OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

-04- 

A-aHonorable B. F. ?JboKse 

omnt y Audit or 

riitlalso GouJlty 

Edlnbur&, ‘pszps 

Eear sirt 

Your letter 0 

opfaion of th5rr departann 
Honorable E. F. &!olCoe, Page 2 

swantsen thousand, 6oven hundred (17,700) and 

in any aounty In this State having a population 

of not leea than seventy-amen thousand (77,000) 

and not mare than wvoaty-revan thousand, one 

hundred (77,100) and in any oounty in this Stata 

hating a population 0f not less than seventyBOVO~ thousand, rite bumma(77,500) and not 

more than l oventy-seven thoumid, 61x hundred 

(77,8OO), aooordlng to the last prmoedlng Fodaral COMUB, the CanmIssioners Court ia hereby 

authorized to allaw eaoh Uaremiesiont~ the PUP 

0r Birty Dollms (850) per month tar traveling 

~xpsnee~ and depre0iatlan on bii~ aut0mabflo while 

oa orriaial buaine6a. Eaoh #U&I Commleeloner 

shall pay all expenoer in the operation of euoh 

autaobila and keep 886x1 in repair irae or any 

other charge to the county. 

*. . ." 

Article 2540, t’t6Vi66d Civil Statutes, 1925, provldoa 

.U rOuOW6t 

*mrtam entering upon the duties 0r their 

ofriom, tha oounty jadgr and saoh ooauntm~ionor 

6h6l1 taka the obri0id oath, @nd l&all al60 

take a writton oath that ha will not be dirrotly or fndlreotly latere6tad in enr oontraot with, 

or olaim agalmt, the oouaty In whiah he reBid66, 

UOOpt 6uoh Warrant6 a6 Play i68U9 to him a6 isO6 

0r orrice. Za6h oommisoioner mball uooute a 

bond to be .SDQrOVed by thmmaty judge in the 

mUi8 Of three thOU6md dollar6, payable to the 

oounty treasurer, oonaitlonrd ior the faithful 

performmoe of the duties of ,hi6 offloe, that he 

will pay over to hi6 oounty a3.1 money8 lll~gall~r 

paid to hian out of oountr rum, aa voluntary 

paymat* or otherwise, ana that he will not vote 

or give his aoneent to pay out aounty funds oxoept ror lawful purpoa08.~ 

It is assumed in your requoet that oao or athor 

0r the thma dates =mii0ma by you is the oorroot date rpiti 

which to oalculate refund6 due te the eountr U~&OP th@ AOb 

in quutioa. Your raqw6E raim6 tha point a6 to whet&r 

t 
Honorable B. 1. bWCee, Page 3 

a OOUlltr OOSUEi66iOfBr Who Vote6 raS Md l-OO@iV@S OOUnt$’ 

funds a6 traveling apen6e under an unoonstitutlonsl statute 16 liable thsvsror. 

We intend to deal prIaoipally with this point, 

althou& und6r our OpInIon #o. O-414& addre66ed to you and 

approved April 9, 194l, It Is olear that suoh OcPmi86iOaer6 

would be liable ror a refund or all payB8nt6 reeefVe& rr0m 

and artsr the data or the ofrloial prrlImInarP annouaaamsnt 

oi~the 1940 Pederal Consus, whloh aaoordlng to hour letter, 

was June $38, 1910. 

In our opinion Ilo. 048ll approved Ootsber 16 

1940, thlr department held Howe Bill So. EW Oh. 194 &t6 

1957, Forty-il?th hegl6lature, unoon6tIt'utIb~ end Void as 

It l ppllsd to Camsron Oounty. A6 applied to Wlalgo Oouutr, 

you were 6imilarly advlsed by our opinion Ho. Sa7d approved 

mroh al, lml.. The rlrst abovs #atIsned opinion IS round 

In tb monthly x-sports or the Attorney General, Volwie 1, 

Book 10, pago SlE?. 

Judge COOleP, In hi6 rrOrk6 on OolutItutI6aal lImitatlon6, Voluu 1, EI65hth MItIon, at pag6 ma, saP8: 

"When a cktute 16 adjud@d to k unoonrtitution61, it ir u ii It had asve~ been. Right6 

oanaat be built up under It;)~6mtraots nhiah depend upon It for thslr mn6IdoratIaa an voidj 

it bh6titUt66 a prot6otloa to no on6 Iho b66 

l oted under it, cad ao oas 6an be punI6hed tar 

hatins ref’u8ed obedienor to it before the deoldon wa6 made. Aad what l6 true Of a6 aot void 

in tot0 is true also a6 to say pati 0r aa sot 

whloh I6 round to be unaon6tItutlonal, and uhioh, 

oon6eqruatly, i6, to be regarded u havlag never, 

at any time, bass possessed Sa any lrgal imae." 

The Supreme Court or T-6 in SeISWnS v. Bowsi, 34 

Ter. 33!540, did not oonstrue'tho above autharIt7 as announolng 

a dootrlne that sn unootititutlonal law soul& be no proteatlan 

to offioers or aitl6en6,bsfors the sams had be6a pamed klEon and 

adjudged invalid. The court in its opinion raid: 

Ve are not wIllIng to endorse the propodtfon, in it6 bmadert ssnle, that a mI6I8tsrIal 
Honorable B. F. UelCoe, Page 4 

oftloer has ths ri@t and power to deal&e upon 

the aoastltutIonallty or uncoastitutloaslIty of 

a 5 l o t pas6ed with a ll the r0rbdity 0r la w. It 

16 ths duty or such orriioers to exeoute and not 

dm par8 jw&smn$ upon the law, aad we ars or the 

oplnloa that the olerk 0r t&43 di6triat amart 

6hould have rdu0a to hsvs Issued l xeoutioa In 

vlolatlon of what appearrd to be a valid and binding 

law, Until the ssue had been deslarsd void by the 

tribunal properly 06nstltu8ed tar that purpo6s.s 

The oatart or Tgxa6 have never dlreotly pa66sd 

upon ths question rai8ed by your requert, t+wlt whether 

a county 6om@l66loner, voting for and moeitiag &n&s under 

aa A6t orths Leglrlatum, pa6sed with sll apgesraaoo ot 

a raZld law wloh benefialal iaterert6 Imru rolely to 

su6h offiaer6 a6 provided la SeatIon l* Houss Bill S&3, 

4Sth Ze&rlature, I8 llabls. 

A2%101* tMQ, clupra, appear6 to ml60 a 70x-y 6drong 

Iniennoe or 1IabIlIt.r usdsr 6uah an @at,.-however, br l ettla& 

roxth as a oondltlon of eaoh oo6ml6sloner!s bond, %hat h6 

ars Illegal aad ior 50 Lawful pUrpos@, eanuot be qusrtIoaed. 

Su6h ssndltIon of the e6s?6ilesionerts bond, hmrwer, applie6 

with equal roroe uxd dignity to all 5.Uegal paymentr, whether 

to the aoaPi6aIonrr6 th?m6elver or mds to other oirlaerr. 

The Su rwe 

tmrni 

Court of Oklahma In the ease si Wade 

v4 Board or 0, rslonsrs or Hamon Oountg, 17 Paa. and cl00 

held that ths %#ard of qbunty SO6WI66isn,r6 Oi a smnty Wd 

not bs penalinred ~uadsr oortaln sots of the Legislature far 

p6pauat of 6alarie6 to oouaty offiarrr under 66 unoonotltutieail losal l ot where rush psyasats were made in @ml faith 

and berom the law Is doolared uaaoa6tltutIonaX, or berore 

they am adtired by ths proper aifIola1 as to Its unoon6tItutianaltty. / 

< 

SUppOl%@d by later deolsI6ns I6 that 68ah, ths 

Supruse Court of Oklahoma rscogaIse8 au& view8 ths 

er *&%d faith*~,Ia the lI@t ot a legal. duty 

mlai6terI6l offloerr under oertaln aatr 
646 

ELonomnbls B. F. YoKea, Pwa 6 

bare 8 t&sot personal intorent distinguiahhable from thoao 

requlrlng them to perform mini8tarial aotabanaliaial to the 

publlo. 

It is the duty of thencrountr end dlstrlot attornaj8, 

upon nqueet, to give an opinion er advloo in nrlting to v 

Bounty or preeinot offloor of their distrlot or oounty, touohing their o~flalal duties (Article 558, Rerinad Clril Btatu@m, 

19CS), and It has been the poll02 of the bttornay General of 

Texas to 80 adrlea Slid offloer8 upon 8uah queStioa8 touohing 

the publia lntereat, or oonoarning their ofrialal duty. (utlela 4999, Retired Civil Statutes) Tha Oklahoma authoritia8 

appear to mooanita and be Inollaad to follow the supr~0 

&Urt Or lliiO8OUri ifi the OR80 6@8 ail08 1. 'Willial~II, 183 8. W. 

1, trap whleh 6pinion, on PYJO 6;we quotet 

“In the @aBe at bar, it appears itom the NOOrd that the Attorney ‘@~nOrdL Or the 8tata wa8 

oalled Upon Andy gave a written opinion to the aounfir aoul't of ~&t&W&y oounty, whloh WO8 the fiSOil 

0gant thereof, te the affect that the aot In 

qUO8tiOB Was UBOOI¶8titUtiOB~, Ftil Snd Void, and 

that 86id oourt Informed ro8pOndant of 86113 apinian, U~Q mtiri0a kia not to WY tbo w-at PLOLLtioned in the p1Oadfl&-8, aa4 that ii he did 80, 

he nuld be held llablo upan hi8 bond for the 

emount a0 paid tbereoni 

*In the li@t of those diooJ,o8urem, the ra8pondant not only had the lag&k rigbtto rai8e 

the oonstitutionalitg of the aat, but under tho8e 

faots It beoama hi0 Is&al duty to do 80; other- 

~5.88 he would h8vs paid the warrurt at hi8 peril. 

We therefore hold that fn tihe oa8a at bar the 

rerpondent had the right tOmi the oonstituti0mitg 0r the 06t M 1907." 

Se are not hare daolaring that a legal duty wa8 

iniposed upon the county 4olEi018SiOIl0T8 to lUi80 Wij QueSti@ 

au to the aoMt~tutlonalltg 0r the aot at tiw time ihny voted 

to pay themselves Under ita pravisione. Momove~, t&r0 is 

a pro8umption that they, in good raith, aotad under the belief 

84110 wan 4onatttutiormL 

As pointed out in Wilea 1. Wllmum, supra, auoh, 

orfioero ware not l ppolated (Pr aloeted to pa08 upon @On8ti- 
Iionorabla F. T. HaKea, Page 13 

tutional questions and it Is 4omon lsnowleUga that oounty 

commissioners are not learned fa the law, ooneaquantly, not 

qualified to intelligently pass upon 8ubh questions. 

The ocndltion of the eona;issioner% bond, hwatar, 

leads UB to believe that the &pm60 Court of Oklahaaa announced what would be the corm& rule Tollow~ping Wile8 v. 

willi6ma, eupra, to the sit4ot that under euah 8n aot of the 

X.agi8latura whose ~rovieions are colaly t.~ the personal and 

bswi0frrl interests 0r the oiriaar, kn0ub~6~e on the part 

0r the obfioar 0r it8 unaonstitutionctitp, rooafrad tibnwgh 

adrioe givan him by his county or diotriot attorney or indlraotly fmn the kttornag Saneral or Taxas, Is ayfrlcfent 

to deprive such orfloor al any aquitios antl fix liability 

rr4i0 that tiv on r0r illegal papment8 voted r0r and. maelrad 

under raid unoonstitutional law. 

In answering the above question, thorarora, It 

la the opinion of thfa departniont that the time from whioh 

to oaloulate rerunas due r0r illegal pay303nt8 under the Aot8 

or 1983, 45th Lsgiolatcra, Ch. 194, i8 the data 08 whloh the 

county oanmissloner raaeired authorltetivo advioa that ruoh 

AH was UIlOOll8ti tUtiOll&~. Wore ths above Act aonrtitutional, 

it wo ulAal0 o ngl or ppll to Hidalgo County after the off%oW 

prolhlnary publieetion or th4 1940 Federal Canouo, hum0 patwnts made thereafter wow clearly illegal and shauld be rofundacl to the countAT. 

Youm vary truly 

ATWIWEY o]EIJERAL OF TIZAS 

ATTORNEY GENERAL BY / 

i