.Hon, WI.lliam Ii. Davis Cpinion NO. v-1287 

County Attorney 

willlamson county Re: Several questions reGeorgetown, Texas spectlng the traveling expenses of conDear Sir: stables. 

Your request for an opinion contains the 

following questions concerning traveling expenses 

of constables under the provisions of Senate Bill 

~~:~."%g%%j: 

R.S. 1951, ch. 264, p. 424 

"1. What'is meant by the wordi?. 

'to and frcm points wlthln this State ? 

‘2. Does this statute l&end the 

mileage be allowed only in specific 

cases, that is, an individual to be 

arrested or served with legal papers, 

or does it allow for any tra.vel in connection with investigations, discussing 

matters in connection with the case 

with witnesses, etc.? 

“3. Would it cover mileage vithin 

the city or as under a former ruling 

only mileage beginning after one mile? 

"4. Would the Court be aothorized 

to set the rule for mileage other than 

in a specific case, going to place of 

arrest of defendant and returning him 

to Court or jail?" 

Section 1 of.Senate Bill 362 provides: 

.i 

373 

:

i

"The Co,untg Commissioners Courts of 

this state are hereby authorized to supply or psy for the transportation of constables and deputy constables of the respective counties and justice precincts 
Hon. William H. Avis, page 2 (~-1.287) 

\ 

! 

to and from points within this State, 

under one of the four following subsections: 

*(a) Conetables and deputy CVstables may be furnished adequate 

motor transportation Including all 

expense incidental to the upkeep and 

operation of such motor vehicles. 

"(b) Motor vehicles may be furnished to constabl.es and deputy constables who may furnish gas and oil, 

wash and grease, incidental to the 

operation of such vehicles; for which 

gas and oil, wash and grease, such 

constables and deputy constables shall 

be comensated at a rate not to exceed 

four cents (a#) per mile for each.mile 

such vehicle is operated i'n the performance of the duties of Ns or their 

office. 

"(c) County Commissioners Courts 

may allow constables and deputy constables in the respective counties and 

justice precincts to use.and operate 

cars on official business personally 

owned by them for which such officers 

shall 

I 

64) P 

be.paid not less than six cents 

er mile nor more than ten cents 

lO#) for each mile traveled in the 

performance of official duties of their 

office. 

"(d) All compensation paid under 

the provisions of tNs Acts shzill be 

upon a sworn statement of.such constable or deputy constable; 

"(e) This Act shall not apply to 

counties having a population of less 

than twenty thousand (20,000) people." 

Senate Bill 362 is almost identical to 

House Bill 531, Acts 50th Leg. 1947, ch. 204, p. 

351 (Art. 6877-1, V.C.S.), the only differences 

being that the provisions of Article 6877-1, V. 

C.S., are mandatory end urovide for traveling 

'expense for the sheriff and hisdeputies in 
Hon. William II. Davis, page 3 (v-1287) 

every county of the State, while the provisions 

of Senate Bill 362 are discretionary with the 

commissioners' court and provide traveling expense for the constables and their deputies in 

all Counties having a population of 20,000 or 

more inhabitants. 

Prior to the enactment of Senate Bill 

362, the commissioners~ court could not pay traveling expense to constables who were co 

T 

nsatea 

on a salary basis, Att'y Gen. Cp. V-71 1947). 

Since the language in Senate Bill 362 

is the same as that contained in Article 6877-1, 

the construction placed on Article 6877-l will 

be equally applicable to Senate Bill 362. 

stated: 

In Att'y Gen. Op. V-526 (1948), 

"Section 2 of H.B. 501 provides 

that pribr to the present Act there 

it is 

was no adequate law providing for 

transportation for sheriffs and their 

deputies. Therefore, the Legislature 

enacted H.B. 501 and ala not place a 

limit on the number of miles which 

the sheriff could travel in the parformance of official duties. Cn the 

contrary, the Legislature provided 

under subdivision (c) that they 'shall 

be paid not less than six cents ( 

per mile nor more then ten cents "f' ( Cd) 

per mile for each mile traveled in the 

performance oPofficia1 duties.' Therefore, it is our opinion that the Commissioners' Court cannot limit the 

number of miles which the sheriff and 

his.aeputies may travel in the performante of official dut1e.s. 

"Ii.& 501 states that 'al.1 compensation paid under the provisions of 

this Act shall be upon a sworn statement of such sheriff.' In view of this 

provision, lt is our opinion that the 

Commissioners' Court may require the 

sheriff to furnish the Court in his 

sworn account such information which is 

necessary for the Court to determine 
Hon. William H. Davis, page 4 (v-1287) 

what mileage was traveled in the performance of those duties set out in 

various statutory provisions prescribing the duties of the sheriffs and 

their deputies. See Art. V, Sec. 23, 

Texas Constitution." 

therefore , 

In answer to your first three questions: 

you are advised that the commissioners 

court is authorized under Senate Bill 362 to pay 

the traveling expense of constables and deputy 

constables traveling on any official business within this State, whether such expense be incurred in 

traveling within the corporate limits of a city or 

town or outside the corporate limits of a city or 

town. Official business will include not only 

making arrests and serving legal napsrs but also 

investigations in connection with any official 

duty. 

In answer to your fourth question, you 

are advised that if the commtssioners'court adopts 

the provisions of Article 6889c, the connnissionera' 

court may not limit the number of miles a constable 

may travel in the performance of his official duties. 

However, the commissioners' court may require sufficient information in the constable's sworn accounts 

of traveling expense to determine how many miles 

were traveled in the performance of his offloial 

duties. 

SUMMARY 

Pursuant to orovisions of Senate 

Bill 362, Acts 52nd Deg. R;S.'lq51 

ch. 264, p..424 (Art. 68&c, V.C.S.3. 

the commissioners' court in-i countyof 2C,OOC or more inhabitants is authorized to pay the traveling expense 

of constables and deputy constables 

traveling on official business in this 

State, regardless of whether such expense is incurred while traveling within the corporate limits of a city or 

town or outside the corporate limits 

of a city or town. Official business 

includes not only making arrests and 

serving legal papers but also investigations in connection with any official duty. 
Hon. William H. Davis, page 5 (w-1287) 

377 

If the oo~asioners' court adopts 

the provisions of Senate Bill 362, the 

court may not limit the number of miles 

a constable may travel in the performance 

of his officisl duties. However, the 

commissioners* court may require sufflc!ent information in the constable's 

sworn accounts to determine the number of 

miles he traveled in the performance of 

his official duties. 

APPROVED: Yours very truly, 

J. C. Davis, Jr. 

County Affairs Division 

Jesse P. Luton, Jr. 

RevlewLng~Assistant 

Everett Hutchinson 

Executive Assistant 

JRaawo 

PRICE DdRIRL 

Attorney General 

.Y 

Assistant