OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

GROVER SELLERS 

*TrwwLI GENERAL 

Honorable Worth i3. Durham 

County Attorney 

Sterling county 

Sterling City, Texas 

Dear Sir: Opinton No, O-7121 

We have re 

hereinabove oapti 

follows: 

opinion on the 

your latter as 

Sterling County, Texas. 

y has a population of 

ompiling the permanent county records, 

ax Rolls, Daed Records, Deeds of Trust 

age Reoorda, etc. The question has arisen 

as to whether the expenses of repairs and maintenanoe 

of such equipment ie properly chargeable to fees 

earned by the offiosra using such squipment, or 

may suoh expenses be paid by the CommisaionersV 

Court out of county funds. 
Eon. Worth B. Durham, page 2 

” uer ; Are the expenses of repairs and maintenanoa 

of coun iE-y y-owned typewrlters, adding maohines and like 

equipment, used solely in compilation of permanent 

county reoorda, payable out of fees of office of county 

officials using such equipment?v 

Ssotion (a), Artiole 3699, Vernon’s Annotated Civil Statutes, 

reads in part a8 follows: 

“At the close of each month of his tenure of offioe, 

each officer named herein who is compensated on a fee 

baais shall make, as part of the report now required by 

law, an itemized and sworn etatement of all the actual 

and neoessary expenses incurred by him in the conduct 

of his offioe such a8 stationary, stamps, telephone, 

premiums on officials’ bonds including the cost of 

surety bonds for hla deputies, premium on fire, burglary, theft, robbery inauranoe proteating publio 

funds, traveling expenses, and other necessary expenses; provided, that in addition to the offlaere 

named herein, the oounty treasurer, oounty auditor;’ 

oounty road commissioners, county school superintendent, and the hide and animal inspeotor shall 

likewise make a’report on the premiums on offlolala~ 

bonds, including the cost of surety bonds for any 

deputies, and said premiums ahall be subject to payment 

out of the fees of said office, as herein otherwise 

provided for the offioers named; . . .I1 

In the oaae of State vs. Carnes, et al, 106 S. W. (26) 397, 

the court said: 

*Under article 3899, Revised Civil Statutes as 

amended, Acta 1933, 43d Leg., p. 734, c. 220, 8 4, 

which waa in force during 1934, the expenses, other 

than thoae expendFturea in oonnection with automobiles, whioh an officer is authorized to claim aa 

deductions under this provision, are limited to 

stationery, stamps, telephone, traveling expense, 

and other similar necessary expenses, the rule of 

ejuedem geheris being applied to qualify the general 

language by the apeolficelly enumerated items and to 

restrict its meaning to expenses of the same kind or 

class. Cameron County v. Fox (Tex.Civ.App.) 42 5. W. 

(;a) 653; Casey v. State (Tex.Civ.App.) 289 S. VS. 428 

(writ of error refused).” 
Hon. Worth B. Durham, page 3 

The expenses of repairing and maintaining oounty-owned 

typewritera, adding maohines and likequipment are not expensee of the same kind or olaea as those named Ln Art. 3899, 

supra, and it ieherefore our opinion that said expenses are 

not payable out of the fees of offioe of the oounty officials 

in a fee county. 

Yours very truly, 

ATTORNEY GANS&IL OF TAM 

BY 

Assistant