governed by Article 3912e, Section 19(f), which providea for nine assistants to 

be paid the following salaries: two at $4,500.00 each5 two at $4,200.00 each; 

one at $3,600.,00~ one at $3,000.00; and three at $2,700.00 each. 

It Is further provided In said Section 19(f) that should a district 

or criminal district attorney be of the opinion that the number of assistants, 

etc., is inadequate for the efficient performance of the duties of his office, 

with the advice and consent of the Commissioners' Court, he may appoint additional assistants and fix their salaries as follows: one not to exceed $4,250.00; 

one not to exceed $3,600.00; one not to exceed $~,OOO.OO; and two not to exceed 

$2,700.00 each. 

Your attention is also directed to House Bill No. 855, Ch. 307, p0 

505, Vernon's Texas Sessions Law Service, which became effective June 4, 1945, 

and which provides that the county attorney in counties having a population of 

more than 190,000 inhabitants according to the last preceding Federal Census, 

where there is no resident district attorney or criminal district attorney, 

shall receive the mm@ salaT a8 provided for district attorneys or criminal 

district attorneys in Section l-a, Senate Bill No. 374, Ch. 26, Acts of the 

Forty-fifth Legislature, Regular Session, 1937; and said county attorneys are 

authorized to appoint assistants and employees in the se@e manner as is provided for district attorneys or criminal district attorneys under the provisions 

of Section 1, House Bill No. 148, Ch. 68, Acts of the Forty-fifth Legislature, 

Second Called Session, and that such assistants shall be compensated as provided in said Section 1 of House Bill No. 148. 

The first Act referred to is Article 3912e, Section 19(d), which 

has applied since June 15, 1943, and the salary of the county attorney So provided for, IS $6,500.00 per annum. The other Act referred to is Article 3912e, 

Section 19(f), and authorizes the same number of assistants as has been authorized in this county since June 15, 1943, and said assistants can be paid the 

same salaries as have been authorized to be paid since said date. 

You refer to~the fact that the chief clerk employed by the criminal 

district attorney of this county In 1942 and 1943 was not an attorney. There 

is no law requiring a chief clerk to be an attorney, but under the opinion 
Hon. C. H. Cavness, page 15 (o-6676) 

. 

of this department referred to by you, dated September 15, 1936, the salary 

of such chief clerk should not have been used as a basis for the apportionment 

by the State here under consideration. 

We enclose herewith a copy of our Opinion No. O-6499 holding that 

the Special Federal Census of June 15, 1943, governs in fixing the amounts 

of salaries after that date in Jefferson County. 

Kaufman county. The population of this county in 1930 was 40,905. 

Under Articles 3883.3 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid 

$4,250.00 per annum. Under Article 3902.3, the first assistant county attorney could have been paid not to exceed $2,100.00. 

'Lamar county. The population of this county in 1930 was 48,529. 

Under Articles 3883.3 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid 

$4,250.00. The 1940 population was 50,425, and the assessed valuations for 

1941, 1942 and 1943 were $21,278,295.00, $21,653,595.00 and $21,81.7,1.10.00, 

respectively. Therefore, under Article 3912e, Section 13, the county attorney could have been paid an additional 2s of $4,250.00 far each of the years 

1942, 1943, and. 1944. Under Article 3902.3, the first assistant could have 

been paid not to exceed $2,100.00 and.other assistants not to exceed $l,800.00 

per annum each. 

Limestone County. The 1930 population was 39,497. Under Articles 

3883.3 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid $4,250.00 per annum. 

The 1940 population was 33,781 and the assessed valuations for 1941, 1942, and 

1943 were $16,529,6lO.O0, $15,607,655.00, and $16,176,100.00, respectively, 

which, under Article 3912e, Section 13, would have authorized the salary of 

the county attorney to have been increased 2$, l$, and 2$, respectively, for 

the years 1942, 1943, and 1944. Under Article 3902.3, the first assistant 

county attorney could have been paid not to exceed $2,100.00. We enclose herewith copy of our Opinion No. 0-2560 which deals with the proper method of computing salaries of county and district officials in this county. 

McLennan County. This county was at no time authorized to have a 

criminal district attorney, and what has hereinbefore been said as to the invalidity of the statutes authorizing criminal district attorneys is also applicable here. 

The population of this county in 1940 was 101,898, therefore, it 

would be governed by Article 3912e-7 and what has been hereinbefore said as 

to Hidalgo and Jefferson Counties as to the application of said Article also 

applies here. 

Under Articles 3883.5 and 3891, the county attorney could have been 

paid $5,500.00 per annum. Under Article 3902.5, the first assistant could 

have been paid not to exceed $2,600.00 per annum and other assistants not to 

exceed $2,3OO,OO per annum each. 
Hon. C. H. Cavnese, page 16 (o-6676) 

Milan County, There raa no statute authorizing a criminal district 

attorney for this county, and what has heretofore been said relative to such 

officials not being authorized also applies here. The 1930 population of this 

county was 37,915. Under Articles 3883.3 and 3891, the county attorney could 

have been paid an much a8 $4,250.00 per annum. The 1940 population wan 33,120 

and under,Article 3912e, Section 13, he could have been paid an additional 

sum of l$ of said salary for each of raid yearo, mince the araeaaed valuations 

for 1941, 1942 and 1943 were $15~76~735.00, ,$15,423,512.00, end $15,581,045, 

respectively. 

Navarro County. This county wan not authorized to have a district 

attorney and what has been heretofore said ar to criminal district attorneys 

also applies here, if eald county wae considered aa having been subject to 

the statutea referred to. The population of this county for 1930 waa 60,507. 

Under Articlee 3883.4 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid a8 

much a8 $4,750.00. The 1940 population was 51,308 and under Article 3912e,' 

Section 13, he could have been paid an additional mun of 1% of said amount 

for each of the years inquired about, since the &seeqed valuations for the 

years 1941, 1942 and 1943 were $20,083,293.00, $20,090,547.00, and $20,608,666.00, 

respectively. Under Article 3902.3, the fir& aesistant could have been paid 

as much as $2,100.00 per annum and other assistants as much a8 $I.,~OO.OO per 

BMUIil. We alao hand you herewith a copy of our Opinion No. 0-6484, which deals 

with the salaries of the county attorney of this county. Ae to whether all 

those referred to as assistants were actually entitled to be carried as such 

would depend upon the services performed and, if they were not actually assietant, county attorneys, they should not have been used as a basis for this apportionment from the State. 

Red River County. The 1930 population of this county was 30,923. 

Under Articles 3883.3 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid as 

much a8 $3,500.00. 

Robertson County. The 1930 population of this county wan 27,240. 

Under Articles 3883.2 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid a8 

much as $39500.00 per annum. 

Rusk County. The 1930 population of this county was 32,484. Under 

Articles 3883.2 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid a8 much ae 

$3,500000 per annum. The 1940 population was 51,023 and under Article 3912e, 

Section 13, he could have been paid an additional 72$, 70% and 66$, respectively, 

for the years 1942, 1943 and 1944, since the asseesed valuations for 1941, 1942 

and 1943 were $g1,210,805.00, $89,342,105.00 and $85,367,894.00, respectively. 

Under Article 3902.2 the first assietant county attorney could have been paid 

aa much as $2,000.00 per annum and other assietante as much as $1,700.00 per 

annUrn. 

Tarrant County. The Crimiqal District Court for Tarrant County wan 

created and established by Article 52-63 -- 52-87 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the State of Texas, and Subdivision 52-81 provides for a criminal 

dietrict attorney. The 1940 population of Tarrent County was 225,521, therefore 
. 

Hon. C. H. Cavness, page 17 (O-6676) 

the salary of the criminal district attorney of said county is governed by 

Article 3912e, Section 19(d), which authorizes the sum of $6,500.00 for each 

of the years inquired about in counties having a population in excess of 

190,000. 

The salaries paid to the various aeaistaut criminal district attorneye for the years named vary in amount, and we are unable to charge any of 

said ealaries against any particular person, but Article 3912e, Section 19(f), 

which applies to counties having a population in excess of 190,000 authorices 

all of the salaries in the schedules submitted, except as hereinafter eet forth. 

You show in your schedule fifteen assistant criminal dietrict attorneys for 1942, who were paid the folloxi.ng salaries: two at $4,500.00 each, 

one at $3,600.00, one at $3,300.00, two at $2,880.00, two at $2,520.00, one 

at $2,400.00, one at $2,34O.OO, three at $2,100.00, oue at $1,920.00, and one 

at $1,800.00. You show twelve for 1943 who were paid the following salaries: 

two at $4,500.00 each, one at $3,600.00, one at $~,OOO.OO, one at $2,880.00, 

two at $2964~.~~, one at $2,520.00, two at $29400.00, one at $2,280.00, one 

at $2,100.00, and eleven for 1944 who were paid the following salaries: one 

at $4,500.00, two at $3,600.00, one at $~?OOO.OO, one at $3,180.00, two at 

$2,7OO.OO, and four at $2,880.00. Said Article 3912e, Section 19(f), authorizes the criminal district attorney to appoint nine assistant criminal district 

attorneys and pay them the following salaries: two at $4,500.00, two at 

$4,200.00, one at $3,600.00, one at $3,000.00, and three at $2,700.00. In 

addition, if he be of the opinion that the number of assistants is insufficient, 

he may, with the advice and consent of the Commissioners' Court, appoint additional assistants and pay then the following salaries: one not to exceed 

$4,250.00, one not to exceed $3,600.00, one noa + to exceed $3,000.00, and two 

not to exceed $2,7OO.OO. It is our opinion, therefore, that salaries paid 

said assistants during the years mentioned were authorized under the law even 

though the amounts paid were in some cases less than the amount authorized, 

except that fifteen were used and paid in 1942 when only fourteen were authorized. 

House Bill No. 241, Ch. 74, p0 106, Vernon's Texas Session Law Service, applies to counties having a population of 225,000 or more and leas than 

500,000 according to the last preceding Federal Census and would include Tarrant County. This law authorizes the district attorney to be paid a salary 

of $7,400.00. 

House Bill No. 849, Ch. 271, p0 428, of said Law Service applies 

to counties having a population of 225,000 or more and less than 500,000 and 

also includes Tarrant County. This law fixes the salary of the criminal district attorney at $6,500.00 per annum up to January 1, 1946, and thereafter 

at $7,400.00 per annum. Under the rules of law set out in our Opinion No. 

o-6728 hereinabove Peferred to, House Bill No. 849 would govern the salary 

of the criminal district attorney in Tarrant County, instead of House Bill 

No. 241, since House Bill No. 241 was approved and became effective on April 

10, 1945, and House Bill FTo. 849 was filed by the Governor on May 30, 1945, 

and became effective ninety days after June 5> 1945, or on September 3, 1945. 
Hon. c. H. Cavness, page 18 (o-6676) 

Therefore, House Bill No. 849 repeals House Bill No. 241 Insofar as they are 

in conflict, the conflict being that Houee Bill No. 241 providea for a salary 

of $7,400.00 for the district attorney while Houre Bill Ao. 849 provideB that 

said salary shall be only $6,500.00 to January 1, 1946, and $7,400.00 thereafter. Therefore, in connection with the salary of the criminal dintrlct attorney of Tarrant County, it will be $6,500.00 per &MWE to April 10, 1945; 

$7,400.00 per mum from April 10, 1945 to September 3, 1945j $6,500.00 per 

annum from September 3, 1945, to Jaauary 1, 19461 and thersaiter $7,400.00 

per agum. 

While "District Attorney" in named ln House Bill No. 241 and "Dietrict Attorney" and "Criminal District Attorney" in Houre Bill No. 849, it ia 

clear that both of eald bills were intended'to apply to "Criminal District 

Attorney", since all countiesl within the population bounde named have such 

official. 

Van Zandt County. The 1930 population of this county was 32,315. 

Under Articles 3883.2 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid aa 

much a8 $3,500.00. The 1940 population wa8 31,155 and under Article 3912e, 

Section 13, he could have been paid an additional cum of 10% of said salary 

for each of said years, elnce the aaseeaed valuations for the years 1941, 1942 

and 1943 were $24,067,ggg.O0, $24,064,984.00, and $24,296,412.00, respectively. 

Under Article 3902.2 the first assistant county attorney could have been paid 

not to exceed $2,000.00. 

Williamson County. This county was at no time authorized to have 

a crFmina1 district attorney and what has heretofore been eaid as to the invalidity of law6 providing for a criminal district attorney in a county of this 

size is aleo applicable here. The 1930 population of this county was 44,146. 

Under Articles 3883-3 and 3891, the county attorney could have been paid a6 

much a8 $4,250.00. The 1940 population ~88 41,698 and under Article 3912e, 

Section 13, the county attorney could have been paid an additional 2s for 1942, 

& for 1943, and 3% for 1944, since the assessed valuation6 for the respective 

preceding years were $21,206,110.00, $21,799,940.00, and $22,195,150.00. Under 

Article 3902.3 the first assistant could have been paid not to exceed $2,100.00 

per annum, and other assistants not to exceed $I.,~oo.oo. 

A county attorney is required to be a duly licensed attorney at law, 

and an assistant county attorney must have the 6am.e qualifications as the county 

attorney. (Articles 331 and 332, V. A. C. S.) 

The State Bar Act (Art. 320a-l), which became effective fn 1939, 

provides in part a8 follows: 

"Sec. 2. There Is hereby created the State Bar, which is 

hereby constituted an administrative agency of the Judicial Department of the State, with power to contract with relation to 

ite own affaira and which may sue and be sued and have such other powers a8 are reasonably necessary to carry out the purposes 

of this Act. 
, 

Hon. C. H, Cavness, page 19 (o-6676) 

"Sec. 3. All persona who are now or who shall hereafter be 

licensed to practice law In thin State shall constitute and be 

members of the State Bar, and ahallbe subject to the proviaiona 

hereof and the rule6 adopted by the Supreme Court of Texas; and 

all persons not members of the State Bar are hereby prohibited 

from practicing law in thir State, 

"Within the meaning of this Section, all perrons furnishing 

evidence of or complying with any of the following provisions 

&all be deemed ae now liceneed to practice law within this State, 

viz: 

"(a) That he ie now enrolled a8 an attorney-at-law before 

the Supreme Court of this State. 

"(b) A license or the issuance of a license by the Board 

of Legal Examiners of thfs State authorizing him to practice law 

within this State. 

"(c) A license or the 'leauance of a license to practice law 

within this State by any authority, which, at the time of the ienuance thereof, was authorized by the laws of thie State, then in 

effect, to issue the license." 

Section 4 of said State Bar Act authorfzee the Supreme Court to prepare and propose rules and regulations for disciplining, suspending and dlsbarring attorneys at law, which said rules and regulations were to be submitted to the members of the State Bar and a majority vote was required to adopt 

any or all of said rules and regulations. Said Act also authorized the Supreme 

Court to prescribe a fee not exceeding Four Dollare ($4.00) per ennum per person to be paid to the Clerk of the Supreme Court. 

The rules governing the State Bar, which were approved in accordance 

with the above statutes, provide that the membership fee prescrrbed by the 

Supreme Court shall be due and payable by each member to the Clerk of the Supreme Court on June 1st of each fiscal year, the fiscal year beginning June 

let and ending May jlst of the next succeeding year; that a member in default 

of payment of said fee for sixty days after it was due Shall be regarded a6 

delinquent and shall be given written notice thereof by the Clerk of the Supreme Court. Then, If the delinquent member fails to pay such fee within thirty 

days after said notice, he shall cease to be a member. Provision is also made 

that if at the end of ninety days after June let a member has not paid to the 

Clerk membership due for the current year the Clerk may strike from the rolle 

of the State Bar the name of the delinquent member. 

You state that Borne persons have been used a8 assistant county attorneys whose names do not appear in the Texas Legal Directory, or the record 

of the Supreme Court, as being licensed and practicing attorneys. We do not 

think that the failure to find the names of said assistants in the Legal Directory would be sufficient evidence to show that they were not authorized 

to hold such official positions. As to the names of such aselstantrr not being found in the records of the Supreme Court, we think it would be necessary 
. . I 

Hon. C. H. Cavness, page 20 (o-6676) 

to ehow that the hereinabove referred to rules had been followed and the name8 

of euch aesiatante dropped from the membership rolls in accordance therewith 

before it could be raid that aaid aaristentn should not be conridered in connection with the apportionment here under consideration. 

If the abstracters, tax deputies and clerks referred to by you were 

liceneed attorneys, they should be carried aa aaaistants but, if they were 

merely what such name6 imply, then they should not be considered in connection 

with making said apportionments. 

As to the use of the namee of stenographers, bookkeeper6 and investigators a8 "assistants" in arriving at said apportionment, we agree with the 

opinion of this department referred to by you, addreared to the Comptroller 

under date of September 15, 1936, and It is our opinion that such ruling should 

be applied to any of such employees whose name8 appear in the schedule submltted by you. 

Article 3912e, Section 13(b), which provides for the apportionment 

here under consideration, does not fix any time for the payment of euch apportionment into the County Officer-6 ' Salary Fund of each county, but we suggest 

that, since the Comptroller must necessarily deal with two separate approprlations in each calendar year, he handle same 88 followe: 

Make the apportionments at the end of each four months' period and 

after proper statements have been made q hewing the actual aum61 paid out, the 

apportionments to be made after December 31et of any year to be for the preceding four months and to adjust any discrepanclee or errore in the allocation 

of the apportionments during the year ending on that date. The other times 

for the allocation of such apportionments can be after April 30th and August 

31st of each year, and to be made only after receipt of proper statements a8 

to the 8ume actually paid out by each of said counties. 

We find two other counties that were eligible to share in these apportionments for the years 1942, 1943 and 1944, a8 well a8 future apportionments, viz: Montague County and Parker County. The 1940 populations of these 

counties were 20,442 and 20,482, respectively, and each of them had and has 

a county attorney who performs and Is performing the duties of district attorney. 

As to the effect of the Special Federal Census in Jefferson County 

on that county's apportionment, we refer you to our Opinion No. O-6499, a copy 

of which Is herewith enclosed. The apportionment of this county will now be 

made on the basis of ita having a population in exce88 of 190,000. 

We are unable to find any statute authorizing the Comptroller to 

make adjustments of these apportionments where there have been overpayments 

or under-payments In past years. It is our opinion that where any county or 

counties have been underpaid in allocations prior to the calendar year 1945, 

such error or error8 cannot be adjusted out of a current or future apportlonment, aa all such appropriationa must be used for the year for which they are 

appropriated, and it will be necessary for the Legislature to make a specific 
. * . 

Hon. C. H. Cavness, page 21 (o-6676) 

appropriation for such purpose. Where any county has received more in past 

apportionments than It wan entitled to, it la our opinion that the State would 

have a claim again& such county or countiee for the mm or mm 80 received. 

Your attention ir directed to the following law panned by the laet 

Legirlature which will likely affect the amount of theae apportionments in 

the future: 

Senate Bill No. 123, Chap. 179, p. 244, Vernon's Texas Seasions Law 

Service, which became effective May 9, 1945, and which amends Articles 3891, 

3902, 3912e, Section 13 and 3912e, Section 15, authorizes the Commissioners' 

Court, under the conditions aud an therein eet forth, to increase the salaries 

of the officials and deputies therein named a8 much a8 25s. This would include 

some of the officials and aesirtants here being considered. 

Yours very truly, 

APPROVED OcT.31, 1945 , 

/a/ Carlo@ C. Ashley 

FIRST ASSISTAIQ 

A!ITORNEY GEUERAL / 

ATT-GEZERALOFTEXAS 

By /s/~Jas. W. Baasett 

Jan. W. Baesett 

Aqeist+nt 

JwB:LJ:LY ; 

encls. . 

APPRO& 

OPINION 

COMMITCEB 

BY /a/ BWB 

CHAIRMAN