Mr. Frank Lake 

Secretary of State 

Austin, Texas 

Dear Sir: 

October 19, 1962 

Opinion No. WW-1451 

Re: Nominations by the 

Constitution Party 

of Texas 

You request our opinion on three questions which 

relate to whether you should certify as candidates for the 

general election in November, 1962, the nominees for certain State and District offices certified to you by the 

Constitution Party of Texas. 

Your questions are: 

"1. Are the provisions of Section 1 of 

Article 13.&'a, Vernon's Texas 

Election Code, applicable to the 

Constitution Party of Texas? 

"2. a) May nominations for district 

offices be made by the Constitution Party of Texas at a State 

Convention? 

b) If such question is answered in 

the negative, then in your opinion 

which of the offices shown on the 

attached list are district offices? 

“3. May such party nominate at its State 

Convention a person for any office 

other than the specific office set 

forth in the application which such 

person requested that his name be 

placed before the Convention?" 

You have furnished a photostatlc copy of: 

1. A Certificate of Nomination dated 

May 28, 1962, signed and sworn to 

by the Chairman and Secretary of 
Mr. Frank Lake, Page 2 (Opinion No. WW-1451) 

the Constitution Party State Executive Committee. 

2. A letter addressed to you dated 

June 23, 1962, from the State Chairman of the Constitution Party and 

which is signed and sworn to by him. 

This letter apparently was meant to supplement the 

original Certificate of Nomination hereinabove mentioned. 

You inform us that the Constitution Party did not 

have a nominee for Governor in the last preceding general 

election. 

We answer your questions in their numerical order. 

All Articles referred to are those of Vernon's Texas 

Election Code. 

1. 

Our answer to your first question is that Article 

13.47a, Sec. 1, does apply to all of the nominees certified 

to you. 

The Constitution Party did not name a nominee for 

Governor in the last preceding general election. Therefore, 

it is classified as a kind of party designated b and controlled by Art. 13.46 and not by either Art. 13. $ 5 or Art. 

13.02. The Constitution Party chose to nominate all of 

its officers by convention, as authorized by Art. 13.46. 

Art. 13.47a, Sec. 1, applies to nominations by any party 

of the class named In Art. 13.46 when that party nominates 

for state and district offices by convention. 

The revision and recodification of the election laws 

in 1951 (Acts 52nd Leg., 1951, Ch. 492, p. 1097) by Sec. 223, 

which is codified by Vernon as Art. 13.46 of the Texas Election Code, created a new class of political parties. This 

article reads: 

"The State Committee of political 

parties which are not required by 

law to make nominations by a primary election shall meet at some 

place in the State to be designated 

by the chairman thereof on the 

second Monday in February and 
Mr. Frank Lake, Page 3 (Opinion No. WW-1451) 

shall decide, and by resolution declare, 

whether they will nominate State, district and county officers by convention 

or primary elections, and shall certify 

their decision to the Secretary of 

State." 

The only parties required by law to make nominations by a 

primary election are those described in Art. 13.02, which 

are those which cast 200,000 votes or more for governor at 

the last general election. 

Art. 13.47a, Sec. 1, reads as follows: 

"Sec. 1. No person shall be nomi-~ 

nated by any state, district, or county 

convention held 

T 

ursuant to Articles 

222, 223 and 224 of this Code unless 

he has filed with the chairman of the 

appropriate executive committee an 

application requesting that his name 

be placed before the convention as a 

candidate for nomination. The application shall conform to the requirements of Article 190 of this Code 

(Article 13.12, Election Code, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes), and 

shall be filed in the same manner 

and within the time prescribed by 

that Article, except that it shall 

request that the candidate's name 

be placed before the convention 

instead of requesting that his name 

be placed on the general primary 

ballot." 

This Article expressly 

f 

overns political parties 

covered by Article 13.4 when such parties shall 

convention. 

2. 

Subdivision a) of your second question asks whether 

of the.class 

nominate by 

nominations for district offices may be made by the Constitution Party at a State Convention. Our answer is "NC-". 

lArtlcles 13.45, 13.46 and 13.47 of Vernon's Texas Election Code. 
Mr. Frank Lake, Page 4 (Opinion No. WW-1451) 

Articles 13.47, 13.47a and 13.12 all control nominations for district offices by political parties governed by 

Art. 13.46 when such parties nominate by convention. These 

articles require that nominations for district offices by 

such parties be made at district and not state conventions. 

Art. 13.47 requires that, 

"Nominations for district offices made 

by such parties shall be made by conventions held on the Saturday preceding the 

last Tuesday in May . . .' 

scoring added). 

(underWe have already held in this opinion that the Constitution 

Party at this time is governed by Art. 13.46. We further 

hold that the phrase "such parties" in Art. 13.47 refers to 

parties governed by Art. 13.46. Art. 13.47a expressly states 

that any person nominated by any state, district, or county 

convention held pursuant to Art. 13.46 and 13.47 is subject 

to its provisions and also to the requirements of Art. 13.12. 

Art. 13.12 expressly requires that requests of persons desiring 

nomination, 

II 

. . shall be filed with the State 

chairman in the case of state-wide 

races, with the district chairman in 

the case of districts consisting of 

more than one (1) county, and with 

the county chairman in case of county 

and precinct officers; . . .' 

Subdivision 3 of Art. 13.12 authorizes such requests as to 

district offices consisting of more than one county to be 

filed with the chairman of each county composing the district when there is no chairman of the district executive 

committee. Art. 13.48 requires that, 

"All nominations so made by a State or 

district convention shall be certified 

by the chairman of the State or district committee of such party . . .' 

These articles considered together make clear the Legislative 

intent that nominations for district offices by the Constitution Party in 1962 must have been made at a district and not 

a state convention. Love v. Miller, 316 S.W.2d 269 (Civ. 

APP. 1958). 
Mr. Frank Lake, Page 5 (Qpin~ion No. WW-1451) 

3. 

In answer to Subdivision b) of your second question 

which asks which of the offices shown on the Certificate of 

Nomination are district officers: 

The classification "state office" Includes Governor, 

Lt. Governor, Railroad Commissioner, Comptroller of Public 

Accounts, State Treasurer, Commissioner of General Land 

Office, and Commissioner of Agriculture. Also the office 

of Congressman-at-Large is a state office in that it also 

is filled by the choice of voters of the entire State. 

District offices are those filled by the voters of 

a district, as opposed to State, county and precinct offices. 

The office of Congressman we hold to be a "district office" 

even though two of the congressional districts under consideration, Districts 8 and 22, are each composed of a part 

only of Harris County. Art. 197a, Vernon's Civil Statutes. 

The geographical area from which Congressmen are electzd is 

designated by this Article as "Congressional Districts . 

We hold that the office of State Senator and State Representatives are "district offices". Art. 193 and 195, V.C.S. 

Little v. Sta @, 75 Tex. 616, 12 S.W. 965 (1890); Bounds v. 

McCallum, 122 :, Tex. 1.16, 52 S.W.2d 1047 (1932); Hamilton v. 

Monroe, 287 S 

287s,w. 306) 

#.W. 304 (Civ. App. 1926, error dism. w.o.j., 

; Love v. Miller, supra. 

4. 

We answer your third question, "No'. Section 1 of 

Art. 13.47a (supra) prohibits nomination by the Constitution 

Party of any person for any office other than the office for 

which he made application. Though neither Art. 13.47a nor 

Art. 13.12 states expressly that the person filing the application must specify the particular office for which he applies, 

yet Art. 13.12 necessarily implies that a particular office be 

designated. The application under Art. 13.47a must conform 

to the requirements of Art. 13.12. 

The following authorities are relevant to your consideration of facts not shown on the face of the Certificate 

of Nomination and other instruments furnished to you. Weatherly 

v:, 153 Tex. 481, 271 S.W.2d 938 (1954); and Opinions 

of the Attorney General Nos. V-1529 

(next to last paragraph!, and WW-943 

) WW-1359 (1962) 

On October 1 we gave to you our oral answers to the 

foregoing questions. Upon your request, we have restated 
- . 

Mr. Frank Lake, Page 6 

those answers with our 

written opinion. 

(Opinion No. WW-1451) 

reasons in support of 

SUMMARY 

1. The Constitution Party at this 

them in this 

time is 

one of the class of political parties controlled by Art. 13.46. 

2. Nominations by this party at this time 

when made by convention are subject to the 

provisions of Art. 13.47a. 

3. Nominations by this Party for district 

offices may be made at a district and not 

a state convention. 

4. The following are "state offices" within 

contemplation of Art. 13.47a: Governor, Lt. 

Governor, Railroad Commissioner, Comptroller 

of Public Accounts, State Treasurer, Commissioner of General Land Office, Commissioner of Agriculture, and Congressman-atLarge. 

The following are "district offices" 

under the terms of this Article: Congressman, State Senator and State Representative. 

5. At its state and district conventions 

this party could not nominate any person 

for any office other than the office for 

which that person had made application 

pursuant to Art. 13.47a. 

Very truly yours, 

WILL WILSON 

Attorney General of Texas 

By: 

Assistant Attorney General 

WEA:pw 
Mr. Frank Lake, Page 7 (Opinion No. WW-1451) 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

W. V. Geppert, Chairman 

Pat Bailey 

Iola Wilcox 

Gordon Zuber 

REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: 

By: Leonard Passmore