OFFICE OF THE A’lTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
**AUSTIN**

Bonoxablr Charlay ~oomrt State Traasurar 

### Amtin, Taxar
Dear 

### Slrt

In your lattar 

### r~qurrt0112

oplnlonln

ALL mm BY z%a?sE EMTS: II, or th0 00unCy xaa* ror all6 in

\uytm$)f $500 00 l;awh rsoalp_t 

### r hlo Is ereby o~knaWedge4'arnd eon

the further aousldsrstlon that th & '*(I taroim taka8diid property sabjact/to, but in 1i0tiisr asn&~i& that oerbaln lndsbtsdnww due thorron to ROY Rutlend, Jr., of *XoLanneaCounty, 

### Texak, th6 bal.anos POW

due 01146i.6 indabtednass b.eing the earnor &$ooo.oo -------------.

### HonorablsCharlry 

### Lockhart,page 2

2. Would state note etalaps be raqulred on a dard where the grantee aaeumed pra-existing lnUabtednaaa, whloh lndabtad- ~86 wee eaourad 

### by a prior lien wNoh had been stamped when it wee 

### riledror raoord?


### 3. Would 

### a chattelmorteagabe aubjeot 

### to stat*notaataz~pa wh%oh 15 glr*n on psrso-1 property as rurthar aaourlty 

### rorthe aarga lmdabtodneaa, between the aama partlea thvt Is aaouroa by a randox*a ,llan-and deed or trust lien on real e~atet4’;‘on whloh state note stamps had bwn paid. In other words, the obligation la the aaieo between the aean pertioa but the property eoverad by the ohattel nortgsgr la not the aamo,p~oprrty oovera6 by the vandor’a lien and/or **deed of**  trust lien;

kc. The deed to real 56tet0, looat*d orlglnelly In cX* County, was **duly** raoordad in “X” County in the yaar.1927. Later the county boundary llnae ware,’changed, oetulng 

### thepropertytoba Sn ‘P'Cogaty. wou&a the 

### raoordl of the 

### deedwith rendb@Ta lien in 

### WY2 

### cnmtybe~~aubja8t to balag, 

### rta=paQtmd~r Artlola 7017a3
Art&l8 

### 7017r, Vernon's Retleod Clvll: Statutes, resde in part 88 follmwa:

“(a) 

### Zxcaptes herein otherwise 

### provldedthere is hereby lavle4 and eaaaaaad (I tax or Ten (lO$) 

### Cantson l eeh One Hundred ($100.00) Dollera 

### or tractionthereor, over the rlrst TwoHundred ($2fM..OO) Dollars, oa all notae and obligetlona 684urad by ahattrl mortgage, deed or trmt, p(lohanSo*a lien 

### oontrgot,vendor16 lien, Uom3Itlo~l ealae aontraot and 611 lnatrm~ta of a alailar nature wNab are Silad or 

### raecwdedlh the orfloe ot the County Clerk uader the 

### Ragiatretlon Laws or this Stetei provide4 that

no tax shall be levied on inatrtinta, aeonring an umoaat or mo Eundrod ($ioO.oO) D~llara, or lass. After the 6fr40tir4 dataI’onorabla Chnrley Lockhart, pay-:84

Clearly the tax is not au+3 upon the InstrUment ,~en~ionaa In your first question. Such inetrurnent la zeroly one of conveyance and is not one creative of eecurity for tho imlebtedness OS $4000 nentioned therein.

V:ealso wmw! your 

### sscondand third que~stiona in the neC:ntlva. In our oonrai-enca opinion x0. 

### 3051 aa**CrensUl t0**  

### YOU, wf3axpress6d the view that the tax levied **by thin**  **StStUtS is**  **Upon the**  **J?riVilc?~e of** **’ US?..?~**  the **office** of the county clerk, for tha recording of certain instru- -xats. hoc’ever, >?ebeli?:ve that a readin&: of the statute e~ Qvbole iii~cloaes an intent on the **part of**  the Legfalature n@t to ps-wit **Q** pgranidins of ’ this tax. The firat
**FentGnCa** in the **0Ot \-c~ld**  indicate that the **t0.x** should be collected only once w!ith referance to any particular indebtedness. Further in the statute we find renewals sr!drefundinfis of the original ~rincipsll indebtedness :~rotcctecS fron havim; euch auboequent lnstrmonta t.o be rt!;v;~xd, where the tm. ~?aspaid on the oriE,ffiel instruannatof security. Lt lo also provided that ljfhare several instrcmnts are conteaporenscualy cxecutec? to recuze one obllrction, the tax **ohs11** apply to only one instrument. I’l!rthar?1Qs6) sn instrument once atmIed .my bs rooordcd lu other counties in, the Ct%te wit.hout ar.cin being sub- **,fCCt6t?. to**  **the t-Z.**  Fe dn not mgard OUT nmncr to your second Question as c-l j2E being in confiict with otm oplnicn !:a. rjddsuscad to Iionornble E. 2. %3otcl;riFnc;;, County ;.ttoim3g, Eaaunont, Taxm. In that opinfon w3 Ccld t!mt a dcsd :vould he required to bee: the stamps rhera the nurch.aser was tlereio rsqtiired to assum a pm-mist& indebtedness, but the prior deed fn which the vendor’s lien was ori::inally craated bad been rem-de& dthout ppmt of tilety.