\ OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

43-c.- 

enmnmY- 

.il: r . - 

\ 1; 3 ~~ 

Honorable R.L. Waebburn 

County Auditor 

q ,p. E '.- 

Houaton,Texaa t 

; i 

Dear Slur 

Your requelBt P 

carefully considered by 

request as fOllov81 

Px-eolnot 1 ia 

tent~0f3 or mtlag about 20, 

vernm4nt proae1,vhMlyeuw%.llobted by the C0lsal881oMF, 

tour&y of~laialm, l r4 

any'pmtof the doaussion or the author. 

6 th4 dosltlllent Slid d0 BOt Mnd 

tutsa a mpcwt required by IAV to 

"I have carerullg emmIned the atetutes and 

find no leeel requi PemeBt for P4ptwta of thlr 

netwe from a oounty aomalrrloner to the publ%e, 

to the oourt., or to any p4r4on. I do not find 

that a commfssl.oner ia authoAted to pxwpen, a 

bud&et or to lay down the prooedwe therefor, but 

the budget in thin Cquaty 14 plowed bp tbn 
452 

gonorable R.L. Washburn, Pege 2 

Auditor and adopted by the Comlssiomrsl Court. 

I do not find thnt the Cosmlssloners~ Court itself is suthorlaed to prepare reports OS this 

nature, and no relatfon Is seen befxeea this document and the malntename and oonstruction of 

public roads. I believe that the Coml.saloners~ 

Court itself has authority to incur any expense 

reasonably lnaldent to th4 maintenance snd oonstruction OS County roads, but it does not appear 

that th.ls 4xp4me is neoessary thereto or even 

reasonably lnoident to anything conmoted vlth 

the msintemno4 or constmctloa of roads. 

"Offielal mporta are required of certain 

officers, but none of this type are r4qulred of 

a County uomsias1on4r or rm the Oo3laLissioaers~ 

Co&L Certala offleers have th4 r&at to preswibe the system of aaeounts, budgets, and procedure, but 8uc.h authority 1~ not vested in the 

Coasi8slanerst Court. 

"h'ithout '@:dlsouaslcm or the multitude of 

authoritlee on the subject, It 18 xwasonably 

ssf4 to 4ay that the law In this stat4 18 that 

ot3smdssloxaers1 oourt~, vhlle uourts of gaasmil 

jurisbiotlon vlthln the sph4m oi their autivlti48, hsve only 4uuh authority as la givesi by 

the Constltutfon snd statutes at the State, or 

such as may b4 reasonably incident to earryina; 

out mexprsss authosity. Therefore, lt isnot 

to be lmplled that a uounty o~ssioner or the 

acn5h~ioners~ eoxwt itself has the authority 

to issue at public expense docrtlllsnts of the type 

helvlto atta4hed. 

"It any crounty offleer is germitt4d to 

vrlte, print, and distribute do4um4nts of this 

type, a preoedent would be establish4d for perrnlttfng the Assessor and Collsoto~ af’ Tax48 to 

write 5 volume on the question of taxation, the 

County Engineer to wpite on4 upon questions of 

engfneerfng and road building, the County Health 

Officer to vrits one upon public health, aLnd, in 

fast, the barn vould be let down by impllaation, 
453 

Honorabls H.L. Washburn, Page 3 

lncurrlng a great deal of expense from publla 

funds vhloh obvlomly does not represent a public purpose end does not flov frum any statutory 

authorlty or requlrenumt. 

"Am I, as County Audltor, under the requlreaunts of the County Auditom' Law, authorlsed to 

pay olalms so lmurrcsd and approve varmnts therefor from public Punds'o 

"I have duly submitted the question to the 

Mstrict Attorney and to Hr. Em4st lhlpp, an 

attorney of Hruston, and requested their vl4vs. 

As a matter of lnformatiou, I attaah copies of 

the oplnlon4 given me." 

We have also oarefully examined and oonsldend the 

enolosed pamphlet and enolosed copies of opinions rendmad 

you by Ronarable #Marshall t. Anderson, A8slstant ZXstriat Attarney ol Bsrris County, Taxas, and by Roaorsble Ernest A. Knlpp 

attomwy of Houston, Texas, upon the questian, vhleh hold that 

the oommlssloners* oourt has no authority to lnaur the propoaed expenditure and that you, as county auditor, should not 

approve th4 warrants th4r4for. 

We quote from 11 Texas Jurlsprudenoe, pages 563-h-5, 

as r0iiav88 

"Qmnt14*, being colqpollent parts 0s the 

state, have no powers or duties except those 

vhlch ar4 alsaz%y set forth and defined in the 

Constltutlon and statutes. The statutes have 

alearly defined ths powers, preserlbed the duties, 

and Imposed the llebllltles of the eommlsalnn4n~ 

marts, the medium through tiah the different 

counties act, snd from those statutes must oome 

all the authority vested in the oountles.... 

It . . ..Comslsslcmers~ uourt8 am fiourts of 

Us&ted jurlsdlotlon, in that their authority 

axtends only to mstters pwtalning to th4 geneti 

welfare of their aountles and that their povers 

are only thorn4 expressly or iarplledly conferred 

upon them by lav, that~ln~ bg th4 Canstltutlon and 

statutes of the state.... 
454 

honorable H.L. UeJiburn, Page 4 

me courts of Texas have repeatedly held that 

oounty cossnlssloners~ courts lpsy exercise only such authority a8 

state. 

l;h~i'~~~ by the Constltutlon snd statutes of this 

bundant authorities to this effect. We 

41te the follovlng: 

Article 5, Seotion 18, Texas Constltutlon~ 

Artlole 2351. R4ViSOd Cl~ll Statutes of Texas1 

11 Texas %&spmdenoe, pag4s 563-566;~ 

Bland v. OIV, 39 SW (26) 558; 

Ikann-Warre&Publishlng Co. v. Hutohlnson County, 

45 SW (26) 651~ 

HIS& v; Campimil, 48 SW 26 515; 

Landman v. State, 9-f SW ! 26 ! 264; 

~1 Paso County V. EIL~IS, 106 SW 3931 

Hnvard v. Benderson County, 116 SIJ (26) 791; 

kbson v. ylsrrshall, 118 SW (W) 621; 

Ml114 Crounty v. Lswgasas County, 40 SW 404. 

APtor a most car&al search ve have been unable to 

find any irtatutory authority, express or *lied, whloh vould 

authorlse the proposed expenditure. 

We thinkthatthe opinion and masonlng expressed 

by you In your raqusst, quoted above, is lo&oSl SIkd #otmd. 

We think that ths 4on4luslon rsached by you and ths attornej8 

above named, holdlng the propored expenditure to be unauthorlsed, 18 4minontly aomat. 

Your qubetlan is thsreeiore ansvered ln the negative. 

very truly yours 

ATTOHEEY CXUEHAL OF TEXAS